|WikiProject Psychology||(Rated Start-class)|
|WikiProject Medicine||(Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)|
|This article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:|
|This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Assigned student editor(s): Alexinetice. Assigned peer reviews: Pennylikeacoin.|
Also in "Synecdoche New York". The main character is named Cotard. He spends the majority of the film creating a play which explores death and dying. "I've been thinking a lot about dying lately ... regardless of how this particular thing works itself out, I will be dying, and so will you, and so will everyone here. That's what I want to explore: we are all hurtling towards death. Yet here we are alive, each of us knowing that we are going to die, and each of us really believing that we wont."
I couldn't figure out what "unless regarded as just oneself to another or others" means -- and I really did try to make sense of it. Can anyone figure out the intent of that phrase and hopefully clarify it? I'm thinking it could mean that either that the Cotard's delusion sufferer might still believe in death as oblivion for others, but regards his or herself as an exception, or possibly that death is universally oblivion, and the experiences of the Cotard's delusion sufferer are actually being experienced by someone else, who is experiencing a very intense hallucination or dream of being the (actually dead) Cotard's delusion sufferer.18.104.22.168 (talk) 02:34, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
- @22.214.171.124: I don't see that text in the article. Perhaps it's been edited out? TheVictor99 (talk) 23:14, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
pointless and irrelevant trivia section
It adds nothing of value to the article and it is entirely unreferenced (The one alleged reference, http://www.radiolab.org/blogs/radiolab-blog/ is obviously not a reliable source and doesn't even support the text it claims to.) Our verifiability policy states clearly and unequivocally that the burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material. Please do not re-add unferenced material. Dlabtot (talk) 19:31, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
Clarification/context needed in Signs and Symptoms section
New ref for association with aciclovir
A New Scientist article  describes 8 aciclovir-associated cases, 7 in people with renal failure, referencing an abstract: . I can't access the abstract but perhaps someone who can could summarise this. Espresso Addict (talk) 07:46, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
Is Jim Jarmusch's 1995 film Dead Man truly an example of Cotard's syndrome? The article states "everyone who meets the protagonist [William Blake] believes he is . . . already dead." I must point out that I don't agree with this statement—why would bounty hunters be chasing a man if they think he's already dead?—but let's say, for the sake of this discussion, that everyone in the film does believe Blake is already dead; would that constitute a case of Cotard's syndrome? It's my understanding that the Cotard delusion refers to one's impression of one's own existence (or lack thereof), not to what others believe. ♦ I'll leave this open to discussion for a while. Then, unless someone presents a convincing argument for its inclusion, I'll remove the Dead Man reference from the Cotard article's "Popular Culture" section. TheVictor99 (talk) 00:59, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
Suggested Change/Invalid conclusion in first paragraph
I am not an expert on this particular disorder (as I only have a minor in psychology) but it seems to me the idea that one is dead and that one is immortal are not in conflict with each other in many people's view as the word "paradox" suggests in the first paragraph. There are plenty of people that believe in an afterlife (regardless of whether it is true or not) and it would seem to me that the only logical explanation of one's existence if they held the delusion that they were dead would be that they are now in the afterlife and are therefore (quite probably) immortal.