Psychologists are evil

[rahvin]

Fine, but please tell me what difference does that make now that Taliesin has stated that the ‘normal’ thing was a misunderstanding.

probably no difference. but your opinion on this jumped out from the written page to tell me that a discussion on psychology/psychiatry with you is unlikely to produce any results if you disagree on some of the most basic tenets of logic.

And I wouldn’t venture into trying to determine what’s “normal” and what’s not when it comes to human behavior, even if I thought ‘normal’ made any sense. Dangerous grounds, mate.

it's a calculation. i assume you're not exactly a man of science and probably appreciate poetry or star-gazing better, but if 50%+1 people in the world belch loudly after every meal, then that's normal behavior. as long as you don't attach values to it in terms of wrong/right, i'd be hard put to find it controversial, not to mention "dangerous".

Am I so terribly mistaken in believing that, since ‘normal’ means “conforming to a standard; usual; typical; expected” and everyone is different, ‘normal doesn’t properly apply to human nature because no two persons are the same and thus there is no ‘usual’?

i'm not sure about "terribly", but you're indeed mistaken. everyone is different, but normal is not a definition of what you are, but what you do. i imagine both you and i wake up in the morning and get out of bed. we're still different. and we both do something that is normal.

There might be similar aspects or behavior, but where do you draw the line between what’s slight variation and what’s a different aspect or a different behavior?

where i draw the line depends on what my analysis is focusing on. to refer to the previous image, if i'm talking about waking up and getting out of bed, it doesn't matter whether you put your left or right foot on the floor first. however, i can also research normal behavior when it comes to the foot preference.

it's really not that complicated or open to conjecture, despite what appear to be your best efforts to wrench some big bias out of it. there are none. the devil is, as usual, in the details: in this case, the opinion some people have of what normality entails.

How was that inappropriate in the context I used it in?

basically, you were saying that humanity was convinced of some pretty dumb shit in ages past. well, so what? mankind has also always got stuff like gravity, or getting burned by fire, more or less right, but it wouldn't make sense to offer this as a justification for the validity of any established theory in the universe.

Was that directed at me?

pretty much.

 

[Magrathean]

I thought that this would be an interesting thread. Will never be interesting to express an opinion to someone who seems not to listen more than his own ego, though.

Again, read my posts. Or would you like me to kindly make a list of links to every post in which I have admitted that I was wrong?

it's a calculation. i assume you're not exactly a man of science and probably appreciate poetry or star-gazing better, but if 50%+1 people in the world belch loudly after every meal, then that's normal behavior. as long as you don't attach values to it in terms of wrong/right, i'd be hard put to find it controversial, not to mention "dangerous".

i'm not sure about "terribly", but you're indeed mistaken. everyone is different, but normal is not a definition of what you are, but what you do. i imagine both you and i wake up in the morning and get out of bed. we're still different. and we both do something that is normal.

Oh, but thou should’st look at what I am studying so thou would’st wist whether I am a man of science or not. And yes, I do appreciate art (not particularly poetry, though) a lot, but not better than science, just in a different way (I believe both are equally necessary for a good life). And stargazing just isn’t my thing. It was when I was about ten or twelve years old, but not anymore. Guess I got bored with it.

Anyway, I was just saying that people are going to start a discussion about what’s normal and what’s not. Go there if you want to, just don’t try to drag me into it. I’m sick of discussions that go nowhere.

basically, you were saying that humanity was convinced of some pretty dumb shit in ages past. well, so what? mankind has also always got stuff like gravity, or getting burned by fire, more or less right, but it wouldn't make sense to offer this as a justification for the validity of any established theory in the universe.

Man has gotten some things right and other things wrong throughout history, and he continues to get some things right and others wrong today (and will continue to do so in the future). I don’t really believe it’s so wrong to use as a reference the belief that the Earth was flat and the sun orbited around it when I’m trying to say that, similar to when mankind believed that, mankind may now believe stuff that’s not true.

pretty much.

My childhood was, perhaps regrettably, neither shy nor secluded. So blame it on something else of your preference.

Nooo *argh* *brings out axe and battlesword to make it clear to you*

Short version:
you: being treated by the majority as outsider, they say that you are a freak..
majority: insecure twits who like to pick on minority
your reaction: get a bit tired of that, so making the situation look better
declaring yourself superspecial and try to get a back up on your theory that they are idiots and you are cool with the essay on psychology
twist: now you make others look bad, same pattern in a way, but for the (elsewhere extendedly) explained reasons it´s understandable and okay.

Please don’t kill me! *runs and hides from you until he’s sure you’ve put your weapons away* =P

Thank you for explaining it in that way. Now I understand. But, rather than making others look bad, my goal is to make myself (and those who are like me) look good.

 

[rahvin]

And stargazing just isn’t my thing. It was when I was about ten or twelve years old, but not anymore. Guess I got bored with it.

a boar chasing me is what tore it for me.

I don’t really believe it’s so wrong to use as a reference the belief that the Earth was flat and the sun orbited around it when I’m trying to say that, similar to when mankind believed that, mankind may now believe stuff that’s not true.

since it may and it may not with about the same likelihood, i find the use of this metaphor rhetorical, in the sense that it sounds like something that is just there to influence the reader.

My childhood was, perhaps regrettably, neither shy nor secluded. So blame it on something else of your preference.

well, i can easily blame it on your regret that it wasn't.

 

[hyena]

it's like replying to people who believe the sun orbitates around the earth that to you "there is no earth"

This is one of the coolest sentences I've read in a while.

My only suggestion for this thread is that we substitute 'normal' with 'common' or 'average', so there will be whining no more.

 

[Siren]

i assume you're not exactly a man of science and probably appreciate poetry or star-gazing better

And stargazing just isn’t my thing. It was when I was about ten or twelve years old, but not anymore. Guess I got bored with it.

Excuse me for interrupting like this, but there can be something very scientific about stargazing.

 

[Magrathean]

since it may and it may not with about the same likelihood, i find the use of this metaphor rhetorical, in the sense that it sounds like something that is just there to influence the reader.

Perhaps... Okay, let us not use it anymore.

well, i can easily blame it on your regret that it wasn't.

My only suggestion for this thread is that we substitute 'normal' with 'common' or 'average', so there will be whining no more.

Should work.

Watching Robin Hood (now I finally go the Robin Of Sherwood-DVDs with the mega-cult series from the 80s BBC *YAY*) all night and listening to Ensiferum all day can lead to dangerous chemical imbalances in my brain which make me a special first class medieval warrior-angel with very creative ideas on torturing

Ah, see how our dark and twisted side isn’t necessarily something bad?

Excuse me for interrupting like this, but there can be something very scientific about stargazing.

Indeed. How do you suppose astronomy began? I take it he meant romanticizing and fantasizing whilst gazing at the supposed beauty of a starry sky.

 

[Siren]

Indeed. How do you suppose astronomy began? I take it he meant romanticizing and fantasizing whilst gazing at the supposed beauty of a starry sky.

I know. I just had to do that.

 

[Misanthrope]

Cute Thread.

Unlike my better half, im currently still unemployed and as Dr. Lecter said, when it comes to free time "I have oodles". Regarding punctuation and grammatical errors i always take the necessary precautions to asure the ideas i am putting forth to the discussion are understood by all, and even edit my posts many times when something is not clear enough. My gramatical skills might be lacking. My comunication skills however, are not. Anybody is welcome to disregard the entire post right now since i will not proceed to intentionally make a mistake so you can nitpick it easily and we both save time: fock this, Shit:

Now Id like to begin by saying that you have many misconceptions. Your use of the word "normal" has already been criticized but we will get to that later, first id like to address this

There is no rule or guideline for a brain's functionality because every person is different from every other person and there is no "perfect person" every other person wants to be like. Mental conditions are not "disorders" term used to describe supposed mental "diseases" which are not caused my microorganisms), just that -- mental conditions.

Lets talk about Electricity for a moment. Electricity is a form of energy that men has studied and learned to control to such degree that it powers the microprocessor of the original poster, so i doubt even he can deny we dont have "some" ( to make an understatement ) degree of sofistication and understanding. We have many physical laws that describe the behavior of subatomic particles traveling through a certain medium we call "conductor".

Now as you know, hour brain has a series of cells called "neurons". This neurons are escencially conductors in a vastly intrincated network of this cells which serve to control all the functions of the human body. Now all of this electromagnetic impulses can be measured, and given the fact of what we know about electricity this is scientifical fact ( if you want to dispute the validity of scientifical facts please present a theory that disputes this on which you have conducted verifiable experiments you can repeat under controlled circunstances that completly disregard this laws beyond reasonable doubt. Thats how the scientific method works just so we are clear ).

Now the medical studies utilize this irrefutable physical laws to examine the ammount and location of brain activity ( by measuring electrical impulses ) of a person when he is exposed to several different factors. This can go from the most basic like physical pain to the most sofisticated humans are capable of like sentiments.

Those studies have provided that persons that suffer from diverse pychiatric disorders ( leave psychology out of this: a Psychologist is not a doctor, he is the equivalent of a knowledgeable farmacist who recommends threatment for symptoms he might or might not completly understand and judge ) that you call "mental states" show different brain activity on several parts of the brain when exposed to several verifiable factors.

You see studies have shown that most people show the same electrical activity on the same physical part of the brain when exposed to the same common factor: the left side of the brain controls the movement of the right side of the body, the exact same regions of the brain shows electrical activity when we talk and produce language, etc.

So this means that like rahvin said at least 50% +1 of the people ( through in reality is on the 90s ) who do not present the abnormal ( dont panic, call it different instead of abnormal if you must ) patterns of behavior of certain conditions like say, experiencing pleasure while torturing and killing another human being, do not present the same electrical activity. Remember there's no foul play from psychiatrist at this point: its all just electricity so far.

Through trial and error methods following the scientific method ( which means that you can reproduce the same results by conducting an experiment if you want ) the Psychiatrist tries to supress this behavior ( not succesfull in the case of psychopaths, more succesfull in the case of bipolar individuals for example ) by different methods that go from therapy to medication.

There are only two reasons for the Psychiatrist to do this:

1) The individual's behavior represents a danger to himself or others.

2) The individual asks for threatment.

I think this is perfectly clear: in case 1 the individuals must be put into control to avoid harm while in number 2 the person obviously feels unsatisfied about the sympthoms he experiences. This is entirely a free choice on the person's part and varies from person to person: while certain persons do not feel they need to take painkillers when they break their bones others feel the have to take them.

So the psychiatry profession is not inmune to corrupt behavior, big deal. Everything that involves humans is never inmune to corrupt behavior. The reason why the medical field bases their investigation on the scientific method is precisely because of that: The scientific method is build around the fact that humans can ( and do ) make mistakes.

So your atempts to delegitimize ( sp? ) Psychiatry are completly misguided as other posters have mentioned: At most you can identify several groups of corrupt individuals who take advantage of patients. That, however, does not means there are not several groups of psychiatrist who subdue their diagnosis and threatment methods to the full rigor of the scientific method for anyone and everyone to see and verify their results. In fact as a profession the corrupt and inapropiate behavior of psychiatry isnt even the worst in medicine ( Plastic Surgery comes to mind: while some special circunstances like having heavy machinery blow off half of your face require it for the most part many of them dedicate to cosmetic changes which more often than not are completly pointless ).

So in conclusion: yes there are corrupt psychiatrists who might be trying to take advantage of certain circunstances to make a monetary profit, but if you go ask a group of 10 psychiatrists i bet you at least 9 will tell you that they would never try to induce someone who doesnt needs ( as on number 1 ) and doesnt wants ( as on number 2 ) to be "threated" for their uncommon behavioral patterns you call "mental states". In fact some of them will even refuse to call someone to convince them to seek help as they believe the person needs to make that choice himself before they can help them out. After all if profits is all they wanted they could easily abandon their common practice and limit themselves to threat and diagnosticate the people forced to receive threatment by law ( often because of number 1 ).

Care to refute any of this?

 

[Misanthrope]

By the way i feel like i just hosted a boring "Discovery on School" special for some reason.

 

[Misanthrope]

Time for Part Two: Examining the Asks part of my post.

Another relevant point is that you're convinced that Society causes more problems than solutions to this people simply because they are different. Id like to examine some of your points if you do not mind.

I'm supposed to suffer from obsessive-compulsive "disorder". Supposed to because i don't suffer from it. Sure, sometimes i'm too obsessive, i think too much and i realize things i didn't want to know, but it's not like a disease i suffer from. I think every brilliant person is more obsessive than not-so-brilliant people. It's just a mental condition, not something to worry about. And i'm very paranoid. But paranoia isn't a disease, it's more like a defense mechanism. Paranoid people are always more aware and more prepared for anything. It is harder to hurt a paranoid person because it is harder to get them to trust you.

I will start by saying something you can probably agree with: Right now you probably do not need therapy. With that out of the way i will just say a couple of things for you to consider: The Brilliant correlation to obsesive compulsive is a little far fetched simply because "brilliant" is something that is completly subjective. Second is that there is a distinction between being "paranoid" and being "pathologically paranoid" and i dont think you suffer from the second.

A friend of mine is obsessive-compulsive as well. She takes medication and submits herself to therapy. Has she "gotten better"? Of course not. You can't get cured if you're not sick.

Your logic is faulty: You cant currently get cured from Aids either, does that means all those people dying are not sick? If a cure doesnt currently exists or works on the patient it doesnt means the dissease does not exist. Like i mentioned on the previous post the condition exist simply because we can observe distinctive similarities between different persons who's behavior is different from the majority of the people. This doesnt means the condition has a definitive cure or that the condition needs a cure since thats entirely up to the patient unless its a very specific case like criminal behavior.

Another friend is depressive, and one of my ex-girlfriends is bipolar. Are they mentally ill? No. They have normal lives. They have an extra burden to deal with, but each person has their own burdens in life.

So what exactly is depressing about that? If he has a burden you want her to continue to have a burden just because you dont like people calling her "mentally ill"? Having a condition or being "mentally ill" doesnt always implies the inability to live a normal life. I think your comment comes from the fact that you blame society for this "burden" but we'll to that.

While conditions like schizophrenia and obsessive-compulsive “disorder” have some general symptoms depending on the particular condition, they cause different responses and behavior in different people. This can be compared to any given environmental situation, which will have a different effect on different people, with a group of effects common to all or nearly all people (for example, a burnt-down forest might cause anger or sorrow in all or most people, but beyond that each person will react differently to the scene).

Many psychiatrist disagree about the causes of mental disorders and personality traits. However the nature of Medicine dictates that while caution is adviced theories can wait. You wouldnt want a doctor to have a long discussion with another doctor about the cause of your hearth attack while you die, Its obvious that they need to take immediate action. The same goes for psychiatry: some people want to get rid of the sympthoms first and find the reason later and others need to have them under control.

The problem is that there is no real alternative to what you propose: finding specific causes and let people suffer in the mean time or try methods proven to be both safe and to have some degree of success? It comes back to what we talked about: some people choose not to wait for specific tried and true causes that explain the behavior that causes a conflict to them and are willing to go right ahead and try methods that have worked for others ( sometimes many many others ).

Second, these conditions (schizophrenia, obsessive-compulsive “disorder”, bipolarity and so on; autism could be considered a “disease” because there are structural lesions, namely the lack or malfunctioning of mirror neurons) do not affect a specific location, but rather overall behavior and thinking. There is no physical injury or lesion in any part of the body directly linked to the mental condition (physical damage caused by the person, i.e. cutting, is indirectly linked to the condition and is possibly not even a cause of the condition, but rather a response to the pain felt because of society’s behavior towards people with “nonstandard mental conditions&#8221.

A misconception, refer to the first post and the studies conducted on psychopats among others. As for your involvement of society on all of this I really do not see the logical bridge you are crossing to arrive at that conclusion. There are many people who do not mind if society considers them "quirky" and are perfectly capable of dealing with this situations. But what if a persons feels like he is not able to deal with this or happy about it? What do you suggest we do, medicate and threat 90% of the population so they behave like him and he doesnt feels alienized? Just because you feel like persons should not change to adapt to a society it means that every person should subdue to your rebelious behavior even if it makes them miserable? We're all glad that you dont feel like you need any therapy thats very positive, but you shouldnt try to impose your will onto others and should instead listen to your own words: We're all different and what works for you might not work for other obsessive-compulsive persons.

Not everything with adverse effects is a disease, especially if those effects are caused by society’s response to the condition and not by the condition itself.

Again, its a person's choice if they want to deal with responses from society. We're all different and we all have different degree's of appreciation and different needs for acceptance and care. If someone feels like they need more acceptance than you is probably because they do.

As for the responses from society itself I dont see why they are not acceptable. Everyone in society is also a free individual and no one should be forced to deal with a behavior from someone else that for some reason bothers them. No one can force you to be friends with someone you do not like, no one can force you to constantly interact with someone you do not like. So if i do not like the behavior of a very rigid person who is obsessive-compulsive i dont have to move in with them. Accepting someone from what they are doesnt means i have to like them or be forced to interact with them. And that is usually the reason why people seek help, becuase they realize they cant force others to accept their unusual behavior but they still wish to be accepted and loved.

 

[Magrathean]

Electricity is a form of energy that men has studied and learned to control to such degree that it powers the microprocessor of the original poster, so i doubt even he can deny we dont have "some" ( to make an understatement ) degree of sofistication and understanding. We have many physical laws that describe the behavior of subatomic particles traveling through a certain medium we call "conductor".

Now as you know, hour brain has a series of cells called "neurons". This neurons are escencially conductors in a vastly intrincated network of this cells which serve to control all the functions of the human body. Now all of this electromagnetic impulses can be measured, and given the fact of what we know about electricity this is scientifical fact (...)

Now the medical studies utilize this irrefutable physical laws to examine the ammount and location of brain activity ( by measuring electrical impulses ) of a person when he is exposed to several different factors. This can go from the most basic like physical pain to the most sofisticated humans are capable of like sentiments.

Those studies have provided that persons that suffer from diverse pychiatric disorders (...) that you call "mental states" show different brain activity on several parts of the brain when exposed to several verifiable factors.

(...) the left side of the brain controls the movement of the right side of the body, the exact same regions of the brain shows electrical activity when we talk and produce language, etc.

I know all of that. And i will not dispute the validity of it, because i believe it is true.

So this means that like rahvin said at least 50% +1 of the people ( through in reality is on the 90s ) who do not present the abnormal ( dont panic, call it different instead of abnormal if you must ) patterns of behavior of certain conditions like say, experiencing pleasure while torturing and killing another human being, do not present the same electrical activity. Remember there's no foul play from psychiatrist at this point: its all just electricity so far.

Through trial and error methods following the scientific method ( which means that you can reproduce the same results by conducting an experiment if you want ) the Psychiatrist tries to supress this behavior ( not succesfull in the case of psychopaths, more succesfull in the case of bipolar individuals for example ) by different methods that go from therapy to medication.

Exactly my point. They try to turn different or abnormal people into standard (i.e. 50%+1, so as to not start a new discussion about the meaning of 'normal') people. But does having different electric activity in the brain equal being diseased/disordered?

There are only two reasons for the Psychiatrist to do this:

1) The individual's behavior represents a danger to himself or others.

2) The individual asks for threatment.

Let me use an example to address reason #1: Suppose you get drunk. Alcohol, as you probably know, since you're apparently so versed in neurology, inhibits neural activity (especially in the cerebellum, but it doesn't matter). So when you're drunk your neuroelectric patterns are alrered (i.e. not the same as 50%+1). Now suppose you're driving a car while your drunk. Surely you do know that this represents a danger to you, to anyone who might be in the same car as you, and to everyone else who's driving on that street. And yet people do not see drunkenness (not alcoholism, just being drunk at a certain moment) as a disease or as something that needs to be cured.

Okay, now for reason #2: If an individual asks for treatment, it is because they believe they are diseased or disordered (or because they were forced to, but let's take the first case). What tells you that they didn't come to believe that because they fell for the common "everyone believes it, so it must be true" assumption? And yes, it hurts, but not everything that hurts is sickness.

So the psychiatry profession is not inmune to corrupt behavior, big deal. Everything that involves humans is never inmune to corrupt behavior. The reason why the medical field bases their investigation on the scientific method is precisely because of that: The scientific method is build around the fact that humans can ( and do ) make mistakes.

So your atempts to delegitimize ( sp? ) Psychiatry are completly misguided as other posters have mentioned: At most you can identify several groups of corrupt individuals who take advantage of patients. That, however, does not means there are not several groups of psychiatrist who subdue their diagnosis and threatment methods to the full rigor of the scientific method for anyone and everyone to see and verify their results. In fact as a profession the corrupt and inapropiate behavior of psychiatry isnt even the worst in medicine ( Plastic Surgery comes to mind: while some special circunstances like having heavy machinery blow off half of your face require it for the most part many of them dedicate to cosmetic changes which more often than not are completly pointless ).

So in conclusion: yes there are corrupt psychiatrists who might be trying to take advantage of certain circunstances to make a monetary profit, but if you go ask a group of 10 psychiatrists i bet you at least 9 will tell you that they would never try to induce someone who doesnt needs ( as on number 1 ) and doesnt wants ( as on number 2 ) to be "threated" for their uncommon behavioral patterns you call "mental states". In fact some of them will even refuse to call someone to convince them to seek help as they believe the person needs to make that choice himself before they can help them out. After all if profits is all they wanted they could easily abandon their common practice and limit themselves to threat and diagnosticate the people forced to receive threatment by law ( often because of number 1 ).

That's beside the point. I never tried to discredit psychiatrists. What i've tried to discredit is the notion of such conditions as 'diseases'.

Your logic is faulty: You cant currently get cured from Aids either, does that means all those people dying are not sick? If a cure doesnt currently exists or works on the patient it doesnt means the dissease does not exist. Like i mentioned on the previous post the condition exist simply because we can observe distinctive similarities between different persons who's behavior is different from the majority of the people. This doesnt means the condition has a definitive cure or that the condition needs a cure since thats entirely up to the patient unless its a very specific case like criminal behavior.

You yourself made a comparison that's faulty if we assume your position. You clearly believe that the conditions we're talking about are diseases or disorders (please allow me to use them as synonyms so i don't have to write "diseases or disorders" every time). Criminal behavior is obviously not a disease. And yet you compare them.

I know that the inexistence of a cure doesn't imply the inexistence of a disease, but i believe in this case it does.

So what exactly is depressing about that? If he has a burden you want her to continue to have a burden just because you dont like people calling her "mentally ill"? Having a condition or being "mentally ill" doesnt always implies the inability to live a normal life. I think your comment comes from the fact that you blame society for this "burden" but we'll to that.

Ex-friend now, and she's a girl. But on to the important stuff: I never said i wanted her to continue being depressive. And the "burden" was just a way for me to say that she gets depressed/sad more easily and more often than most people. What i was/am trying to say is that it's not a disorder just because it hurts.

The problem is that there is no real alternative to what you propose: finding specific causes and let people suffer in the mean time or try methods proven to be both safe and to have some degree of success?

I believe that if n people have to suffer/die in order to save n+1 people from suffering/dying then it's worth it. Of course, i can't just go and tell that to someone who's dying from a heart attack, but it's what i believe. Anyway, i have a simple and effective alternative: stop regarding certain conditions as mental diseases and stop trying to cure them, and just live and let live.

A misconception, refer to the first post and the studies conducted on psychopats among others.

Depends on whether you count abnormal neuroelectric patterns as physical lesions.

As for your involvement of society on all of this I really do not see the logical bridge you are crossing to arrive at that conclusion. There are many people who do not mind if society considers them "quirky" and are perfectly capable of dealing with this situations. But what if a persons feels like he is not able to deal with this or happy about it? What do you suggest we do, medicate and threat 90% of the population so they behave like him and he doesnt feels alienized? Just because you feel like persons should not change to adapt to a society it means that every person should subdue to your rebelious behavior even if it makes them miserable? We're all glad that you dont feel like you need any therapy thats very positive, but you shouldnt try to impose your will onto others and should instead listen to your own words: We're all different and what works for you might not work for other obsessive-compulsive persons.

It works for the people with these conditions i've talked to. And no, of course i'm not saying that 90% of the world should be medicated and treated. You know what i'm saying. I've said it 5846798760+1 times.

Again, its a person's choice if they want to deal with responses from society. We're all different and we all have different degree's of appreciation and different needs for acceptance and care. If someone feels like they need more acceptance than you is probably because they do.

But that's completely beside the point. Regardless of the acceptance and care someone needs, i'm sure they'd be better off if people just let them live instead of trying to change them. And if you want to talk about acceptance and care then i'll just say that acceptance of what they are and caring for them (i.e. asking what's wrong and trying to help, and not trying to convince them that they're sick (where do you think a lot of the depression comes from?) and/or medicating them) would be very appreciated.

As for the responses from society itself I dont see why they are not acceptable. Everyone in society is also a free individual and no one should be forced to deal with a behavior from someone else that for some reason bothers them. No one can force you to be friends with someone you do not like, no one can force you to constantly interact with someone you do not like. So if i do not like the behavior of a very rigid person who is obsessive-compulsive i dont have to move in with them. Accepting someone from what they are doesnt means i have to like them or be forced to interact with them.

Nobody is forcing you to bear with them. But, just as nobody has the right to force you to, you do not have the right to try to change what they are just because it bothers you. Those who aren't bothered by these conditions can stay and try to help (instead of just making it worse) while you move on and try to find people whose behavior doesn't bother you.

And that is usually the reason why people seek help, becuase they realize they cant force others to accept their unusual behavior but they still wish to be accepted and loved.

No, there are some people who accept and love them. And, upon lack of such people, they can always turn to others like them --other people with nonstandard conditions-- for love and support.

 

[Misanthrope]

I see so your entire argument revolves around semantics then? You just dont want them to be called "mental dissease" because you consider that derrogatory.

I believe that if n people have to suffer/die in order to save n+1 people from suffering/dying then it's worth it.

If you just want people to stop getting help to solve a dumb crusade against calling something a "dissease" as opposed to "mental state" then you can just fuck off for all i care, people who truly need help should not listen to your selfsteem issues, dissease is NOT a derogatory term period, you just chose to make it one. I thought you were being serious and i find you having some of the must dumb arguments ever while you try to impersonate me on replies ive done in the past. Please just take this bullshit to some nu-metal band forum im sure you'll find lots of "rebels without a cause" there who would sympathize with your absurd teen-angst crap.

 

[Magrathean]

Um... no to everything you said. I'm not talking about semantics (i'm talking about attitude... is that really so hard for you to understand? Oh, but i guess it is, since if it were not you would be replying intelligently and not insulting me), and i won't even reply to the rest of your senseless post. Te creí más inteligente.

 

[Siren]

And i was wondering how long it would take for Mis to give it up..
I really enjoyed Mis's two long posts, btw.

There's a million of counter-points i could make to Undo's last post, but since rational discussion seems impossible, i'll just say this:

it's not a disorder just because it hurts

i'm sure you'll be delighted to know that there's a whole (sub)specialty of medicine dedicated to pain relief.

not everything that hurts is sickness

of course not. hurt does not equal sickness. the pain is usually the product of sickness, a means to let your body know that there's something wrong.

 

[Magrathean]

I'm not talking about physical pain.

So everyone is giving up? Fine, i'm getting tired of this myself. Doesn't seem to lead anywhere, and people just post stupid (as in the case of Misanthrope's last words before giving up).

 

[Hitori]

Misanthrope was not the one being stupid in this thread

 

[Taliesin]

Anyway, i have a simple and effective alternative: stop regarding certain conditions as mental diseases and stop trying to cure them, and just live and let live.

Your quest for respect towards the mentally ill is honorable, but this part is plain retarded. No one is trying to cure anyone, it's the patients who come to the Psy's. Besides, you make it sound like those people are "different" again, as if summed up, they were capable of the same amount of things as anyone else, which is really not the case. Maybe with a depression it's not as obvious as with other diseases, but Social Anxiety Disorder, Schizophrenia, Multiple Personality Disorder and the likes, THEY NEED TO BE TREATED. Every one of thoses diseases, if not treated correctly, can become so bad that the person will be unable to live his/her life. It's not a question of opinion, it's a question of facts.. and the longer you cling to that opinion the more pathetic it becomes. You've had your show and some of your ideas were indeed interesting but it's way past time you let this whole thing go.. please

 

[Magrathean]

it's way past time you let this whole thing go.. please

Agreed.

Let's please stop this. It's getting tiresome for everyone (tell me if someone isn't tired of this), and it's getting nowhere. Maybe i shouldn't have posted it in the first place, but the damage's done, so i guess the only thing we can do about it is to leave it alone. You think it's stupid, and i think it could use a couple of word changes and better explanations, and we're reaching no conclusion. What do you say?

 

[Angelbreeze]

Um... no to everything you said. I'm not talking about semantics (i'm talking about attitude... is that really so hard for you to understand? Oh, but i guess it is, since if it were not you would be replying intelligently and not insulting me), and i won't even reply to the rest of your senseless post. Te creí más inteligente.

So everyone is giving up? Fine, i'm getting tired of this myself. Doesn't seem to lead nowhere, and people just post stupid (as in the case of Misanthrope's last words before giving up).

So, are YOU talking about attitude?

Well, I guess this is the way that you admit that you're wrong, isn't it?

Let's please stop this. It's getting tiresome for everyone (tell me if someone isn't tired of this), and it's getting nowhere. Maybe i shouldn't have posted it in the first place, but the damage's done, so i guess the only thing we can do about it is to leave it alone. You think it's stupid, and i think it could use a couple of word changes and better explanations, and we're reaching no conclusion. What do you say?

As I said a few days ago, will never be interesting to express an opinion to someone who seems NOT to listen more than his own ego.

 

[Taliesin]

You need to seriously shut up Angelbreeze