Talk Again.
You've lost someone.
Maybe you can fix it.
Free pilot sessions. Leave with a concrete fix.
You've lost someone.
Maybe you can fix it.
You've tried them all...
They fail and sometimes even make things worse — because they assume you're in a normal disagreement, not a deranged..
It doesn't feel like disagreement.
It feels bizarre.
Physical Contempt. Sneering and/or dismissive laughter.
Logic Avoidance. Responses don’t actually answer what you just said.
Enjoys Pain of Others. Visible enjoyment when an out-group is mocked or harmed.
Huge Energy Asymmetry. You’re walking on eggshells but they’re already done.
Derangement (as used here) is a predictable, diagnosable pattern of signals in conversation.
We’re naming the state so you can fix it — not insulting the person.
These can amplify derangement, but they didn’t invent it. In 1943, Bonhoeffer was describing the same deranged conversations across Germany.
Why? Because those things have a spectrum. People can be a little ignorant, a little resentful, or somewhat selfish — and you can often move them gradually.
Derangement doesn’t behave like a spectrum. There’s no “somewhat deranged.” The switch is bimodal — you’re either in the derangement-state or you’re not.
That’s why normal tools fail: they assume a gradual, spectrum-shaped problem. Derangement requires a different kind of repair.
Derangement shows up as a failure in the synchronization layer of speech — not a lack of facts. Fix sync first, then reason can work again.
To fix derangement, you have to learn how to synchronize in adverse conditions.
...but it's difficult to explain because it's fundamentally nonverbal. Like dancing, it has to be demonstrated.
Free 20-minute demo