Exclusive: Carson claimed West Point 'scholarship' but never applied

[meltzerboy]

When the facts don’t reconcile then it isn’t true. When you repeat untruth numerous times in print and verbally over a period of years, its lying.

All anyone needs to make a fair determination about his other untruths is some grey matter and a browser. One of the funniest and easiest to prove is his lie about Mannatech.

Carson claim: " I didn’t have an involvement with them. That is total propaganda, and this is what happens in our society. Total propaganda."

The truth: Carson made several unpaid promotional videos for Mannatech one of which was with the co-chief executive and chief science officer, was prominently featured on their website, gave a number of paid speeches in one of which he claimed that they donated part of an endowment in his name to Johns Hopkins (which Mannatech says is not a true statement on his part) and three which Mannatech made payment to his Scholars Fund, etc. etc.

Yet another example of the truth being…difficult to reconcile with a Carson whopper. You may not think the West Point lie to be worthy of attention, but a doctor selling out the principles of the profession to become a snake-oil salesman and then lying about it speaks volumes about his character too.

In Carson’s defense, when you repeat something that is not true often enough, you may begin to believe it yourself. There is also what is known as reconstructive memory, in which details are often confused, out of sequence, left out, or added but WITHOUT intentional deception. The main idea of an event remains intact but the specific details continue to change increasingly over time. This is the case with eyewitness testimony according to the abundant research of the psychologist, Elizabeth Loftus. Eyewitnesses may believe they are reporting what actually happened in a crime or an accident but in fact they are not. I don’t know if that is what’s going on in the case of Carson’s reportage or whether there is intentional lying on his part. And, frankly, as I stated previously, I don’t really care since the reasons why I don’t support his candidacy for the presidency do not depend on this incident.

 

[Darryl1958]

It is getting more and more ridiculous, now projecting that Carson is believing his own lies.

This is pyscho-babble at its worse.

Yellow journalism meets yellow psychology.

 

[Peter_Plato]

When the facts don’t reconcile then it isn’t true. When you repeat untruth numerous times in print and verbally over a period of years, its lying.

All anyone needs to make a fair determination about his other untruths is some grey matter and a browser. One of the funniest and easiest to prove is his lie about Mannatech.

Carson claim: " I didn’t have an involvement with them. That is total propaganda, and this is what happens in our society. Total propaganda."

The truth: Carson made several unpaid promotional videos for Mannatech one of which was with the co-chief executive and chief science officer, was prominently featured on their website, gave a number of paid speeches in one of which he claimed that they donated part of an endowment in his name to Johns Hopkins (which Mannatech says is not a true statement on his part) and three which Mannatech made payment to his Scholars Fund, etc. etc.

Yet another example of the truth being…difficult to reconcile with a Carson whopper. You may not think the West Point lie to be worthy of attention, but a doctor selling out the principles of the profession to become a snake-oil salesman and then lying about it speaks volumes about his character too.

When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, "Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” (John 8:7)

Yes, I get that you are agnostic, but at least try to respect those whose company you presently keep.

The Colleges of Physicians and Surgeons in many parts of the modern world consider dismembering unborn human beings to no longer be of any concern to them. Many actively participate in doing so and, even if they don’t, a large number seek to actively keep out of the practice of medicine anyone who disagrees with these so-called “modern principles."

Now, physician-assisted suicide is rapidly becoming the next “sell-out” of the principles of the profession. A bit of snake-oil peddling just seems innocuous in comparison – even if we do grant you everything you claim.

Your pettiness is unbecoming a man of your stature, Napoleon :roll eyes:

Step back, take a few deep breaths and try to regain some perspective on this entire non-issue BEFORE you throw any more stones.

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

In Carson’s defense, when you repeat something that is not true often enough, you may begin to believe it yourself. There is also what is known as reconstructive memory, in which details are often confused, out of sequence, left out, or added but WITHOUT intentional deception. The main idea of an event remains intact but the specific details continue to change increasingly over time. This is the case with eyewitness testimony according to the abundant research of the psychologist, Elizabeth Loftus. Eyewitnesses may believe they are reporting what actually happened in a crime or an accident but in fact they are not. I don’t know if that is what’s going on in the case of Carson’s reportage or whether there is intentional lying on his part. And, frankly, as I stated previously, I don’t really care since the reasons why I don’t support his candidacy for the presidency do not depend on this incident.

I think he has a severe case of narcissistic personality disorder. That this drove him to invent things about his past that portray himself as superior, more accomplished, and even more heroic than he really is and it prevents him from admitting the truth. Even the Mannatech debacle for which there is ample proof of his relationship was like slowly peeling back an onion. He still maintains that his involvement doesn’t constitute a relationship despite the fact that he finally admitted to making promotional videos, that money changed hands for speeches, and that his face was prominently used to promote the company on their website. His ego doesn’t allow him to admit to his own falsehood and deceit. Some people think that a certain degree of narcissism is needed in some professions to have the confidence to do the job (neurosurgery being one of them), but Carson possesses it in abundance and to a fault.

 

[meltzerboy]

It is getting more and more ridiculous, now projecting that Carson is believing his own lies.

This is pyscho-babble at its worse.

Yellow journalism meets yellow psychology.

What I wrote is not psychobabble, and I am actually defending Carson in my previous post.

 

[Peter_Plato]

I think he has a severe case of narcissistic personality disorder. That this drove him to invent things about his past that portray himself as superior, more accomplished, and even more heroic than he really is and it and prevents him from admitting the truth. Even the Mannatech debacle for which there is ample proof of his relationship was like slowly peeling back an onion. He still maintains that his involvement doesn’t constitute a relationship despite the fact that he finally admitted to making promotional videos, that money changed hands for speeches, and that his face was prominently used to promote the company on their website. His ego doesn’t allow him to admit to falsehood and deceit. Some people think that a certain degree of narcissism is needed in some professions to have the confidence to do the job (neurosurgery being one of them), but Carson possesses it in abundance and to a fault.

Careful, EmperorNapoleon!

Charges of “narcissistic personality disorder” coming from EmperorNapoleon on the Internet just seem a little odd.

AND…

You are addressing your post to a licensed and practicing psychologist.

Yet, here you go psychologically diagnosing a well-known public figure as if you

1. had the competency to do so, and in the unlikely event that you do,
2. are likely contravening your own professional ethics by doing so publicly and without proper access to the patient.

 

[Exiled_Child]

He should be discredited.

Its a lie that was too easy to check and being he didn’t know that, shows a deficiency in his not only in character, but also his ability to grasp the political arena he’s playing in.

Jim

As an aside, the unspoken implication of your observation is completely on target: America needs a President who is both honest, and capable of lying through his teeth without getting caught. It’s a requisite quality of any politician, period.

Frankly, it may be the most necessary quality, sad as that is.

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

Careful, EmperorNapoleon!

Charges of “narcissistic personality disorder” coming from EmperorNapoleon on the Internet just seem a little odd.

AND…

You are addressing your post to a licensed and practicing psychologist.

Yet, here you go psychologically diagnosing a well-known public figure as if you

1. had the competency to do so, and in the unlikely event that you do,
2. are likely contravening your own professional ethics by doing so publicly and without proper access to the patient.

You’re lecturing me on professional medical ethics for offering a psychological explanation for Carson’s myth-making while defending a man who threw ethics to the wind to peddle Mannatech’s products and continues to deny it? That is rich.

 

[Peter_Plato]

You’re lecturing me on professional medical ethics for offering a psychological explanation for Carson’s myth-making while defending a man who threw ethics to the wind to peddle Mannatech’s products? That is rich.

Are you qualified to “offer a psychological explanation?"

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

Are you qualified to “offer a psychological explanation?"

I’m qualified to read up on the disorder and find parallels between its definition and symptoms with Ben Carson’s actions and personality. So, yes, I am qualified to offer a psychological explanation. So is anyone else who is literate and willing to apply what they’ve learned to this situation.

 

[Peter_Plato]

You’re lecturing me … for offering a psychological explanation for Carson’s myth-making.

It is against forum rules, for one…

Solicitation or offering of advice as to the diagnosis of disease, the effectiveness of medications, or the efficacy of various therapeutic interventions, modalities, and regimens** is not permitted on the forums**. While generally well-intentioned, it can have potentially serious repercussions.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=134056

So, either

1. You are NOT qualified to make the diagnosis,
2. You are qualified, but it would be a transgression of your own professional ethics and, therefore, you have engaged in professional (not to mention legal) hypocrisy by accusing Carson of doing so at the same instance that you do so yourself. (Cf. also: The legal doctrine of Clean Hands* ) And…
3. It is against forum rules, in any case.

---

• Under the clean hands doctrine, a person who has acted wrongly, either morally or legally - that is, who has ‘unclean hands’ - will not be helped by a court when complaining about the actions of someone else.
  lectlaw.com/def/c202.htm

 

[Peter_Plato]

I’m qualified to read up on the disorder and find parallels between its definition and symptoms with Ben Carson’s actions and personality. So, yes, I am qualified to offer a psychological explanation. So is anyone else who is literate and willing to apply what they’ve learned to this situation.

The answer, then, is NO.

And it is still against forum rules.

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

It is against forum rules, for one…

So, either

1. You are NOT qualified to make the diagnosis,
2. You are qualified, but it would be a transgression of your own professional ethics and, therefore, you have engaged in professional (not to mention legal) hypocrisy by accusing Carson of doing so at the same instance that you do so yourself. (Cf. also: The legal doctrine of Clean Hands* ) And…
3. It is against forum rules, in any case.

---

• Under the clean hands doctrine, a person who has acted wrongly, either morally or legally - that is, who has ‘unclean hands’ - will not be helped by a court when complaining about the actions of someone else.
  lectlaw.com/def/c202.htm

1. Anyone who can read and apply what they’ve learned is qualified to speculate on Carson’s mental state.
2. I’m not bound by medical ethics and the clean hands doctrine applies more to you than to me on this subject as your prior posts attest. Physician heal thyself.
3. What I said is not against forum rules. I am not offering anyone medical advice.

 

[Darryl1958]

What I wrote is not psychobabble, and I am actually defending Carson in my previous post.

You are saying of him that those who reconstruct their lies long enough actually begin to believe them. They in effect are only fooling themselves ( or believing in their reconstructions), as the old adage points out.

But, it is only amateur, buffoonish, yellow journalism that is slandering Ben Carson as being a liar(reconstructionist) in the first place!!!

With a defense like that, you are only fooling yourself that there is any objectivity or professionalism involved on your behalf.
Or, shall we say, you are only fooling yourself that you are actually doing the character of Ben Carson a service of any kind.
With friends like that, who needs enemies?

 

[Darryl1958]

Careful, EmperorNapoleon!

Charges of “narcissistic personality disorder” coming from EmperorNapoleon on the Internet just seem a little odd.

AND…

You are addressing your post to a licensed and practicing psychologist.

Yet, here you go psychologically diagnosing a well-known public figure as if you

1. had the competency to do so, and in the unlikely event that you do,
2. are likely contravening your own professional ethics by doing so publicly and without proper access to the patient.

This reminds me of how a group of psychologists made a scathing psychological diagnosis of Barry Goldwater without ever having even met him in person.

It embarrassed the profession enough that the Goldwater Rule was introduced.

 

[Peter_Plato]

1. I’m not bound by medical ethics and the clean hands doctrine applies more to you than to me on this subject as your prior posts attest. Physician heal thyself.

Your post was addressed to Meltzerboy, if you recall.

I never claimed to be a professional psychologist, but he is.

Shall I now accuse you of “lying” because you made that error?

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

Your post was addressed to Meltzerboy, if you recall.

I never claimed to be a professional psychologist, but he is.

Shall I now accuse you of “lying” because you made that error?

I never claimed you were a professional psychologist either. So I’m not sure what your point is.

 

[meltzerboy]

You are saying of him that those who reconstruct their lies long enough actually begin to believe them. They in effect are only fooling themselves ( or believing in their reconstructions), as the old adage points out.

But, it is only amateur, buffoonish, yellow journalism that is slandering Ben Carson as being a liar(reconstructionist) in the first place!!!

With a defense like that, you are only fooling yourself that there is any objectivity or professionalism involved on your behalf.
Or, shall we say, you are only fooling yourself that you are actually doing the character of Ben Carson a service of any kind.
With friends like that, who needs enemies?

My first statement on self-deception is only tangentially connected to the rest of my post about the phenomenon called reconstructive memory. The latter is a normal process of unintentional change within the memory system of people, which has been verified countless times by psychological researchers. We all experience this process when we try to relate the details of events that took place some time ago. In plain English, we make mistakes concerning the details.

 

[Peter_Plato]

**I never claimed you were a professional psychologist either. **So I’m not sure what your point is.

I suppose if I had the same UNWILLINGNESS to be generous with regard to your comments as you are to Ben Carson, I might push the point, that by saying…

…the clean hands doctrine applies more to you than to me on this subject as your prior posts attest. [Followed by…] Physician heal thyself.

…you were implying that I was a medical professional and now you are just lying about what you meant to save face.

But that just wouldn’t be giving you the benefit of the doubt, now would it?

See how "generosity of spirit” works?

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

I suppose if I had the same UNWILLINGNESS to be generous with regard to your comments as you are to Ben Carson, I might push the point, that by saying…

…you were implying that I was a medical professional and now you are just lying about what you meant to save face.

But that just wouldn’t be giving you the benefit of the doubt, now would it?

See how "generosity of spirit” works?

The very clear difference being that Carson actually did say things that are refuted by the truth vs. you trying to read between the lines of what I said in a failed attempt at a gottcha moment. I’m not sure what “generosity of spirit” means when applied to not accusing me of lying for something I didn’t say. Should I be grateful that you tore down your own straw man? Are congratulations in order? I don’t know what the etiquette is in such scenarios. In any case, I guess its nice that you seem to have progressed beyond denying what Carson said isn’t true to discussing whether or not he meant to say things that aren’t true many times over the years.