Thread: schizophrenia considered

Originally Posted by PharoahSunrise

That much understanding would drive someone completely insane. Schizophrenics come close, and that awareness to them is often total confusion.

Please indulge into how schizophrenics come close to anything.
~

Originally Posted by O'nus

Please indulge into how schizophrenics come close to anything.
~

Well its not good to generalize, especially considering the enigma of schizophrenia, but I will do so just to try to make what I meant clear.... its my understanding that through the hallucinations of a schizophrenic are expressed intangible and inexplainable aspects of the subconscious, of perceptions that are generally too powerful for the human mind. Those with even the mildest case of schizophrenia live in separate realities(albeit not entirely different) from others, which happen to consist of their thoughts. With this, and by looking at the quote, I think what I said makes fairly good sense.

Please explain what you mean by "coming close to anything".

Originally Posted by PharoahSunrise

Well its not good to generalize, especially considering the enigma of schizophrenia, but I will do so just to try to make what I meant clear.... its my understanding that through the hallucinations of a schizophrenic are expressed intangible and inexplainable aspects of the subconscious, of perceptions that are generally too powerful for the human mind. Those with even the mildest case of schizophrenia live in separate realities(albeit not entirely different) from others, which happen to consist of their thoughts. With this, and by looking at the quote, I think what I said makes fairly good sense.

Please explain what you mean by "coming close to anything".

Oh, I said "to anything" because I was not sure what you were referring to when you said, "schizophrenics come close..".

I think I understand what you are saying, but not 100%. Consider this:

I was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia. Though I have not gone for any rehabilitation, I do feel much better.

I have also dealt with schizophrenics during my behavioral research.

With these two combined, I am not sure what you are referring to:
- Schizophrenics experience something too powerful for their minds to comprehend
- Schizophrenics express something too power for other minds to comprehend

I can tell you that when I was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia, all I thought about was megalomaniacal thoughts. It was a constant feeling of depression and journal entries, dreams, and meditation was often very sporadic and difficult to follow (poverty of speach..). Thankfully, as you can tell, I have a grasp on things now. If you go far back to when I first joined Dream Views (in 2003), you can see residual posts with poverty of speach. (Note; no one knows this on the board up until now).

When dealing with schizophrenic patients and monitoring their development/rehabilitation, they have difficultly comprehending a great deal of their environment. Further, their EEG readings do not show a consistency.

In conclusion, I am inclined to ask you; what is this that is too powerful for the mind to comprehend? We could say that they use more of their brain than normal, but, the truth is that in order to use all of your brain you would have to remember every moment, move every limb, orgasm, feel every emotion, feel every part of your body, etc. etc. This does not seem like a "full consciousness" or "absolute experience" more or less just what we are doing is compartmentalising our experience of our body?

I am not sure where to elaborate more here. What do you think...?
~

Originally Posted by O'nus

Oh, I said "to anything" because I was not sure what you were referring to when you said, "schizophrenics come close..".

I think I understand what you are saying, but not 100%. Consider this:

I was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia. Though I have not gone for any rehabilitation, I do feel much better.

I have also dealt with schizophrenics during my behavioral research.

With these two combined, I am not sure what you are referring to:
- Schizophrenics experience something too powerful for their minds to comprehend
- Schizophrenics express something too power for other minds to comprehend

I can tell you that when I was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia, all I thought about was megalomaniacal thoughts. It was a constant feeling of depression and journal entries, dreams, and meditation was often very sporadic and difficult to follow (poverty of speach..). Thankfully, as you can tell, I have a grasp on things now. If you go far back to when I first joined Dream Views (in 2003), you can see residual posts with poverty of speach. (Note; no one knows this on the board up until now).

When dealing with schizophrenic patients and monitoring their development/rehabilitation, they have difficultly comprehending a great deal of their environment. Further, their EEG readings do not show a consistency.

In conclusion, I am inclined to ask you; what is this that is too powerful for the mind to comprehend? We could say that they use more of their brain than normal, but, the truth is that in order to use all of your brain you would have to remember every moment, move every limb, orgasm, feel every emotion, feel every part of your body, etc. etc. This does not seem like a "full consciousness" or "absolute experience" more or less just what we are doing is compartmentalising our experience of our body?

I am not sure where to elaborate more here. What do you think...?
~

When you say "you'd have to use all of your brain" and "we could say they use more of their brain" that's what I mean by coming close. Schizophrenics tend to have longer memories, enhanced emotional reactions(as a result of a greater, sometimes excessive understanding of the severity of any given situation) and creative/spiritual advantages over the typical being. Its also very similar to the mindset of psychedelic drug use, many people saying that using LSD is much like inducing temporary schizophrenia. While some with the "disorder" may be "basketcases" its said that those intelligent enough to comprehend the intensities that they are subject to, despite being common sufferers of depression, will be creative geniuses, so its not to say that all schizos will "come close" if they are simply being driven mad by their incapacities. There's a spiritual awareness in schizophrenics, and in those unable to handle such awareness(too much perception is the cause of a 'bad trip' I believe) it often leads to complete confusion. I hope this clarifies further the point I was trying to get across.

Again, its an enigma of a diagnosis and a bullshit term at that, I'm a thousand percent sure that with enough intent to do so I could become diagnosed as a latent schizophrenic. The most diverse of personality types, grouped under one inert term, I don't like it.

Originally Posted by PharoahSunrise

When you say "you'd have to use all of your brain" and "we could say they use more of their brain" that's what I mean by coming close.

I did not mean it as anything more than the fact that using marignal usage of our brain allows us to better function. This is the equivalnet to using all the tools on a swiss army knife at the sametime. We don't; we use only one tool at a time.

Schizophrenics tend to have longer memories, enhanced emotional reactions(as a result of a greater, sometimes excessive understanding of the severity of any given situation) and creative/spiritual advantages over the typical being.

You've stepped out of the empirical side of science here now.

Its also very similar to the mindset of psychedelic drug use, many people saying that using LSD is much like inducing temporary schizophrenia. While some with the "disorder" may be "basketcases" its said that those intelligent enough to comprehend the intensities that they are subject to, despite being common sufferers of depression, will be creative geniuses, so its not to say that all schizos will "come close" if they are simply being driven mad by their incapacities. There's a spiritual awareness in schizophrenics, and in those unable to handle such awareness(too much perception is the cause of a 'bad trip' I believe) it often leads to complete confusion. I hope this clarifies further the point I was trying to get across.

You seem to be implying that being a schizophrenic is a good thing?

Again, its an enigma of a diagnosis and a bullshit term at that, I'm a thousand percent sure that with enough intent to do so I could become diagnosed as a latent schizophrenic. The most diverse of personality types, grouped under one inert term, I don't like it.

What do you propose should be done with schizophrenics..? Have you direct experience with schizophrenics in hospitals..?
~

Originally Posted by O'nus

You seem to be implying that being a schizophrenic is a good thing?

Schizophrenics in shamanic cultures often became spiritual leaders.

What do you propose should be done with schizophrenics..? Have you direct experience with schizophrenics in hospitals..?
~

Schizophrenia should not be treated by society the way it is being treated. I think a positive change of mind towards these people would be the best way to deal with them on a mass scale.

Here is an excellent video on schizophrenia and shamanism.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEglHjd_gUQ

Its also very similar to the mindset of psychedelic drug use, many people saying that using LSD is much like inducing temporary schizophrenia.

Indeed.

I lived with a Schizophrenic for a while. It's pretty sad how they suffer, they are offered no guidance what so ever on how to deal with their problems (not to mention how much more complex they are), and are forced to live a shitty lifestyle because the government will only give this person so much to live on.

Originally Posted by grasshoppa

Schizophrenics in shamanic cultures often became spiritual leaders.

Schizophrenia should not be treated by society the way it is being treated. I think a positive change of mind towards these people would be the best way to deal with them on a mass scale.

Here is an excellent video on schizophrenia and shamanism.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEglHjd_gUQ

Indeed.

I lived with a Schizophrenic for a while. It's pretty sad how they suffer, they are offered no guidance what so ever on how to deal with their problems (not to mention how much more complex they are), and are forced to live a shitty lifestyle because the government will only give this person so much to live on.

I can tell you that I was diagnosed with schizophrenia and had no previous influence of any hospitalization. Thus, any symptons were the result of society, not the health care. I did not feel very sensitive to my surroundings and ceratainly not capable of being considered "enlightened". If anything, I was a ballistic megalomaniac.

Otherwise... yes, there are problems serving schizophrenics and there ought to be better ways; we're working on it. However, I really disagree with the idea that they should be revered.
~

Originally Posted by SolSkye

Wouldn't you first need to grasp all the fundamentals of reality in order to say someone has disconnected from it. Who on earth has the authority to say such a thing?

If you want to step into this route, we could say this about the entirety of psychology and then suggest that it should be abolished. However, the fact is that it has helped and rehabilitated an overwhelming amount of people for me to even consider this line of thought. Mostly in combination with the following statement..

I think it would be pretty safe to say that everyone has a case of schizophrenia. It's just a matter of whether you own up to your own madness, or not-- whether you paved your own way to break from this reality, or simply chose to conform with how society decides to break itself from reality, both paths are one and the same.

No! No! I can agree with saying that everyone has a form of mental sickness or problem, but not schizophrenia. People with schizophrenia completely lose touch with reality and themselves. I can tell you this because I myself was diagnosed with it and rehabilitated. Further, I have worked with schizophrenics and they hardly have a grasp on even how to swallow sometimes let alone "be honest with themselves".

Schizophrenia is not similar to a result of conforming to ways of thinking or the result of thinking a certain way. It is a way of being brought up, developmental problems, mixed with biological issues. I do not think we should get into the development and definition of schizophrenia, but I think it should be noted that there is no reason to think that it is a common case or that it is a willful choice.

If everyone had a small case of schizophrenia, we would not have a functioning society. However, I think you intended to mean that we all have a mental disability or sickness of somekind... right?

Just scratching beneath the surface of the absurd materialistic ways of the west will show you how fundamentally wrong it is to believe that the world as just a problem waiting to be solved. There is no problem to begin with. Mystery is and always will be ingrained into the very essence of experience.

In contrary to what you have said, health matters have significantly improved, mental rehabilitation, and more. As a result, we have better functioning societies (if you want to debate that point, then let us at least say that we have functionign societies), we have awareness and respect for other individuals (feminism, racism, etc.), and we have a longer life-span. Furthermore, we have an incalcuable amount of people who's lives have changed because of psychotherapy.

~

As things better on the micro, they worsen on the macro. It's just a trade-off. A shuffling of the cards to make one feel better about themselves.

Things change but nothing changes. At least we agree on one thing, we are all inherently sick.

Originally Posted by SolSkye

As things better on the micro, they worsen on the macro. It's just a trade-off. A shuffling of the cards to make one feel better about themselves.

Things change but nothing changes. At least we agree on one thing, we are all inherently sick.

I don't get it. Are you advocating schizophrenia still? Are you saying that I, as a diagnosed schizophrenic, am still one just with a different "mask"? If so, this is resembing scientology.

However, I am curious what you are saying because I can certainly tell you that I am nothing like what I was when I was diagnosed with schizophrenia. You can probably even see for yourself by searching this board and reading my first 100 posts.
~

Originally Posted by SolSkye

As things better on the micro, they worsen on the macro. It's just a trade-off. A shuffling of the cards to make one feel better about themselves.

This sentence is walking into pyrrhonic skepticism. We can easily say that we cannot be certain of anything. In this case, we cannot even know that we do not even know that we don't know that we don't know anything. It's circular, boring, and sophomoric. It does not offer any solutions or practicality.

An all too often scenario.

Originally Posted by O'nus

I don't get it. Are you advocating schizophrenia still? Are you saying that I, as a diagnosed schizophrenic, am still one just with a different "mask"? If so, this is resembing scientology.

However, I am curious what you are saying because I can certainly tell you that I am nothing like what I was when I was diagnosed with schizophrenia. You can probably even see for yourself by searching this board and reading my first 100 posts.
~

I'm not advocating it, so much as, saying that everyone has their skeletons that they hide from prying eyes. Some have bigger fish to fry than others, and some are just better at hiding them than others. Any trip to see the selection at an adult video store, or story from businessmen frequenting lady-boys in Taiwan will tell you-- People are sick. Some may come to grips with, and openly accept their skeletons which may manifest itself into their daily lives which naturally unsettles and scares people because it draws attention to their diversion from the pack signaling their discontent with the system, and forces the observer to reflect on and gauge their own skeletons.

Im sure you realize, the system is an entity unto itself and derives it's so-called sanity and solace in numbers. As numbers wane away from it's trough, the system deems those that do unworthy of the label 'sane', as they arbitrarily see fit. The term, 'sane', would imply the system being grounded in sanity to begin with. Do you really think our current materialistic beliefs, and totalitarian education system which force feeds it's version of reality on the modern world, is sane? That's a rhetorical question, by the way.

Originally Posted by Howie

Quote:
This sentence is walking into pyrrhonic skepticism. We can easily say that we cannot be certain of anything. In this case, we cannot even know that we do not even know that we don't know that we don't know anything. It's circular, boring, and sophomoric. It does not offer any solutions or practicality.

An all too often scenario.

I'm not sure who you were quoting but I would have to say in response to that, who the hell does that person think they are to deem what is objectively boring and sophomoric? The system, through it's so-called practical solutions, inescapably creates more problems. It's a redundant, vicious, never-ending, and self-deprecating loop of-- Problem, Reaction, Solution. Mostly to problems that the-powers-that-be accidentally and arbitrarily created as they went along. Why can't people accept life for what it is, through the flawed lenses of our imperfect perceptions? There will always be problems, because problems exist inborn in us.

Considering I'm as quixotic as they come, I find what the mainstream call practicality to be quite impractical. Practicality is in the eye of the beholder, is it not? Why are we continually forced to settle for second best, step on these pre-paved escalators through life in order to reach these consumeristic and parasitic plateaus and lifestyles decided by equally deluded individuals, or constantly worry about these meaningless monetary digits in order to put food on our plates? Do those finite luxuries really provide one with self understanding and relief, in the end? Hardly. It's just another form of escapism. If every sense of choice and freedom are predetermined and laid out for you, what scraps are left that can be called freedom without seeming to border on society's edge of insanity? Perhaps, that's why people run with their delusions. There is something empowering there that society stifles from childhood... the imagination.

Do you honestly believe there is no better system for us to create or follow? In the public eye when, 'good citizen', equates to, 'avid and blind follower of the system', that's where I adamantly and vehemently disagree. Naturally, questioning the system would cause fear in those that pathologically believe in it, because it forces a good look into the cracks of their blind servitude and their once 'flawless' beliefs.

Practical subservient left-brained follower of a flawed system? Is that the best you can hope to achieve in life? I would hope not.

I'm proud to say I'm crazy in my own right.

Originally Posted by SolSkye

I'm not advocating it, so much as, saying that everyone has their skeletons that they hide from prying eyes. Some have bigger fish to fry than others, and some are just better at hiding them than others. Any trip to see the selection at an adult video store, or story from businessmen frequenting lady-boys in Taiwan will tell you-- People are sick. Some may come to grips with, and openly accept their skeletons which may manifest itself into their daily lives which naturally unsettles and scares people because it draws attention to their diversion from the pack signaling their discontent with the system, and forces the observer to reflect on and gauge their own skeletons.

If you are implying that schizophrenia is a willful choice or the result of choices that leads to a disrupted CNS, then you really must re-examine your knowledge of schizophrenia. Schizophrenic's do not make a willful choice to be sczhiophrenic, in fact, there is significant proof, via monozygotic studies, that it is hereditary.

While I agree that there are many people in the world that have mental disabilities, if not everybody, I do not think we should include disease such as schizophrenia, down syndrome, or muscular dystrophy.

Im sure you realize, the system is an entity unto itself and derives it's so-called sanity and solace in numbers. As numbers wane away from it's trough, the system deems those that do unworthy of the label 'sane', as they arbitrarily see fit. The term, 'sane', would imply the system being grounded in sanity to begin with. Do you really think our current materialistic beliefs, and totalitarian education system which force feeds it's version of reality on the modern world, is sane? That's a rhetorical question, by the way.

What are you debating here? That there is no such thing as sanity? Have you ever seen a person so lost in their introverted world that they try to eat their own feces? Even if they began as willful life choices, they have certainly lost the capability to deal with it on their own. And you imply that it is societies fault? Society has always had mental disabilities and always will. Blaming society will not help and is not practical by any means.

I'm not sure who you were quoting but I would have to say in response to that, who the hell does that person think they are to deem what is objectively boring and sophomoric?

If you would please consider what that comment was referring to, you would know that it is a fair thing to consider boring and sophomoric. Do you want to debate over whether or not opinions define good/bad? How about other vague terms that are completely aporetic? Aporetic debates are sophomoric. You may as well debate which is "bettter"; blue or red.

The system, through it's so-called practical solutions, inescapably creates more problems. It's a redundant, vicious, never-ending, and self-deprecating loop of-- Problem, Reaction, Solution. Mostly to problems that the-powers-that-be accidentally and arbitrarily created as they went along. Why can't people accept life for what it is, through the flawed lenses of our imperfect perceptions? There will always be problems, because problems exist inborn in us.

Yes, problems will always be evident. However, you seem to be implying that we should abolish psychiatry all together and "just live with it". However, facts are that it has helped an overwhelming amount of people. You refute these people and say that they are still not cured and just managed to "hide" the problems. This is how you have made your argument unfalsifiable and, thusly, cannot even prove you wrong. I have been rehabilitated by my scchizophrenia and you seem to imply that I still have that sickness dormant in my head. I can certainly tell you that the memories are still obviously there, but I behave nothing like I did 4 years ago.

Considering I'm as quixotic as they come, I find what the mainstream call practicality to be quite impractical. Practicality is in the eye of the beholder, is it not? Why are we continually forced to settle for second best, step on these pre-paved escalators through life in order to reach these consumeristic and parasitic plateaus and lifestyles decided by equally deluded individuals, or constantly worry about these meaningless monetary digits in order to put food on our plates? Do those finite luxuries really provide one with self understanding and relief, in the end? Hardly. It's just another form of escapism. If every sense of choice and freedom are predetermined and laid out for you, what scraps are left that can be called freedom without seeming to border on society's edge of insanity? Perhaps, that's why people run with their delusions. There is something empowering there that society stifles from childhood... the imagination.

Do you honestly believe there is no better system for us to create or follow? In the public eye when, 'good citizen', equates to, 'avid and blind follower of the system', that's where I adamantly and vehemently disagree. Naturally, questioning the system would cause fear in those that pathologically believe in it, because it forces a good look into the cracks of their blind servitude and their once 'flawless' beliefs.

What are you trying to get at here? Again debating that the system is to blame for the resulting mental incapabilities and sickness? Are you unwilling to point any blame to the individual? Schizophrenia is significant hereditary. Furthermore, a large majority of psychiatrists today will say that mental sickness is the result of an ecclectic approach and is the result of both nature and nurture. You seem to be implying both that society has molded sickness in the world and it cannot accept it. Yet again, your argument is unfalsifiable.

The reality is that people are responsible for some sicknesses and the environment is responsible for others. However, when the individual becomes sick, they rely on their society for help. You implied that trying to help these people only perpetuates the problem. This approach is simply wrong and an easy statistical search on those that have benefited from the health system will prove otherwise.

Practical subservient left-brained follower of a flawed system? Is that the best you can hope to achieve in life? I would hope not.

I'm proud to say I'm crazy in my own right.

Just because I admit to have being sick and having to ask for help does not mean that I am a subservient flawed person. That is possibly one of the most insulting things I have ever read. You think sick people should not ask for help when they are sick and just live with it? People need help and they ask for it.

This pseudo-intellectualism that fervently attacks "the system" is a gross tangent that utilizes a great deal of unfalsifiable methods and residually insults anyone who remotely disagress with the idea that they may want help from an external system of health care. Adhereing to a system of psychiatry does not make you any less a person or "subservient".

And yet you say, "Who the hell thinks they can judge what is boring and sophomoric" and then follow up with this spew.
~

Spew? I beg to differ. Again... eye of the beholder. Touchy are we?

Originally Posted by SolSkye

Spew? I beg to differ. Again... eye of the beholder. Touchy are we?

From what I understood, correct me if I am wrong:
- Society perpetuates mental sickness
- Society manipulates it in order to make benefit, etc.
- Society will not accept mental sickness
- People should just simply accept being mentally sick.
- Accept mental illness will invariably cure mental illness.

Am I off/on..?
~

Before you jump headfirst into a debate with guns blazing, perhaps you should look at who I was addressing in each section of my arguments. The entire second half of my post was addressing Howie which was evident by his name in the quote...

Sorry, but I can't respond to stuff that was taken entirely out of context. I never claimed schizophrenics or anyone being entirely willful of their skeletons. I said 'SOME', and 'OTHERS'. Since when do those two words imply 'ALL'? Obviously, my grievances here were with the system in which we put our faith in to deem those as; sane, or insane. NOT the individuals. Even still, I don't wish to throw out the establishment entirely, but I think people on the fringes of society shouldn't be so easily cast into the shadows as sick when everyone casts their own shadow, however indiscernible, that they so often and easily like to overlook.

Also, the second half of my post I was responding to someone presenting appeals to practicality. And, for some odd reason you felt like chiming in to claim aporetic debates as sophomoric. Let me ask you something... undeniably, this whole universe is an absurd paradox, so does that make the entire universe sophomoric in nature?

Personally, I've found the only things that hold any truth or weight are contradictions. Is matter- waves, or particles? The universe- finite, or infinite? Most likely, they are both and none. Which should tell you, this reality is far from real, and far from fake.

So, Again... Who is anyone to think they are authorities on a subject enough to judge what is or isn't asinine? Next time, I implore you to look more carefully at posts and think before you assume what I was thinking. It wasn't anything meant to belittle your condition.

"The statistics on sanity are that one out of every four Americans is suffering from some form of mental illness. Think of your three best friends. If they're OK, then it's you."

Originally Posted by SolSkye

I'm not sure who you were quoting but I would have to say in response to that, who the hell does that person think they are to deem what is objectively boring and sophomoric? The system, through it's so-called practical solutions, inescapably creates more problems. It's a redundant, vicious, never-ending, and self-deprecating loop of-- Problem, Reaction, Solution. Mostly to problems that the-powers-that-be accidentally and arbitrarily created as they went along. Why can't people accept life for what it is, through the flawed lenses of our imperfect perceptions? There will always be problems, because problems exist inborn in us.

Considering I'm as quixotic as they come, I find what the mainstream call practicality to be quite impractical. Practicality is in the eye of the beholder, is it not? Why are we continually forced to settle for second best, step on these pre-paved escalators through life in order to reach these consumeristic and parasitic plateaus and lifestyles decided by equally deluded individuals, or constantly worry about these meaningless monetary digits in order to put food on our plates? Do those finite luxuries really provide one with self understanding and relief, in the end? Hardly. It's just another form of escapism. If every sense of choice and freedom are predetermined and laid out for you, what scraps are left that can be called freedom without seeming to border on society's edge of insanity? Perhaps, that's why people run with their delusions. There is something empowering there that society stifles from childhood... the imagination.

Do you honestly believe there is no better system for us to create or follow? In the public eye when, 'good citizen', equates to, 'avid and blind follower of the system', that's where I adamantly and vehemently disagree. Naturally, questioning the system would cause fear in those that pathologically believe in it, because it forces a good look into the cracks of their blind servitude and their once 'flawless' beliefs.

Practical subservient left-brained follower of a flawed system? Is that the best you can hope to achieve in life? I would hope not.

I'm proud to say I'm crazy in my own right.

Many people when asked feel they are odd, crazy in their own right.
They long to be different.

The ideology that we have certainly is flawed and is lacking. I am a very big advocate of thinking outside of parameters. I don't think this gives us a free ticket to call everything subjective and use circular logic to free yourself from trying to seek any answers. It is so easy to say it creates more problems. How is it better from a conceptual idea of NO problems. Or to buck a system and have no logical solution to the problems other than to say that it is wrong and to think outside of "it." It is however a system. Any system in place will always be rebutted. This culture of free thinking and throwing the blame at the system is more sad than what is in place.
Thinking outside the "box" or a system should be advocated.

Originally Posted by SolSkye

Before you jump headfirst into a debate with guns blazing, perhaps you should look at who I was addressing in each section of my arguments. The entire second half of my post was addressing Howie which was evident by his name in the quote...

Sorry, but I can't respond to stuff that was taken entirely out of context. I never claimed schizophrenics or anyone being entirely willful of their skeletons. I said 'SOME', and 'OTHERS'. Since when do those two words imply 'ALL'? Obviously, my grievances here were with the system in which we put our faith in to deem those as; sane, or insane. NOT the individuals. Even still, I don't wish to throw out the establishment entirely, but I think people on the fringes of society shouldn't be so easily cast into the shadows as sick when everyone casts their own shadow, however indiscernible, that they so often and easily like to overlook.

Right, I agree that we all have issues and mental demons. We could all use help. I would though say that some people are insane. If we define insane as the incapability of someone to function individualy or in a society, then we have a function to identify people to help. Of course, we should also not be so quick to try a rehabilitate anyone or everyone that comes asking for help. Do you agree that these people, who cannot function individually or in a society (that are typically called insane) should seek help or be deemed to need help?

Also, the second half of my post I was responding to someone presenting appeals to practicality. And, for some odd reason you felt like chiming in to claim aporetic debates as sophomoric. Let me ask you something... undeniably, this whole universe is an absurd paradox, so does that make the entire universe sophomoric in nature?

I think you are delving into wether or not we are even capable of defining or debating the nature of the universe. This is where I would say it is aporetic and sophomoric. There is no point in arguing wether or not we have the capability of understanding the nature of the universe because we inevitably do try to understand it even by debating over whether or not it is a folly. Would you not agree that doing so is sophomoric?

Personally, I've found the only things that hold any truth or weight are contradictions. Is matter- waves, or particles? The universe- finite, or infinite? Most likely, they are both and none. Which should tell you, this reality is far from real, and far from fake.

You are saying that the only things that are true are contradictory paradoxes? So, the following is true; everything is both good and evil and dead and alive?

So, Again... Who is anyone to think they are authorities on a subject enough to judge what is or isn't asinine? Next time, I implore you to look more carefully at posts and think before you assume what I was thinking. It wasn't anything meant to belittle your condition.

That's good, thank you.

We can judge what is asinine with a defined function. For example; if we say that a useful debate is over something that brings mutual enlightenment, then we could say any discussion is benefit. If we define a useful debate as a means to find truth or practicality, then arguing that we can't understand the nature of things is pointless. So, I think what we are really differing on here, perhaps subtly, is what we are really discussing in this matter.

What do you think...?

(Note; I no longer have a "condition")

Edit: Well said Howie.
~

Wow, this is all over the place.
O'nus, I agree with you in some ways and grasshoppa and Solskye in some ways also.

The fact that everyone has a mental illness you all seem to agree on right?
But O'nus you do not believe Schizophrenia is what everybody has.
Obviously, under the general definition this would appear to be true.

Most would say schizophrenics live in an alternate reality, I would not be so inclined to say this. If you believe this, then everyone IS schizophrenic, we ALL perceive the world differently and I think this is what Howie was trying to say.

I think that we should not treat schizophrenics to rid them of the 'disorder'. Unless the person wants to and it is possible. Again, we all see things differently so the person should be asked whether they want to be returned to 'normal' or stay themselves but manage their condition. For example, I like the way I am with most aspects; such as curiosity, creativity, empathetic, perceptive etc. Given the chance to be rehabilitated and rid of anxiety, depression, OCD and whatever else I may have, I simply would not do it. Because they make me me, and contribute to those things I like in myself. Instead I choose to take some Xanax everyday to ease the unsettled and paranoid/anxious feelings which sometimes are just too much.
O'nus, you say that you no longer have schizophrenia, what exactly makes you think this? How do you know you are 'normal' a.k.a same as everybody else? Would you not rather be schizophrenic but at peace with the fact that you are schizophrenic.

I'm not sure I'm explaining this correctly. My point is that people want not to be 'crazy' because this makes them too different by society. O'nus if you lived in a society where everyone was more or less the same as you before you were 'fixed', would you still want to be 'normal'? Assuming normal is who you are now.

When I went to a psychiatrist she said that 'what we do is make you more able to function or fit in in society by removing these things that stop you from doing so'. Do we want everyone to be the same as everyone else?

One last thing, you said before something about a guy eating his own faeces, why is this wrong? It is because our society finds it wrong. In another country it could be a perfectly normal thing to do.

And on the topic: I am honest to my full ability at the time when honesty is needed. With what CymekSniper said Recently I have made the decision to cast any moral binding I have with honesty down as honesty has been getting me in a lot of trouble recently. From now on, I will only do and say what is beneficial to me, not labeling my own actions as moral or immoral. Dude, I thought the same thing a while ago and then I forgot and remembered when more harsh consequences came from trying to be 'moral'. But I learned also not to go so far as to only do what is beneficial for you. Help other people too, tell the truth to them if needed. That is what makes us feel good, just don't put morals or others so high so much that you forget about yourself.

Simply flame me if I was way ununderstanbable.

too much perception is the cause of a 'bad trip' I believe
I've been thinking the same thing myself, recently experiencing a bad trip for a few minutes only luckily, I realised it was because of my fear of having a bad trip. Although bad trips weren't really known before the first person had one, so I thought more and realise maybe it's because I am paying too much attention to everything and the effects I am getting and mixed with the fear of getting too far gone that scared me. But I don't think that too much perception alone could cause a bad trip unless too much perception means you get paranoid also because you can't comprehend everything going on.

And O'nus, you ever taken any psychedelics before?

I think we are all battling different demons here!

Solyske,
Did you ever intend to single out, portay in anyway or have any intent for schizophrenia to be judged as it has been judged in this particular thread?

I ask because it seems like O'nus may have been a little defensive from the onset and from this the entire thread took on another look.
I apologizers O'nus if I did not see something that is there. Also to solyske if that was your intent.
I am unclear about the entire nature of the schizophrenia in context to this thread.

Tommo,
I do believe we ALL perceive the world differently, I can't even see how that is deniable.
However the few points I had wanted to make is that contrary to -

Originally Posted by tommo

I'm not sure I'm explaining this correctly. My point is that people want not to be 'crazy' because this makes them too different by society.

I see that many people a scared to be different at the same time they say they are.
What they really want is to be eccentric.

Even if we define schizophrenia as living in an alternate reality, and make the leap to say everyone then has schizophrenia, there are still these people that are so deluded and have so much difficulty mediating their world that they significantly rely on others in order live a functional life.

How do I know I am no longer schizophrenic? I can live without the constant thought of suicide, that I no longer have delusions of grandeur, I am no longer a megalomaniac, and I can function without the aid of others. In fact, I feel like a much more powerful individual now than ever.

If I was defensive on the onset, it is because people are trying to make it sound like being schizophrenic is a good thing when it is really not a good thing. The only good thing about it is that we now have people that will help them now-a-days. Even that is not necessarily a good thing about being a schizophrenic. I really think that anyone who thinks schizophrenics is a good thing needs to take a trip to a mental hospital to see what they are really like.

I have not taken any psychadelics, yet. I am honestly afraid of what I would think or how I would behave.

It is best to describe schizophrenia by looking at old log entries by a schizophrenic. Here is one from me:

Sept. 2003: (punctuation was fixed)
Today I am I am looking for the end of the end. The beginning of the straw is at the end of the hole. My feelings are lost in an absorbing lubricated abyss where the Pope needs my help! We need to go find the end of the world! Let me say that I just am really happy to be dead. Maybe someday I will be dead and can play ring and round the rosie till I find my dad and mom who will make my life all the more complicated but at least they try their best to help me. God I can't wait to be with God not Christian God, not Christian God, me God, me God, all God we are all God. There is no change. Eternal progress ethereal ending dreams.

With the above considered, I was constantly drinking and found myself walking in the middle of streets and walking down train-tracks. I can conceive of no advantage to being a schizophrenic or revering them.
~

The reason someone would revere a schizophrenic is maybe because they don't have to put up with living in this bland world. However, your experience with it is that the world is horrible as a 'schiz'. But this doesn't have to be, if society was set up to incorporate the workings of the schizophrenic mind, and not ostracize them, I believe most people with schizophrenia would be fine.

For instance, 'schizos' with artistic talent - probably the ones who get hallucinations - could be grouped into a community and create art.
Society could easily pay for institutions like this instead of locking them away in a room and dosing them.

O'nus, the reason I asked about psychedelics was because if the effects are inherently the same as a schizophrenics normal life, there should be no effect felt by a schizophrenic. Either that or they would be much stronger effects. It's probably a good choice on your part to not take them, whenever I smoke weed to chill out 1 time out of 3, I will have a massive panic attack, which would probably be worse in your case, (Hallucinations n stuff) and reverse how far you've come.
Anyway that doesn't really have a lot to do with what we're talking about.

Even if we define schizophrenia as living in an alternate reality, and make the leap to say everyone then has schizophrenia, there are still these people that are so deluded and have so much difficulty mediating their world that they significantly rely on others in order live a functional life.

Yes, I understand this completely and I know how you feel about it, I too used to think the same way. But what I then realised though is that; a slight variation of this 'reality' and a major variation are one in the same.
People say, "yes of course everyone views it differently, but some people are just plain crazy!" Why? Because their view differs moreso to ours?

Some people could go about day by day viewing/hearing/feeling reality in a completely different way to most people. One of us could be experiencing this right now but because we don't know how others see things we don't think of ourselves as crazy. But because schizophrenics become aware that they are crazy this frightens them, and is probably what turns their hallucinations bad. This is just a theory, maybe not a theory coz there's not much evidence, but if someone can live in developed countries with schizophrenia eating their own faeces, yet if brought up in a shamanic culture be placed on a pedestal.... that kinda proves it right?

Originally Posted by Howie

Solyske,
Did you ever intend to single out, portay in anyway or have any intent for schizophrenia to be judged as it has been judged in this particular thread?

No, I didn't. When I referred to everyone having a case of schizophrenia I was talking about it's general usage (a mentality or approach characterized by inconsistent or contradictory elements). For the record, this universe is as contradictory and paradoxical as they come.

Originally Posted by O'nus

Right, I agree that we all have issues and mental demons. We could all use help. I would though say that some people are insane. If we define insane as the incapability of someone to function individualy or in a society, then we have a function to identify people to help. Of course, we should also not be so quick to try a rehabilitate anyone or everyone that comes asking for help. Do you agree that these people, who cannot function individually or in a society (that are typically called insane) should seek help or be deemed to need help?

Not necessarily. Perhaps, they have some insight into things, that we just fail to see from our seemingly rational standpoint. Just because from our perspective they do obscene and absurd things, doesn't mean we don't look equally absurd and obscene to them. Perhaps, therein lies the point. Judge not, lest ye be judged... type deal.

Originally Posted by O'nus

I think you are delving into wether or not we are even capable of defining or debating the nature of the universe. This is where I would say it is aporetic and sophomoric. There is no point in arguing wether or not we have the capability of understanding the nature of the universe because we inevitably do try to understand it even by debating over whether or not it is a folly. Would you not agree that doing so is sophomoric?

Not really. I never argued whether we have the capability to understand the nature of the universe, because the true answer will forever be one thought beyond ours. However, in the process of a debate we are shown different aspects to a viewpoint perhaps unknown to us prior to the discussion. Sometimes, it reflects back our or the other person's insight, other times it reflects stupidity. One can only hopefully grow from each interaction. If not, then yes, it is pretty sophomoric. In this particular case, if anything you learned to check names in quotes more carefully, right?

Originally Posted by O'nus

You are saying that the only things that are true are contradictory paradoxes? So, the following is true; everything is both good and evil and dead and alive?

Yes. and by Yes, I mean... Yes, and no.

Originally Posted by O'nus

We can judge what is asinine with a defined function. For example; if we say that a useful debate is over something that brings mutual enlightenment, then we could say any discussion is benefit. If we define a useful debate as a means to find truth or practicality, then arguing that we can't understand the nature of things is pointless. So, I think what we are really differing on here, perhaps subtly, is what we are really discussing in this matter.

Well, the usefulness and level of enlightenment of a post or topic is up in the air until another person jumps on the idea, or lets it pass. Considering the vagueness of the title of the thread, and the multi-directional answers it received, it really could go either way at any time. It's more about being malleable at all times, and learn something into yourself in the process.

Originally Posted by SolSkye

No, I didn't. When I referred to everyone having a case of schizophrenia I was talking about it's general usage (a mentality or approach characterized by inconsistent or contradictory elements). For the record, this universe is as contradictory and paradoxical as they come.

Not necessarily. Perhaps, they have some insight into things, that we just fail to see from our seemingly rational standpoint. Just because from our perspective they do obscene and absurd things, doesn't mean we don't look equally absurd and obscene to them. Perhaps, therein lies the point. Judge not, lest ye be judged... type deal.

That is where you made the mistake of taking the leap from mental disabilities to mental incapabilities. Schizophrenics have such an introverted world that they are not even aware that they exist. In the cases of cataplexic schizophrenics, they cannot even operate on their own. For the most part, schizophrenics would die if they were left untreated because they cannot survive alone. It is just a plain fact.

You imply that we should not judge the schizophrenics and... and what? Let them be on their own? For the significant amount, they will die if left untreated. That minority that I single out by saying "significant amount" is the little amount of people that can receive help from their family. The fact is that all schizophrenics need help in order to survive let alone function in any sort of society. If we had a society of schizophrenics, and by that I mean that everyone was schizophrenic; the world would be over in less than a couple of years.

Are you saying that it is judgmental for me to say to someone who has blunt trauma to his head, brain spilling over the place, to say, "Wow, you need help"? This is obviously an exxagerated case, but only in the sense that we can see the brain damage spilling outside of their body. Schizophrenics do not choose to be schizophrenics. But you say that we should not judge them by any means?

I really wish I could post a video or records from a schizophrenic so you could see the people you say should not be judged to need help. Unfortunately, the symptoms are so embarrasing and humiliating to family members that no one gives permission to do so. I really hope you meet a schizophrenic someday because it seems to be the only way to show you that they do, in fact, need help and to do otherwsie is simply neglectful.

My point here is that it is not judgmental to say to someone that they need help when they clearly do (ie. bullet wounds, eating your own shit, paralysis, poverty of speach, etc.)

Not really. I never argued whether we have the capability to understand the nature of the universe, because the true answer will forever be one thought beyond ours. However, in the process of a debate we are shown different aspects to a viewpoint perhaps unknown to us prior to the discussion. Sometimes, it reflects back our or the other person's insight, other times it reflects stupidity. One can only hopefully grow from each interaction. If not, then yes, it is pretty sophomoric. In this particular case, if anything you learned to check names in quotes more carefully, right?

I do not think I made a mistake in my quote recognition...?

Anyways, you stepped into the area of saying that all of the universe consists of paradoxes and complications and that there are many things that can be considered "sophomoric". I think you over-looked my note that you are actually arguing that we can never understand the universe because you say that the entire existance is full of contradictions and problematic nature. However, we have developed ways of understanding and functioning that contradict what you are saying. The best example that proves what you are saying is incorrect; feminism movements. If we were not capable of making development in the world and understand the nature of how we ought to live, then we would not have come to these movements.

However, considering the nature of your standpoint; it being unfalsifiable, you can reply by saying something along these lines:
- We are always learning about each other and how we live. The feminism movement was not learning about how we ought to live but how we ought to treat each other. Something along those lines...?

Yes. and by Yes, I mean... Yes, and no.

I think you missed my point.

If everything is full of contradictions, then there is not really anything to begin with because contradictions are then the manifestations of our problems with language. Thus, "yes" and "no" are actually non-existant along with "good", "evil", "bad", etc. They are inevitably the creation of human minds, not a spiritual or external body.

Well, the usefulness and level of enlightenment of a post or topic is up in the air until another person jumps on the idea, or lets it pass. Considering the vagueness of the title of the thread, and the multi-directional answers it received, it really could go either way at any time. It's more about being malleable at all times, and learn something into yourself in the process.

Right. And this is where I pointed out that you are actually not allowing any flexibility in your theory because you have failed to show this point numerous times; what can prove you wrong?
~