Comment

Doing it or not doing it doesn’t change the type of thought it is, based on the definition. I reality we will never know, this could have been and most likely was planned. But assuming they didn’t want to waste money and destroy a roll of solder, the thought could have been intrusive then acted on. The possibility is there.

source

Sort:hotnew top

Heavybell@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
In my understanding, intrusive thoughts is something like this: you`re walking along the street and pass a woman pushing a pram, and a thought pops up reminding you that you could kick it into the traffic if you wanted, and here’s all the consequences. And because you’re not a psycho you reel at the idea, wanting to smack your head for even imagining it. But there is no temptation, no urging. The thought cannot “win” because it is not trying to get you to do it, it’s just an imagined possible scenario.

This is something different from having an impulse, which is something you could act upon as you describe. Or, I suppose, it is indeed to just decide to do something from your intrusive thoughts, but that seems unlikely because a key part of the definition of “intrusive thought” is that the thought must be unwelcome and/or distressing.

source
- Lightor@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  Yes but in your description of an intrusive thought you could still act on it, you just don’t. But I’m sure there are people who at some point have.
  
  I think your last sentence is close to where I sit. In my mind there is plenty of room for overlap between the two. You can have an intrusive thought with out without the impulse to do it. Yes it is distressing, but part of the intrusive thought is that sense of morbid wonder that I have to believe some people have acted on.
  
  Also I’m no psychological expert or anything, I could be way off, it’s just my take.
  
  source