I recognize the limitations of armchair diagnosis, especially of public figures. But there’s value in examining these patterns as case studies in how psychiatric conditions manifest in high-functioning individuals, particularly when those individuals have publicly acknowledged aspects of their mental health.
It would be helpful, though, to have specific information grounded in observations about bipolar-like conditions. E.g. understanding how common it is to transition II → I at what ages, or more concrete things like relations between sleep, speech patterns, etc.
I agree this is good in the american public sphere, but such speculation is still very useful to better predict behaviors. I don’t think we disagree that much here.
Completely agree, thanks for the speculation
Rule-following psychiatrists don’t publicly diagnose people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldwater_rule
It would be helpful, though, to have specific information grounded in observations about bipolar-like conditions. E.g. understanding how common it is to transition II → I at what ages, or more concrete things like relations between sleep, speech patterns, etc.
I agree this is good in the american public sphere, but such speculation is still very useful to better predict behaviors. I don’t think we disagree that much here.