Answer on @Quora by Tracy McGreevy to What was John Nash like as a professor?
Answer by Tracy McGreevy:
I was finally able to hear John Nash speak for himself in his interview with Riz Khan, after reading enough quotes of his to begin to suspect the whole back story is fishy. His interview cemented it, as did several of the stories below.
John Nash under psychiatric examination would have been one exponentially flew over the cuckoos nest. Between the lines of much that he has said in recent years is that people didn't get him and that he learned to pull himself back in, so that regular people could "accept" him.
Can you imagine a nurse interviewing him and being able to ascertain what is a delusion and what is not?
As to his son who occupied himself with math over dinner, I have occupied myself happily with code for days on end. There isn't actually anything wrong with it, unless someone makes it wrong.
It is no wonder he sough asylum as a refuge after being psychiatrically incarcerated.
In an interview with Riz Khan he states that the screenwriter of A Beautiful Mind intentionally distorted his story and made it look like he took medication to get well. The screenwriter's mother was a psychiatrist and didn't want people to think they could get better without medication. To a mathematician who dealt in equations that either proved themselves or didn't, this must have been a total affront. It was certainly an affront to all the people who were manipulated into anti-psychotics through the propaganda.
Who on the planet has the mind that could assess the thoughts of John Nash. Didn't he try to leave the Rand corporation during the nuclear age around the time his psychiatric troubles "manifested"?
Game Theory is what happened to him while institutionalized. He had to play a game to get out. He learned to stop talking about politics he said after he won the nobel prize, among a few other tongue in cheek gems. It's all in there the agents of the state, the various players, in an age when people had very few rights. His only way out was for him to let them think they made him well. Before that, they were using insulin shock as a medication. After a while he learned to not resist, so he could get out. But between all his lines, he tells the story, becoming more vocal as time went on.
John Nash was Big Pharma's dream from 2001 on through the point where he started telling the truth about how the screenwriter and his or her psychiatrist mother twisted his story to promote a political agenda.
John Nash became the unwilling poster child for forced antipsychotic drugging after that movie. The exact opposite of how he "got better". "Just Say No". The triumph was not him giving into medical treatment, it was him resisting it and playing along with them long enough to get out of dodge, finally.
He said no visual hallucinations, despite what the film wrongly depicted, and that 'some people' hear voices, but he didn't identify as one of them. If you ask the right person if they hear voices and they don't realize everybody talks to themselves, they might buy in to it.
No wonder antipsychotics have become one of the top selling drugs in the US since then, despite only 1% of the population experiencing actual symptoms. I would be interested to know if the screenwriters mother was on Eli Lilly's payroll at any point.