General question - is accessibility information valued here?
in [UK Mac]
|
Prev: Aplgies for errors and confusion was Re: newcomer
Next: I'm pissed off with James Jolley's libels and viciousness
From: Pd on 25 Jan 2010 07:16 James Taylor <usenet(a)oakseed.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote: > Peter Ceresole wrote: > > The point about real depression is that it's not caused by something > > external. It's chemical change in your own brain, causing a direct > > effect, not mediated by some external event or the failure of some other > > part of your body. > > I agree that it is chemical changes or similar going on in the brain, > and not something you should be trying to blame on a virus or similar > external pathogen. Also bear in mind that depression is not the only mental illness. There are psychoses (such as schizophrenia, which seems to be used almost as a catch-all term for "any kind of crazy we don't understand") which provide a wide spectrum of effect from isolated, short duration or very specific distortions of reality, to complete disconnect from anything that "most people" would recognise as "consensual reality". This means that it is perfectly possible to live an apparently normal life, but to react in a completely inappropriate manner to something as mundane as a hat, for example. It is a good idea to find out if there are these tiny pockets of crazy hidden in the mind of your potential spouse before you marry them. It is also possible to be very intelligent, able to compose very logical and reasoned arguments, but to base those arguments on a wildly inaccurate interpretation of the world and the intentions of those in it, with no way of recalibrating that interpretation. Everyone filters sensory input before it reaches the conscious mind, deleting, distorting and generalising the raw data. People by default look for evidence to support their model of how the world works, and if that model represents others as a threat, anything that confirms that belief is elevated in importance, and anything that tends to contradict that belief is deleted before it even makes it to conscious attention, or simply ignored. It is a very grey line between useful filtering and unhelpful filtering. With only a limited understanding of how the mind works, modern health practice will sometimes throw all kinds of treatments at a problem to see if any of them work. Sometimes none of them are particularly effective. -- Pd
From: Woody on 25 Jan 2010 09:01 Pd <peterd.news(a)gmail.invalid> wrote: > James Taylor <usenet(a)oakseed.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote: > > > Peter Ceresole wrote: > > > > The point about real depression is that it's not caused by something > > > external. It's chemical change in your own brain, causing a direct > > > effect, not mediated by some external event or the failure of some other > > > part of your body. > > > > I agree that it is chemical changes or similar going on in the brain, > > and not something you should be trying to blame on a virus or similar > > external pathogen. > > Also bear in mind that depression is not the only mental illness. There > are psychoses (such as schizophrenia, which seems to be used almost as a > catch-all term for "any kind of crazy we don't understand") which > provide a wide spectrum of effect from isolated, short duration or very > specific distortions of reality, to complete disconnect from anything > that "most people" would recognise as "consensual reality". > > This means that it is perfectly possible to live an apparently normal > life, but to react in a completely inappropriate manner to something as > mundane as a hat, for example. It is a good idea to find out if there > are these tiny pockets of crazy hidden in the mind of your potential > spouse before you marry them. And whether you can a) deal with those pockets of crazy b) they don't clash with your own pockets of crazy c) there are enough of the right type of crazy > With only a limited understanding of how the mind works, modern health > practice will sometimes throw all kinds of treatments at a problem to > see if any of them work. Sometimes none of them are particularly > effective. Or in the general NHS case 'Throw different drugs at it until you shut up' -- Woody
From: Pd on 25 Jan 2010 10:02 Woody <usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk> wrote: > Pd <peterd.news(a)gmail.invalid> wrote: > > It is a good idea to find out if there are these tiny pockets of crazy > > hidden in the mind of your potential spouse before you marry them. > > And whether you can > a) deal with those pockets of crazy > b) they don't clash with your own pockets of crazy > c) there are enough of the right type of crazy Oh, very much indeed yes. -- Pd
From: James Taylor on 25 Jan 2010 11:49 Pd wrote: > Everyone filters sensory input before it reaches the conscious mind, > deleting, distorting and generalising the raw data. People by default > look for evidence to support their model of how the world works, and > if that model represents others as a threat, anything that confirms > that belief is elevated in importance, and anything that tends to > contradict that belief is deleted before it even makes it to > conscious attention, or simply ignored. It is a very grey line > between useful filtering and unhelpful filtering. That's a very interesting and, I think, accurate description of how the mind works. It is therefore healthy once in a while to question the fundamental assumptions one makes and, instead of seeking data to confirm what you already believe, to seek contradictory data and examine it carefully. In this vein it is often very refreshing to debate with someone who holds different views to oneself and who can put forward consistent and persuasive reasons for holding those views. As an INTJ personality, I particularly enjoy such discussions, but I am frequently disappointed when others are unable to argue logically their reasons and instead just get angry or upset when their beliefs are questioned. -- James Taylor
From: James Taylor on 25 Jan 2010 12:27
Rowland McDonnell wrote: > D.M. Procida wrote: > >> James Taylor wrote: >> >>> They are reacting to your behaviour! Can't you see? > > What, by banning me from accessing any services because I refused to do > what I was told `or be denied access to any other services'? The "they" in that sentence was the people of this group, not the psychiatric services as you seem to have mistakenly assumed. >>> If you were to seek professional help, the counsellor would help >>> you learn how to behave to get a better reaction from people, and >>> you'd be a much happier person. > > That's actually very upsetting and grotesquely arrogant. I don't see why you would take it that way. That is the job of a psychotherapist after all. > I did seek professional help. The years of abuse that the professionals > dished out to be has ruined me as a human being. It seems unlikely they were "out to get you" or deliberately harm you. It seems more likely that you are suffering from paranoia. > And you knew that. You wanted to upset me very badly, didn't you? > Of course you are totally uninterested in understanding me. > you're just looking for means to insult and upset me. Absolutely untrue. That's just your paranoia again. Why would I want to do that anyway? Life's too short for such silliness. You really need to try to correct the distorted view that your paranoia gives you by aiming off in the other direction. In other words, do you best to assume that people are basically decent. Most of them are. > In the meantime, I have been refused the leave to give (or withold) > informed consent, despite `giving informed consent' being a requirement > of all medical guidelines on getting a patient to accept health care. In other words, you've been sectioned under the Mental Health Act, and have thus lost your right to choose your own treatment. > My wife assures me that I'm right on this - although she does think that > my worries are exaggerated, she considers that they're perfectly > reasonable and not at all mad. I am very reassured to know you have the support of your wife. You are already far better off than some. > I dislike amateur shrinks almost as much - sounding off on subjects you > know absolutely nothing at all about, talking about other human beings > in that condescending way as if you've got the key to the universal > understanding of humanity when in fact you don't even understand the > your own minds. That may be true, but the fact remains that you are here in this group causing trouble for yourself and others. This does nobody any good. It's only sensible to encourage you to find a better way to behave. It's not like you're a crazy beyond redemption. You only need to lower your hostility and assume people mean well when your paranoia currently leads you to believe (wrongly) that they all want to do you harm. People don't start out even being hostile towards you until you do it to them. When others do become hostile towards you it is because they are reacting to *your* behaviour. (Which is where this post started.) If you can understand that, you'll have taken the first step to recovery. So please give some thought to how you might be able to find a way to correct your hostility before it even happens. This means actively choosing not to be hostile when you perceive someone "attacking" you or your beliefs. Very likely your perception is inaccurate and becoming hostile will only turn a false perception into a reality because of your self-fulfilling hostility. -- James Taylor |