From our other sites
The story
On 5ch’s Newsoku VIP board, a regular thread-starter developing a homegrown theory of borderline personality disorder — that “non-STEM people are defective products” — invoked existentialism and cell cleavage to lay out the argument. Readers repeatedly complained that the heavy jargon made it hard to follow and called for a plain explanation, while the OP pushed back each time. The two sides never really connected, and the discussion went in circles.
What people said
The whole point is Q&A, and there's a chance I'm wrong, after all.
26 Posted below by VIP via 5channel 2026/07/02 (Thu) 21:44:13.338 ID:Gom1reQs0
Re: #22
It's fine if it's in writing.
・From Jaspers' existentialism: "values = the inverse calculation of setbacks"
・From cell cleavage: "the individual = a mechanism that exists for infrastructure"
・The defining trait of borderline personality is "infantile omnipotence"
Because of this "omnipotence," you can't experience "setbacks," so you can't form "values," so you never settle on "what infrastructure you're meant to support," so the need to be an "individual" never arises.
Mentally you never become an "individual," yet physically you exist as one anyway.
That's the "error," and "borderline personality" is the attempt to compensate for it.
That's "the true nature of borderline personality."
Conversely, if you translate "setback" — i.e., "the capacity to make contact with existence" — into a human category, that's "STEM."
Hence the thread title.
I'll leave it up to each of you to interpret what that corresponds to at the level of the individual.
The two groups differ in kind, not quantity, and they perform different roles in society.
Society needs all sorts of different abilities.
At least read Re: #2, lol.
Even if it's a bit imprecise, please use more widely understood terms.
Honestly, that's already a bad sign.
"Existentialism should bend to my reading comprehension" — that attitude alone is a nonstarter.
Anyway, what part don't you get?
Point to something specific and I'll answer it.
You're not going to specify what exactly you don't understand?
Guess I'll wrap this up then?
Well, it's a recurring thread, so there's always next time.
Solving the borderline personality problem.
Everyone except you
shares the common goal of
recognizing the borderline personality issue as a form of diversity.
Communities that can't preserve this kind of diversity tend to die out.
What's the "borderline personality problem"?
That term hasn't come up anywhere in this discussion.
Ugh, too much hassle.
Funny you ask — there's already a reply today covering exactly that.
Here, Re: #15.
First off, not understanding jargon and lacking reading comprehension are two different things.
Also, jargon exists so experts can skip explanations among themselves.
If you want people here to actually listen, try explaining it plainly and simply, without the jargon.
To someone like you I could just say "ｇｇｒｋｓ" ("Google it, dumbass" — classic 5ch brush-off)
and leave it at that, but fine — which term don't you get?
Jargon is just shorthand — if you can't explain it in your own words without changing the meaning, it's pointless.
He's just using intimidating-sounding words to seem smart and dodge the question.
OP loses.
If someone ran away, doesn't that make ME the winner, lol
Though we're not actually competing.
"I'm wrapping this up!"
and bolted, so
why is the OP still hanging around?
Feel free to "run away" already, lol
Surprised you're the one calling this "running away," lol
Huh? Wait, is Re: #49 talking about me?
I'm around before and after midnight like normal.
Don't have that ability?
Figured as much.
As his own copy-paste shows, it's just a random assemblage of logic — even he doesn't know what he's saying, and he can never explain the same thing the same way twice.
And he can't actually explain or elaborate on it either.
That's just the kind of guy he is.
Huh? Didn't I just tell you "impossible for idiots to grasp"?
What happened?
It's literally right there at the top of the thread title, lol
"Borderline personality" is the umbrella term for Cluster B personality disorders, of which there are four:
・Narcissistic personality disorder
・Borderline personality disorder
・Histrionic personality disorder
・Antisocial personality disorder
The problems with these
The term "borderline personality problem" never actually came up.
I get what "borderline personality" means now.
What I don't get is the "problem" part.
What exactly do you mean by "solving the borderline personality problem"?
Correction —
to be precise,
the term "borderline personality problem" never came up.
That's just because you don't know about borderline personality disorder.
It's almost never discussed as anything other than a problem.
The "borderline personality problem" keeps existing because "the cause is unknown" and "a false cause has spread."
I'm kicking that ladder out from under it and spreading the correct answer — "it's simply a defective product" — to tear down the whole illness-as-vested-interest racket.
So: the solution to the borderline personality problem is spreading the true cause — the fact that it's "simply a defective product" — to tear down the illness-as-vested-interest racket, and that's the whole reason Re: #1 started this thread?
Is that what you're saying?
Yeah.
That's the gist of it.
If anything, the more central part is this bit:
"The borderline personality problem keeps existing because 'the cause is unknown' and 'a false cause has spread' — I'm kicking that ladder out from under it."
That's really the main point.
It's a recurring thread, so if you've got objections or opinions, there's always next time.
And that's been his whole attitude from start to finish.
Huh? I genuinely don't understand what you're saying.
Write in Japanese, lol
What's wrong, lol
Come on, write in Japanese, lolol
Seriously?
Alright, I'm jumping in too then.
Though you should probably go study Japanese, lolol
Background and Key Points
The rikei/bunkei (science-track vs. humanities-track) divide is a fixture of Japanese education — students are sorted into one or the other as early as high school, and the split feeds decades of good-natured and not-so-good-natured sniping online about which group is “smarter” or more useful to society. Newsoku VIP, the board this thread comes from, is one of 5channel’s oldest anonymous forums, known for recurring “theory” threads where a single poster returns again and again with the same pet argument to bait reactions; several posters here note explicitly that they’ve seen this OP’s “borderline personality” thread before, which frames the whole exchange as a known ritual rather than a fresh debate. “Borderline personality” (境界性人格) is being used loosely as an umbrella for Cluster B traits (narcissistic, borderline, histrionic, antisocial), not as a rigorous clinical DSM diagnosis.
The thread didn’t actually split over whether STEM people are superior — almost nobody engages with that claim on the merits. It split over whether jargon is a legitimate way to argue at all: the OP insists critics name a specific term they don’t understand before he’ll explain, while critics counter that an inability to restate a claim in plain words is itself evidence the arguer doesn’t fully understand it. Neither side moves.
What’s easy to miss is that the OP’s own “problem” framing was never established before he was pressed on it — a poster (>>96) points out the phrase “borderline personality problem” appears nowhere earlier in the thread, meaning the OP was retrofitting his conclusion. That’s less a philosophical disagreement than a rhetorical improvisation being caught in real time.
*This article is excerpted and summarized from the 5ch (Newsoku VIP) thread [“I Figured Out the True Nature of Borderline Personality”] I’m the guy from the “non-STEM people are defective products” thread — let’s talk about the original “existential theory of borderline personality” [losing to a script, lol].
Leave a Reply