If everyone on the planet, save one, believed something, but the one other did not, would he be "insane" or "illogical"?
Printable View
If everyone on the planet, save one, believed something, but the one other did not, would he be "insane" or "illogical"?
Chances are, yes! :D
With the ridiculously large sample space, a single belief that is truly unique (and not constructed from other pieces) is almost certainly going to be something eccentric and either silly, harmful, or both. If it's a really good idea, then it doesn't stay 100% unique for too long.
You might say, "well, what about all the great thinkers who have had brilliant, unique beliefs that have changed the world for the better?" I submit that brilliant as they were, those beliefs were not unique. What made the difference was that one person with the belief had three things going for him:
1) The belief
2) Motivation (i.e. bias for action, or whatever you want to call it)
3) The opportunity to do something about it presented itself first.
Well, sanity depends on society as it is a subset of the concept health which can be defined in various ways.
Logic, however, is characterized by being cool, independent of social norms. This is to say, A=A and !(A!=A) is true, always, just as all other tools of logic that man has come up with.
Certainly someone who has a unique belief will be considered insane by society, depending on the nature of the belief, but not illogical, except for the case of the belief being illogical in itself.
As far as sanity goes, no one quite fits the bill there.
As far as logic goes, let's take the reptillian conspiracy. View it objectively, and it makes sense. It can be logical. That to me shows how logic is fallible. There are many things that can appear logical to an objective mind if the material is argued correctly. Of course you're asking if everyone disagrees with a concept except one person, well there are millions of people that believe the reptillian conspiracy. Logic has too much power to stay in the hands of one unless he simply refused to communicate his ideas or he was some sort of super genius and the argument went over the heads of everybody else so they brushed him off.
What societies like to do is label things ridiculous, which essentially means "to invite ridicule" and that's often how less educated people in societies discern things that could be both logical and comparitively sane, because the people are simply afraid of being ridiculed if they somehow agreed with this person. Not everyone has this fear though, and so ideas that can be argued correctly can still spread through societies.
Of course a more educated person can view ideas that appear logical and find the holes in such theories, but 4/5 times they're simply getting defensive they'll lose their sheep and just ridicule them in arguments sugar coated in fallacal logic.
Taking one example, there are literally billions of religious people in the world who consider themselves sane, whereas I find it incomprehensive as to how people can beleive such things. As a result I think I'm the sanest person on Earth but I'm a minority... so really either we are all sane or all insane; unless someone is truely insane like kept in a madhouse or something.
Plato's Cave is relavant to this topic
http://www.plotinus.com/plato_allegory_of_the_cave.htm
Summary with Illustration
http://faculty.washington.edu/smcohen/320/cave.htm
If you mean is insanity socially construed then yes it is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Keeper
"There is a little madness in all of us" Locke
I once heard a parable about King and his faithful adviser. The adviser warns him that next year the wheat crop will be diseased, and all who eat from it will become crazy. He tells the king that if they begin now they can save up wheat for the royal families for next year. The men realize that either they eat of the crop and become mad as well – or – they don’t eat of it. But if they are sane and everyone else is mad, it will appear as if they are the ones who are mad! This feels a little bit like fear as it drives our society – that we’re catching this fear from what we eat, what we take in, or imbibe, as we go through each day.
In the end, they decide to eat the wheat, but before they do so, they each put a mark on the other’s face, so that, even in the midst of madness, they can look at one another, and be reminded by that mark, by the other, of what is really true.
Wow that's excellent. Perfect way to explain society. People know certain paths are insane but walk them anyway for fear their sanity will ostracize them.
I just posted this in a similar thread, but found it more pertinently placed here. If you already read it, then simply pass over it. ;)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolSkyeI'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.Quote:
Originally Posted by O'nus
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Howie
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. :boogie:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keeper
He will be "illogical" because it's not his/her view of whatever belief it is.
What exactly is it that you believe the majority is trying to escape from? How are you so sure that everyone who follows the norm is doing it blindly? Is it not possible that so many people behave the same way because they honestly hold similar beliefs without fear of judgment? Is it not possible that you are simply justifying your divergent beliefs by saying that everyone else is just afraid to believe as you do? One thing you must remember is we all think that we are right. In that respect, you are no different from the rest of usQuote:
Originally Posted by Solskye
From the grand perspective of things, it's quite simple: The majority are trying to escape acceptance and realization of the different facets of themselves. Like dream characters continually denying they are all equally inter-connected subconscious parts of the dream when you go lucid and attempt to inform them. At least, I'm being forthright in the fact that by choosing this finite shell to occupy my blip in infinity, I too, am escaping in some sense of the word. However, I'm not justifying anything. I just think every individual is just as perverse as the next person. Some are just better at concealing it, or creating the many barriers of social acceptance into fooling themselves into thinking they aren't.
I don't think I'm 'right'. I think the terms, 'right' and 'wrong', like any word, are inert ideas without meaning until there is a group of sanctimonious individuals banding together to give it one-- one more way of creating barriers of separation between individuals, and feed the ego.
An easy way to kill two birds with one stone-- avoid reflection into yourself and pass judgement onto others in order to create a moral hierarchy, and at the same time stave off self-doubt and boost the ego.
On a similar note, It's funny you'd mention the term 'Divergent'. That's the title of one of the first songs I made using a relevant sample from one of my favorite movies. Check it out. Enjoy!:chuckle:
That doesn't really answer my question. you say that we are all escaping acceptance of the fact that we are " ...dream characters [that] are all equally inter-connected subconscious parts of the dream..." but the majority does not believe this to be true, and it is by no means a self evident capital T Truth that we are all denying. The majority does not even consider what you claim we are trying to escape from as reality, and so are not actually trying to escape from anything.
This is like saying that since you don't celebrate Christmas (hypothetically), you are trying to escape from realizing and accepting the existence of Santa Claus.
You simply believing in the singularity of all existence does not make it the truth and those that do not believe in that possibility are not purposely avoiding acceptance of your beliefs.
Couldn't be f'd reading these posts coz I need to LD soon. But yes, crazy is majority rules.
I read an article in Skeptic magazine I think it was and it highlighted some of the most outrageous things about the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM IV). I can't remember exact examples the writer gave but it was 'disorders' to the equivalent of not liking bananas. And according to DSM IV 41% of the worlds population has a mental disorder. So technically if they keep adding more and it becomes 51%, then the other 49% percent will be 'crazy'.
Take germs for example.
In the 18th century there was no such thing! Nobody'd ever imagined such a thing -- no sane person anyway. Along comes this doctor...Semmelweiss, I think. He tries to convince people... other doctors mostly...that there are these teeny tiny invisible "bad things" called germs that get into your body and make you...sick! He's trying to get doctors to wash their hands. What is this guy...crazy? Teeny tiny invisible whaddayou call 'em?..."germs"!
Watch the movie 12 Monkeys, or if you cbf the main scene which outlines this is here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KB0dvgCZ4Q0
You will notice that SolSkye is making perfect use of the unfalsifiable denial=true argument. You can still disagree with what he is saying and it still proves him right. There is no sense in arguing it because denying it also shows his argument to be true. However, the fact that he has constructed it as such, proves it is false.
~
It's not quite like saying Santa Claus exists because any rational mind would know, he doesn't. However, if you were to systematically go back through the lineage of this universe you could trace an invisible line back between everyone and everything inter-connecting them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xaqaria
Why would you assume because you can't actively and readily perceive that connection now that it still isn't there beneath the surface waiting to be perceived if contemplated or meditated on enough? When all signs in the known universe point to yes, what else is there except outright denial?
Damn you just gave a big hint to where that sample in my song was from. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by tommo
One can't possibly construct what was already there.Quote:
Originally Posted by O'nus
QED; unfalsifiable.Quote:
Originally Posted by SolSkye
~
Saint Nicholas was a Bishop of Myra during the third century. He is the patron saint of sailors, merchants, archers, children, and students in Greece, Belgium, Bulgaria, Georgia, Russia, the Republic of Macedonia, Slovakia, Serbia and Montenegro and he most definitely exists both in a physical sense and in a metaphysical sense in the same way that politics, philosophy, love, hate, greed, and altruism exist.Quote:
Originally Posted by SolSkye
Now that I've shown how your sense of the rational mind is actually completely contrary to what the rest of us see as reality, it should be easier for you to understand why perhaps your views on the subject are merely dismissed by the general public and not 'feared'.
Ok, I walked right into that one. I meant it means he clearly doesn't exist as we portray him as this timeless image that delivers gifts every year.
The universe and the ties that bind, however, is still up in the air. And for those that think long and hard enough about it, it's not up in the air or on the ground anymore.
lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by Idolfan
Hey man if you know the answers I'm happy for you.
HAHA, I just read this thread and as soon as I saw divergent I instantly thought of the same movie as you lol! Then I see you made a song from that. I will listen to it tomorrow coz' I don't have my headphones here right now.Quote:
Originally Posted by SolSkye
On topic: so really either we are all sane or all insane; unless someone is truely insane like kept in a madhouse or something.
Who's to say these people are insane?
Exactly what we are discussing is what makes people insane or sane. I'm sure we all agree it is society that defines it, or psychologists or whomever. But I'm not sure if we agree on this, I'm tired now and couldn't understand a lot of what was being said.
SolSkye I didn't know you were schizophrenic, I might just do what you said and go back and read a few of your earlier posts and read that thread you posted the comment in that you quoted here, got a link to it? I'll have to look tomorrow, kinda tired.
By saying that you've improved heaps have you been on medication or something? or psychologist/iatrist?
Peace all, Sweet LD's
I'm not a schizophrenic, at least I hope I'm not. I'm what you would call eccentric. :chuckle:
Oh woops it was O'nus that said that lol
Just look in "Dream View Favorites" for "Hi, I'm new please read". It was my first post.Quote:
Originally Posted by tommo
~
Huh? look there for what? I was looking at your first posts from 2003 yesterday by the way, to see your poverty of speech. I couldn't recognise a lot of difference, not being mean, it's just that it wasn't bad at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by O'nus
I stumbled across the one where you posted that movie thing, I thought that was your first post? The one where it takes ages to load and nothing much happens. Anyway so yeh, why look at your Hi, I'm new please read thread? I couldn't find it in the favorites by the way.
Logic is like math; it is an abstract concept used as a tool and the rules are true by definition within the system. I'm sure someone else could explain that better than me.
There are people whose brains are damaged or whose neurotransmitters don't work right which cause them to be insane. There are other people in whom the damage may not be recognizable (for example, a psychopath) but whose behavior is so obviously pathological they have to be labeled as insane.
If a society wants to lock up or do something to people whose brains are intact but who have just have different ideas and call them insane, I'd say it is the society that has the problem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonbeam
Uhm, so it's alright to lock people up who have not 'intact' brains?
It is there. But here is the link: http://www.dreamviews.com/community/...read.php?t=363Quote:
Originally Posted by tommo
tommo: I think you missed Moonbeams point. (I just realize here that I don't know the gender of Moonbeam, and in respect to recent feminist movements, I always refer to the female reference in cases like this, so please don't be offended...) She was saying that some people who have intact brains need to be helped. This does not mean locking them away and throwing away the key. She was saying that if we locked away a "sane" person, then it is societies fault. We do, however, have to help those that need it (ie. schizophrenics, cataplexics, etc.).
~
But who is to say who is insane?
This question can easily be answered. Often we take the term too broadly, but here is a simple way to look at it:Quote:
Originally Posted by Keeper
Insane; the incapability to survive or function alone as an individual. To be insane is to depend on others in order to survive and function in any sort of society.
For example; cataplexic schizophrenics cannot survive alone. If they were left alone for a couple of days, they would die. Thus, we can deem them insane in the face that they cannot survive alone.
I think the reason there are many that have problems with the word "insane" is because it has become so pejorative and duragatory to call someone insane. However, there is no problem in saying the word insane when we are referring to someone who actually does need help.
I think we can agree that some people genuinely need help and those people are generally referred to as "insane". Right?
~
Considering that other thread on the ability to be honest that turned into a schizophrenia related debate, i don't think it can be easily answered.Quote:
Originally Posted by O'nus
Yes, some people certainly need help. By cataplexic schizophrenics you mean they are unable to function right? So overcome by their emotions they basically stop function on a physical level? I'm guessing so.Quote:
Originally Posted by O'nus
Put this way I think maybe these people would not be able to function in any society. I know I said some schizophrenics could survive happily in shamanic cultures but whether these cataplexic ones could or not I'm not sure. Maybe they could before they got this bad? I mean it's not like they turned this way overnight. Most of the damage to brain function in 'mental illness' could be attributed to stress/fear. So as they got more and more scared of becoming insane, they adversely caused more damage to themselves.
Anyway, yes, we call these people insane. But what is sane? That is what we need to answer first. If sane is having the ability to interact with and perceive the world as majority of people do, then insane would be defined as not having this ability; thinking mostly of internal things and excluding the outside world for the most part.
I just want to clear this up because I'm not sure where we are going with this to be honest. It's a tough issue to discuss because nobody fully understands the human mind. I mean, who's to say that the so called cataplexic schizophrenics if left alone for a few days on a deserted island, even though dying within a few days, would not experience the most enlightening and amazing things that no 'sane' person could even begin to comprehend?
Why do we choose to 'help' these people when we don't really know what they are experiencing. Of course we shouldn't just let them suffer because they might be having the time of their lives, but I think we shouldn't assume we know what is best for them. Why do we always choose longevity over quality? Because that's how our society is. That's why a lot of teenagers are now doing drugs; to escape this type of thinking. One of the most amazing girls I've ever met is a big time drug user, she says 'live fast, die young'. Of course she wouldn't care if she lived to be 100, but she isn't wasting her time, she has fun as much as possible, and she would live every one of those days doing something she loved. I myself find it hard to accept because I want her here for longer.
If we want to help these 'insane' people live longer, more boring lives, then that is really insane.
We are born different and that makes us unique. Why not incorporate the way our brains function into our lives? I mean, people who are unbelievably good at maths could be deemed insane if it weren't for the fact that they are needed in certain jobs.
If maths wasn't a part of our society they would sit at home, which would probably be the streets, completing maths problems in their head or drawing them on walls with rocks because this is how they were made to function. If we then took them and 'rehabilitated' them, causing them to stop thinking about maths altogether. They would then be called sane.
In our society right now, we would call that action, insane.
Do you see what I'm getting at?
Yes, if they are a danger to others. People who are not dangerous are generally not locked up in our society. People who are insane are generally unhappy, and will seek help if they can. If that is not within their capacity, they may suffer without help.Quote:
Originally Posted by tommo
A trained medical professional? A friend or family member who notices extremely odd behavior?Quote:
Originally Posted by Keeper
That is a good way of looking at it.Quote:
Originally Posted by O'nus
It digressed.Quote:
Originally Posted by tommo
No, cataplexis schizophrenics become to be so (and it can happen over night) because of central nervous damage and theories exist simply to explain how emotional distress might exacerbate it but not ilicit it. Make no mistake, schizophrenics do not choose to be so.Quote:
Yes, some people certainly need help. By cataplexic schizophrenics you mean they are unable to function right? So overcome by their emotions they basically stop function on a physical level? I'm guessing so.
Put this way I think maybe these people would not be able to function in any society. I know I said some schizophrenics could survive happily in shamanic cultures but whether these cataplexic ones could or not I'm not sure. Maybe they could before they got this bad? I mean it's not like they turned this way overnight. Most of the damage to brain function in 'mental illness' could be attributed to stress/fear. So as they got more and more scared of becoming insane, they adversely caused more damage to themselves.
Right, so we can define it operationally. Just because we do so does not mean we have to make the leap of saying, "how dare you judge x and y!" becaue we need certain judgments in order to facilitate a functional society. Correct? Unless you want to argue that anarchy is actually more beneficial, which would obviously digress into another topic of discussion.Quote:
Anyway, yes, we call these people insane. But what is sane? That is what we need to answer first. If sane is having the ability to interact with and perceive the world as majority of people do, then insane would be defined as not having this ability; thinking mostly of internal things and excluding the outside world for the most part.
We could say the samething about any person; every person has individual and relative experiences.Quote:
I just want to clear this up because I'm not sure where we are going with this to be honest. It's a tough issue to discuss because nobody fully understands the human mind. I mean, who's to say that the so called cataplexic schizophrenics if left alone for a few days on a deserted island, even though dying within a few days, would not experience the most enlightening and amazing things that no 'sane' person could even begin to comprehend?
However, a schizophrenic, left alone, will die. It is easy to see this by simply referring to evidence.
Furthermore, even if a schizophrenic experienced something "amazing", they would have no means or even understand any way to convey that experience to any other mind because schizophrenics are so lost in their delusions that they are not even aware of an externally existing reality.
I would really, really, love to see you say this very thing to the following cases (all schizophrenics):Quote:
Why do we choose to 'help' these people when we don't really know what they are experiencing. Of course we shouldn't just let them suffer because they might be having the time of their lives, but I think we shouldn't assume we know what is best for them. Why do we always choose longevity over quality? Because that's how our society is. That's why a lot of teenagers are now doing drugs; to escape this type of thinking. One of the most amazing girls I've ever met is a big time drug user, she says 'live fast, die young'. Of course she wouldn't care if she lived to be 100, but she isn't wasting her time, she has fun as much as possible, and she would live every one of those days doing something she loved. I myself find it hard to accept because I want her here for longer.
- Someone who eats their own fecal matter and believes that they are Jesus
- Someone who is insistent that George Washington if their father and that they have to collect all the straws in the world to create a dam to stop him from raping them.
- Someone who is paralyzed and cannot even feed themself.
As I said, we can take your line of logic and say, "Oh, why should we help someone with a bullet wound? They may be experiencing something amazing and who are we to say that we should stop them from experiencing a bullet wound?" It is because it is obviously a terrible thing to experience and the goal is to be able to help someone to the point where they can decide wether or not they want to experience these things and let others know. If a person has the incapability to even do this but still communicate on other terms, then they are doomed! It is as simple as that. We can also argue, from your point of view, that we should not help suicidal people because they may be on an enlightening path that we should not interrupt.
My point here is that, just because we help someone, does not mean we are a tyrant over their life. The goal of psychiatry and medicine is to perpetuate individual providence.
What are you suggesting? So, if we should not help people live longer, because their lives will be more boring; then we should, logically following, shoot anyone that comes to the hospital?Quote:
If we want to help these 'insane' people live longer, more boring lives, then that is really insane.
This is not how I am using the term insane. I defined it earlier as the incapability to function and survive alone and, as a result, depend on others in order to survive. Furthermore, we can add implications about how their delusions can be a danger to others (ie. those that believe that they have to drink others blood in order to keep their father from cutting off their penis).Quote:
We are born different and that makes us unique. Why not incorporate the way our brains function into our lives? I mean, people who are unbelievably good at maths could be deemed insane if it weren't for the fact that they are needed in certain jobs.
If maths wasn't a part of our society they would sit at home, which would probably be the streets, completing maths problems in their head or drawing them on walls with rocks because this is how they were made to function. If we then took them and 'rehabilitated' them, causing them to stop thinking about maths altogether. They would then be called sane.
In our society right now, we would call that action, insane.
Do you see what I'm getting at?
I see what you are getting at with the latter part, and I think that is the wrong function of the word "insane" when it comes to the medical world. The layman has a completely distorted and different definition of insane that seems to be analogous to "retarded", "stupid", "idiotic", etc.
Needing help should not be a pejorative term. Please do not perpetuate the negative connotation. For the love of all medicine and those that depend on it.
What do you think...?
~
Well, you misunderstood a few things I said. So i'll point that out and also reply to thing you've said, obviously.
I have no doubt this is true, unless you purposefully ingest a few grams of LSD. But yes, I am well aware of the fact that schizophrenics do not choose to be schizophrenic.Quote:
Originally Posted by O'nus
I don't think judging is a matter of debate here. We are judging them right now. Not necessarily in a bad or good way, but we are judging.Quote:
Originally Posted by O'nus
Ok.... so what? Why does it matter whether they are able to explain it to us? Besides, if we let a schizophrenic live out her or his delusion for a few days, in a cataplexic state, then gave them an anti-psychotic. They would easily be able to explain what they experienced, unless of course it was impossible to explain without feeling, like some high dose hallucinogen trips for example.Quote:
Originally Posted by O'nus
You misunderstood here, I saidQuote:
Originally Posted by O'nus
So I mean, we shouldn't leave them be on the basis that we think they might be having a great time, because for all we know they could be suffering.Quote:
Of course we shouldn't just let them suffer because they might be having the time of their lives, but I think we shouldn't assume we know what is best for them.
Ok, that's a good point, I agree with this. But that is not what people are doing, we are trying to make them the same as everybody else; making them functional for our society.Quote:
Originally Posted by O'nus
A goal is a goal, not an outcome. Prison is supposed to rehabilitate.Quote:
Originally Posted by O'nus
A psychiatrist may say that this person needs to not hallucinate to live properly, this person needs to not have OCD to work in a proper job etc etc. Soon this person thinks "I have to be the same as everybody else or I will not be able to live." Whereas someone with OCD could function perfectly in a job which requires perfection and order and therefore support themselves to live. A schizophrenic who hallucinates could do perfectly well as an artist, writing music or drawing what they see etc etc. Then they can support themselves also.
Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying....Quote:
Originally Posted by O'nus
Of course not! I'm not saying a long life is a boring one. I'm saying IF schizophrenics were experiencing great things, this life would be boring. Who are we to force our ways upon them. But going back to what you said before we should get them to a point where they can tell us what they want to do. Without brainwashing them into the 'civilized' way of thinking.
And that is exactly what I was saying. People who's brains live to do maths NEED to do maths. People who's brains conceive conglomerations of creative ideas cannot function how they are supposed to without expressing them.Quote:
Originally Posted by O'nus
The only difference between them and a schizophrenic is that the schizophrenic does not have a place in society to incorporate their way of thinking into a productive manner, for society too, but for mostly themselves.
I know this, believe me. I'm called insane, crazy and 'skitzo' a fair bit because of my way of thinking and doing things.Quote:
Originally Posted by O'nus
Of course it shouldn't we need help, every single one of us. I apologize if I seem to perpetuate the negative connotation, I'm not trying to and it is not my point at all. It is also not going to destroy medicine etc. If I was against medicine I would not be saying anything on this topic besides 'what the fuck does anyone know? medicine is a stupid plot to take out money' or something of the sort. I am for medicine and it has done a lot of great things, also many bad things, but that's all part of the progress.Quote:
Originally Posted by O'nus
On the side note of money, this just came to my head. Why do psychiatrists/ologists get so much god damned money? If they really cared they would do it for nothing or very little. How can you put so much faith in these people?
Oh, and about the easy answering thing where you said it digressed. I meant that this debate is fairly long and therefore it is clearly not an easy question.
Right, I think we have come to the same terms. There are flaws in the psychiatric design in modern days and it is manipulated too frequently. However, I would also argue that people in general exacerbate the issue by claiming that they need help and perpetuate the requirement for these rehabilitation institutions (ie. how many celebrities do you think actually needed to go to rehab compared to those that staged it for publicity?).Quote:
Originally Posted by tommo
Keyword; if. I can tell you, as having been diagnosed as a schizophrenic, that it was far from something good or something that I want to experience again.Quote:
Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying....
Of course not! I'm not saying a long life is a boring one. I'm saying IF schizophrenics were experiencing great things, this life would be boring. Who are we to force our ways upon them. But going back to what you said before we should get them to a point where they can tell us what they want to do. Without brainwashing them into the 'civilized' way of thinking.
Hell, we could say the samething about those that are comatose or in a vegetable-like state, right?
I think we are on the same terms here.Quote:
And that is exactly what I was saying. People who's brains live to do maths NEED to do maths. People who's brains conceive conglomerations of creative ideas cannot function how they are supposed to without expressing them.
The only difference between them and a schizophrenic is that the schizophrenic does not have a place in society to incorporate their way of thinking into a productive manner, for society too, but for mostly themselves.
I know this, believe me. I'm called insane, crazy and 'skitzo' a fair bit because of my way of thinking and doing things.
Of course it shouldn't we need help, every single one of us. I apologize if I seem to perpetuate the negative connotation, I'm not trying to and it is not my point at all. It is also not going to destroy medicine etc. If I was against medicine I would not be saying anything on this topic besides 'what the fuck does anyone know? medicine is a stupid plot to take out money' or something of the sort. I am for medicine and it has done a lot of great things, also many bad things, but that's all part of the progress.
Uhm, because psychologists and psychiatrists need money in order to pay for an institution to retain medical records, hydro, electricity, staffing, equipment for possible research, computers, etc.Quote:
On the side note of money, this just came to my head. Why do psychiatrists/ologists get so much god damned money? If they really cared they would do it for nothing or very little. How can you put so much faith in these people?
Furthermore, I would like to remind you that psychologists are not tyrants; the reason the price is so high is because the demand is so high. When the demand gets to be overwhelming, you must set the price higher in order to simply facilitate the amount of deman.
I put faith in psychiatrists because, first of all, I am trying to be one and have worked with many. They do help people and do not offer dogmatic beliefs.
Are you suggesting that you would rather get help from an evangelist Jesus healer than a psychologist..?
~
These parts of what you said kinda go together. If they didn't treat people who don't need them, there would be less demand.Quote:
Originally Posted by O'nus
Except I disagree that the demand creates higher prices, of course I just realised you are talking about the mental hospitals, where that means it costs more to have people there. But I was talking about like single psychiatrists, that don't need any money for hospitality.
They definitely get more than they need. But as for the mental hospital ones, or ones that work in large groups, research etc. They also create new medicines etc for the sole purpose of getting money, of course not all of them do this, but a lot do. I have read up a lot about this and I won't explain it all here unless you want me to if you don't agree, but new medication with practically no difference to the old ones are created all the time by all areas of medicine.
So yes, they do good work. Some people exploit this. However, that happens everywhere.
It's good to hear! I can see you obviously care. I wanted to be one for a while back but I realise I will probably do better work as a graphic designer or artist, and reading about psychology made me realise the shaky grounds it stands on. Not belittling what you want to do, just how I feel about it. I still want to do something for mentally ill people just not through psychiatry.Quote:
Originally Posted by O'nus
And in no way would I have anything to do with religious healers of any sort unless I was in the process of bring their business down lol :P
Oh and by the way in your first thread you said you weren't diagnosed with schizophrenia? Was this to stop dogma etc? or did you just forget about that thread?
The people treating the mentally ill are diligently finding ways to stifle out those that do not require as much help as others. Do you think that people love to work that hard? And don't make the mistake of thinking that they do it for money, there are caps on how much psychiatrists can make in practice via insurance claims. (Of course, this likely varies depending on where you live).Quote:
Originally Posted by tommo
Uhm. I do not often have the confidence to say this but, you are just simply plain wrong in your statement here. Basic economics "supply and demand" will explain:Quote:
Except I disagree that the demand creates higher prices, of course I just realised you are talking about the mental hospitals, where that means it costs more to have people there. But I was talking about like single psychiatrists, that don't need any money for hospitality.
+ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_and_demand
- Note that this is a public source and if you want me to diligently find a more credible source, I am fully confident that I can conisdering the fudamental nature of this.
I would say that, for the most part, you're right. Especially in the field of neuropharmacology. However, I would also be just a quickly to also bring in the fact that society and the general populus have a high demand for drugs and quick cures for things.Quote:
They definitely get more than they need. But as for the mental hospital ones, or ones that work in large groups, research etc. They also create new medicines etc for the sole purpose of getting money, of course not all of them do this, but a lot do. I have read up a lot about this and I won't explain it all here unless you want me to if you don't agree, but new medication with practically no difference to the old ones are created all the time by all areas of medicine.
So yes, they do good work. Some people exploit this. However, that happens everywhere.
Do people exploit this..? Of course. My point is that they are not entirely to blame for the consequence of medicine for profit.
Scientology...?Quote:
It's good to hear! I can see you obviously care. I wanted to be one for a while back but I realise I will probably do better work as a graphic designer or artist, and reading about psychology made me realise the shaky grounds it stands on. Not belittling what you want to do, just how I feel about it. I still want to do something for mentally ill people just not through psychiatry.
I was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia. I am not sure what you are referring to here.Quote:
And in no way would I have anything to do with religious healers of any sort unless I was in the process of bring their business down lol :P
Oh and by the way in your first thread you said you weren't diagnosed with schizophrenia? Was this to stop dogma etc? or did you just forget about that thread?
~
From your Hi, Im new here thread - the last post you made in it....Quote:
Originally Posted by O'nus
Quote:
Originally Posted by O'nus
It says applies to the selling and buying of goods. To be honest I cannot read that drivel, I zone out and cannot concentrate when reading about economics, business etc. So it may seem stupid of me to say I disagree with you. But there is no reason why an individual psychologists would need to charge their clients extra because they suddenly have more clients to deal with. It just doesn't make sense, if anything they would be able to lower their prices because they don't need as much money to survive.Quote:
Originally Posted by O'nus
Say you needed $200 from each patient, once per week to live off comfortably. You had 10 patients. You suddenly get 20 patients, you would now only need $100 of each patient to survive comfortably and lowering your prices would help you get more clients because you are cheaper than the competitors.
There is no logical reason as to why you would need more money off each client.
Yeh, that's fair enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by O'nus
God no! lol. Listen, I'm as atheistic (? kinda sounds like a religion in itself lol) as you seem to be, if not more. I don't follow Scientology or condone Jesus preachers. I meant I would like to do something through art. Like artists such as van Gogh, Dali and Peter Booth.Quote:
Originally Posted by O'nus
Erm..Quote:
Originally Posted by tommo
So.. I was diagnosed.. but then I self-diagnosed and... I don't think it's a good idea to get into this. It's really personal and not necessary to get into.. To put things straight; I was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia by a medical professional (2, in fact). I then treated my symptoms mostly on a self-treatment basis... if you are honestly interested in more than that, please let me know...
I can see why you are saying this. What you are saying makes basic sense. The thing is that individual psychologists have the capability to raise their prices and may, in fact, need to. Here's why:Quote:
It says applies to the selling and buying of goods. To be honest I cannot read that drivel, I zone out and cannot concentrate when reading about economics, business etc. So it may seem stupid of me to say I disagree with you. But there is no reason why an individual psychologists would need to charge their clients extra because they suddenly have more clients to deal with. It just doesn't make sense, if anything they would be able to lower their prices because they don't need as much money to survive.
Say you needed $200 from each patient, once per week to live off comfortably. You had 10 patients. You suddenly get 20 patients, you would now only need $100 of each patient to survive comfortably and lowering your prices would help you get more clients because you are cheaper than the competitors.
There is no logical reason as to why you would need more money off each client.
- Start off selling yourself off cheap
- As demand increases, you can eventually give yourself a fair profit
- As you say, some individual will exploit this
- Contrary to this, there are (in some countries/states) caps to how much insurance claims individual psychologists can claim (as nearly all clients seek therapy via insurance, they have to pay via insurance). Thus, there are limits to how much they can make.
All considered, yes, some obviously exploit. However, some do make profit. Honestly, in this line of work - I honestly think they deserve some profit.
Consider:
- They get into the job to help people
- They help people with drastic problems
- They deal with suicidal, depressed, etc. people of all kinds.
I don't doubt you think they deserve some profit.. I just say these to clarify our mutual intentions.
Cool. I'll bet you would be intersted in music therapy? Art therapy? I think these forms of therapy are great as they are much more inclusive to the individual and allows for further growth outside an enclosed room. I encourage you to follow this route. You should consider Carl Rogers for reading material. Furthermore, whereabouts do you live? I know some good places for these abstract forms of therapy (that should not be abstract..).Quote:
Yeh, that's fair enough.
God no! lol. Listen, I'm as atheistic (? kinda sounds like a religion in itself lol) as you seem to be, if not more. I don't follow Scientology or condone Jesus preachers. I meant I would like to do something through art. Like artists such as van Gogh, Dali and Peter Booth.
~
The key to the laws of supply and demand is that you must take both aspects in to account. The situation is not that a psychiatrist has 10 patients and now that he is more popular, he has 20 because in that situation the supply has effectively increased which would make your logic of lowering prices valid. The prices increase as the demand increases when the supply stays the same. In other words, when the psychiatrist has 10 patients and now has 20 prospective patients, but still only has time for 10. Obviously the 10 who are willing to pay more are going to get the attention.
I love when two people come to an agreement, that rarely happens in my life lol!
Well, obviously you don't wanna share everything, that's fine. But I do have an interest, just in my nature. I like knowing things, plus I am wondering how you self-treated. So you can tell me if you want to. PM or whatever.Quote:
Originally Posted by O'nus
Ohhhh, ok so you're saying they need or deserve profit, but cannot go past a certain amount, due to the limit on insurance claims.
So individual have trouble if they take on too many (past a certain amount) because they would be working over-time for the same money, unless they didn't take some money off non-insurance claims. Really this needs an example, it gets too complicated, but I don't think it matters a whole lot.
Just one point, Australia only recently got the insurance thing for mental health care, or tax-deductible, can't remember. But it is only up to $70 per week or something. My psychologist/iatrist (I don't know which one can prescribe meds, mine couldn't) charged $132 per session, one per week. So I had to pay a substantial amount out of my pocket, well my mum's pocket lol.
Anyway, just thought I'd add that in just as a clear up into why I believe they make too much, as that is $132 an hour. It's kinda absurd.
As for the dealing with suicidal, depressed, etc. people of all kinds I was gonna say something about this too, and is probably the biggest reason they deserve high profit. I have heard a lot of them end up 'contracting' symptoms of their patients, due to mirror neurons. You probably know about that so I won't go into it any further.
Hm, sounds interesting and thanx for the reading material reference! I'll be sure to look him up. Sorry I don't feel comfortable revealing where I live too much but, Victoria is the state. Australia of course.Quote:
Originally Posted by O'nus
Cheers!
EDIT:Thanx for that Xaqaria, so it was just a simple misunderstanding of what supply and demand refer to in psychology.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xaqaria
Guess we should never be so confident in our statements. Huh O'nus? :P
Thanx for clearing that up Xaqaria. I'll just delete some of this post because it was way too confusing and got cleared up already as I was writing it.
EDIT AGAIN: I just read again what Xaqaria wrote and got all confused. It now makes no sense to me again! haha And Now I just deleted half my post for no reason! Bah, I'm annoyed now, I'll just put it back and wait till someone else posts.
Difficult sometimes, but possible. Text is also a culprit.Quote:
Originally Posted by tommo
I utilized lucid dreaming and, without my knowing, existential psychotherapy. The process of learning to lucid dream, if you keep an eye out on this, also invariably teaches you existentialism - how to be a free individual. It is simply a matter of transferring this confidence from the dream life, to waking life, and obviously keeping your physical limitations in mind, lol.Quote:
Well, obviously you don't wanna share everything, that's fine. But I do have an interest, just in my nature. I like knowing things, plus I am wondering how you self-treated. So you can tell me if you want to. PM or whatever.
It took time, but I eventually changed, almost entirely, as an individual. Let's put it this way; I went from wanting to be a weapon engineer for the army to what I am now (psychology/philosophy student).
The diary of my paranoid schizophrenia is something I am considering to share as it may be entertaining to read my hallucinations and poverty of speach.
Xa. cleared up the supply and demand sense of things, so yes. The price increase incidentally happens with the increase of demand. Is it too bad that it costs so much? Yes, if it could be free, that would be all the more better.Quote:
Ohhhh, ok so you're saying they need or deserve profit, but cannot go past a certain amount, due to the limit on insurance claims.
So individual have trouble if they take on too many (past a certain amount) because they would be working over-time for the same money, unless they didn't take some money off non-insurance claims. Really this needs an example, it gets too complicated, but I don't think it matters a whole lot.
Just one point, Australia only recently got the insurance thing for mental health care, or tax-deductible, can't remember. But it is only up to $70 per week or something. My psychologist/iatrist (I don't know which one can prescribe meds, mine couldn't) charged $132 per session, one per week. So I had to pay a substantial amount out of my pocket, well my mum's pocket lol.
Anyway, just thought I'd add that in just as a clear up into why I believe they make too much, as that is $132 an hour. It's kinda absurd.
Precisely.Quote:
As for the dealing with suicidal, depressed, etc. people of all kinds I was gonna say something about this too, and is probably the biggest reason they deserve high profit. I have heard a lot of them end up 'contracting' symptoms of their patients, due to mirror neurons. You probably know about that so I won't go into it any further.
Oh, well I do not know much of the Australian education system, but I hope that it serves you well in your endeavour. Are you considering music/art therapy?Quote:
Hm, sounds interesting and thanx for the reading material reference! I'll be sure to look him up. Sorry I don't feel comfortable revealing where I live too much but, Victoria is the state. Australia of course.
Cheers!
~