The Meaning of Life

[Received]

To be fair, as someone with a mental disorder, there is a big push in psychology to eliminate the concept of a "good order." Mental disease is different because of biological or chemical differences. Mental disorder is the lack of those differences but, yet, a markedly different outlook and rationality from the "norm." That is to say that there is some sort of normal thought process which, if you compare genders in this regard, you realize that there clearly is no normal thought process or rationality.

Robert Sapolsky said there could easily be a day when everyone has a "disorder" given that each person has some type of idiosyncrasy, etc., that sets them apart from the "norm". Until then, I like distinguishing the biology from the person, and try my hardest to turn the "disorder" into a sign of strength: you're walking around with a 100 pound weight whereas others aren't (in regard to this specific area, e.g., anxiety, depression, etc.); you can't control what's been given to you (your earlier experiences, your biology or facticity), but you deserve credit for how you're handling it, and if this means you're getting out of bed rather than staying in it all day because of depression, you pushed against your 100 pound weight when everyone else has it easy. You've worked harder for life.

 

[Star Adept]

I see it happening already. In psychology they give names to particular aspects of a disorders such as disassociation, derealization, depersonalization, etc. In philosophy we give names to different schools of thought like solipsism, determinalism, etc. Eventually we will be able to define a persons mentality by a list of such things, realizing that the definitions need to be strict, the list needs to be vast, and that a person may hold varied levels of commitment and the list per an individual can only be a snapshot as one can easily change day by day as they learn and grow. That being said, I think such definitions are silly and confining and if we did not have them at all, we would be more prone to ask "what do you think" and actually learn about someone

 

[Received]

I see it happening already. In psychology they give names to particular aspects of a disorders such as disassociation, derealization, depersonalization, etc. In philosophy we give names to different schools of thought like solipsism, determinalism, etc. Eventually we will be able to define a persons mentality by a list of such things, realizing that the definitions need to be strict, the list needs to be vast, and that a person may hold varied levels of commitment and the list per an individual can only be a snapshot as one can easily change day by day as they learn and grow. That being said, I think such definitions are silly and confining and if we did not have them at all, we would be more prone to ask "what do you think" and actually learn about someone

Whenever I mention a disorder or diagnosis to clients (which is rare because I don't need to accept insurance), I always emphasize how having "anxiety" means having anxiety like everyone else but it just happens to be affecting your goals more challengingly. We all depersonalize, derealize (i.e., waking up), have anxiety, have defects, fail, etc. The question is how much these things happen in terms of how much it's affecting our lives.

 

[Star Adept]

Exactly. Disorders are nothing but regular functions of the mind that anybody either can or does have. It's called a condition when those things are either chronic or impeding. I think one of the narcolepsy-type conditions literally has a requirement of how many events at a job or at home before a doctor can make a clinical diagnosis of it. My doctor doesn't treat me as abnormal and of need of fixing, he treats me what I imagine a plastic surgeon treats his patients in the sense that: everyone has a right to be happy and he is there to make people happy by adjusting the mentality that makes me unhappy.

When people don't understand the more in-depth explanation of my schizophrenia, I simplify it by saying I daydream so much that I can't function. That's grossly inaccurate, but it gives people an idea and makes me feel not quite so distanced from one person to the next.

 

[BL2KTN]

Received, are you an accredited counselor? If so, through what accrediting organization?

 

[GrowingSmaller]

To be fair, as someone with a mental disorder, there is a big push in psychology to eliminate the concept of a "good order."

If its a good order that fair, but there are "many possible peaks on the moral landscape" to quote Sam Harris. If there is good order theoretically, in believing what we ought to believe; and practically - in doing what we ough to do, there is also I believe good order ontologically, being or becoming what we ought to be.

SO there's 1) theoretical rationality, 2) practical rationality and 3) ontological rationality. Hey, I just invented a new category!?!

 

[Received]

Received, are you an accredited counselor? If so, through what accrediting organization?

I am licensed through my state licensing board. I went to a CACREP-accredited program for graduate school in counseling. I wouldn't prefer giving more info than that.

 

[Received]

Exactly. Disorders are nothing but regular functions of the mind that anybody either can or does have. It's called a condition when those things are either chronic or impeding. I think one of the narcolepsy-type conditions literally has a requirement of how many events at a job or at home before a doctor can make a clinical diagnosis of it. My doctor doesn't treat me as abnormal and of need of fixing, he treats me what I imagine a plastic surgeon treats his patients in the sense that: everyone has a right to be happy and he is there to make people happy by adjusting the mentality that makes me unhappy.

When people don't understand the more in-depth explanation of my schizophrenia, I simplify it by saying I daydream so much that I can't function. That's grossly inaccurate, but it gives people an idea and makes me feel not quite so distanced from one person to the next.

Indeed, and let's remember that these "disorders" are still here, which means they're potentially adaptive at some time in the past (or present), or at the very least not maladaptive enough to get excluded from the gene replication process we call evolution. That says something very important about our discussion. Society right now might think it's a "disorder" but our biology thinks otherwise. I often tell my generally anxious clients that were they in a hunter-gatherer group 40,000 years ago, they would be the ones who jumped awake at every twig snap when the group is sleeping, which would only help the group survive to ward off possible predators. It's just as much, or more, society's "fault" for not letting these otherwise "disorders" have an adaptive function which they almost certainly did in the past.

 

[bhsmte]

I am licensed through my state licensing board. I went to a CACREP-accredited program for graduate school in counseling. I wouldn't prefer giving more info than that.

And I think your first name is Sigmund.

Just kidding, you certainly appear to be very knowledgeable and are well reasoned in your approach.

 

[Received]

And I think your first name is Sigmund.

Just kidding, you certainly appear to be very knowledgeable and are well reasoned in your approach.

Thanks dude!

Yeah, I'm the annoying guy on staff who, I don't know what you call it, oh yeah -- reads.

 

[agua]

Indeed, and let's remember that these "disorders" are still here, which means they're potentially adaptive at some time in the past (or present), or at the very least not maladaptive enough to get excluded from the gene replication process we call evolution. That says something very important about our discussion. Society right now might think it's a "disorder" but our biology thinks otherwise. I often tell my generally anxious clients that were they in a hunter-gatherer group 40,000 years ago, they would be the ones who jumped awake at every twig snap when the group is sleeping, which would only help the group survive to ward off possible predators. It's just as much, or more, society's "fault" for not letting these otherwise "disorders" have an adaptive function which they almost certainly did in the past.

According to this premise does it imply that ( according to evolutionary selection ) anxiety isn't moderated out of our current gene pool because people who suffer from it are enabled to function. ie. anxiety sufferers live and reproduce.

Another question. Can you suggest how, according to the evolution model, providing adaptive functions for anxiety sufferers inline with predator awareness would be beneficial; or are we talking about maniupalting the process to suit our needs ?

Also can you give me some adaptive functions in place of predator awareness that could benefit anxiety sufferers ?

( forgive my ignorance of the evolution model )

 

[Received]

According to this premise does it imply that ( according to evolutionary selection ) anxiety isn't moderated out of our current gene pool because people who suffer from it are enabled to function. ie. anxiety sufferers live and reproduce.

Yes. Obviously if they're still here. The question is whether it's selectively adaptive or, because anxiety and all other disorders can be "attached" to otherwise "highly functioning" people, just along for the ride. To me just being along for the ride indicates something, i.e., if mental disorders were really "survival disorders", you wouldn't see anyone at all; therefore although mental disorders might cause problems for individuals in today's society, they didn't cause problems in terms of survival and replication of genes (reproduction).

Another question. Can you suggest how, according to the evolution model, providing adaptive functions for anxiety sufferers inline with predator awareness would be beneficial; or are we talking about maniupalting the process to suit our needs ?

I'm talking about the former. Evolutionary biology and psychology hold a questionable stance toward group selection, but it's conceivable that anxiety could help an individual be more attuned to their surroundings, which would help the individual by helping the group first, i.e., because the group is alerted then the individual's genes are kept safe and have a better chance of replication, as opposed to if the group isn't alerted and so might get jumped on by predators.

Also can you give me some adaptive functions in place of predator awareness that could benefit anxiety sufferers ?

( forgive my ignorance of the evolution model )

Well, in a sense all of evolution is directly or indirectly involving predator awareness. The deeper "point" of evolution is reproduction: replicating your genes and passing them on, and often this means competing against the potentially replicable genes of the other guy (or girl). You can't do the latter without having some type of advantage over the other guy, the predator.

 

[agua]

Well, in a sense all of evolution is directly or indirectly involving predator awareness. The deeper "point" of evolution is reproduction: replicating your genes and passing them on, and often this means competing against the potentially replicable genes of the other guy (or girl). You can't do the latter without having some type of advantage over the other guy, the predator.

ok. My question was this.

Also can you give me some adaptive functions in place of predator awareness that could benefit anxiety sufferers ?

In other words what activities/functions/occupations could you give modern anxiety sufferers to replace the predator awareness of ancient humans, which would and allow them to be benificial to the group.

 

[Received]

ok. My question was this.

Also can you give me some adaptive functions in place of predator awareness that could benefit anxiety sufferers ?

In other words what activities/functions/occupations could you give modern anxiety sufferers to replace the predator awareness of ancient humans, which would and allow them to be benificial to the group.

Well, we have the same brain as 40,000 years ago, so really there is no replacement in terms of our biology. There's only replacement of our surroundings: from groups to agriculture to civilization.

 

[agua]

Well, we have the same brain as 40,000 years ago, so really there is no replacement in terms of our biology. There's only replacement of our surroundings: from groups to agriculture to civilization.

Ok. So you can't recommend a stop gap treatment as replacement/substitute for predator alert ?

ETA. That was poor phrasing. I'm looking for activity/function that will benefit the anxiety sufferer and make the predator alert function beneficial to them ( or the group ), now.

 

[Received]

Ok. So you can't recommend a stop gap treatment as replacement/substitute for predator alert ?

ETA. That was poor phrasing. I'm looking for activity/function that will benefit the anxiety sufferer and make the predator alert function beneficial to them ( or the group ), now.

Can you explain a little more?

 

[agua]

Can you explain a little more?

Not really I thought I did already. Ok one more try before moving on. You wrote this ...

I often tell my generally anxious clients that were they in a hunter-gatherer group 40,000 years ago, they would be the ones who jumped awake at every twig snap when the group is sleeping, which would only help the group survive to ward off possible predators. It's just as much, or more, society's "fault" for not letting these otherwise "disorders" have an adaptive function which they almost certainly did in the past.

Can you prescribe an adaptive function today for these people who you suggest may suffer anxiety because of the predator alert sensitivity; considering the claim that society is at "fault" for not letting this happen.

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Not sure about that line of reasoning, recieved. If someone breaks their leg, does that mean it was adaptive in the past, or that broken legs have an adaptive function? I agree that context is relevant to diagniosing a disorder though. You may be schizophrenic in one country, and a respected shaman in another. Or similar. Likewise I think I heard that aspergers syndrome has been take of the DSM list (or something) - I think because people can live with the "disorder" now we know how to treat and fit them into society better. Its not always the person that has to change in orderfor there to be a remedy.

 

[Received]

Not really I thought I did already. Ok one more try before moving on. You wrote this ...



Can you prescribe an adaptive function today for these people who you suggest may suffer anxiety because of the predator alert sensitivity; considering the claim that society is at "fault" for not letting this happen.

I don't think they have current adaptive function with today's society, generally speaking. Now, there are a few examples where not adapting to society can work very well for the individual, such as with those with bipolar disorder and who truly enjoy their manic episodes.

 

[Received]

Not sure about that line of reasoning, recieved. If someone breaks their leg, does that mean it was adaptive in the past, or that broken legs have an adaptive function? I agree that context is relevant to diagniosing a disorder though. You may be schizophrenic in one country, and a respected shaman in another. Or similar. Likewise I think I heard that aspergers syndrome has been take of the DSM list (or something) - I think because people can live with the "disorder" now we know how to treat and fit them into society better. Its not always the person that has to change in orderfor there to be a remedy.

People aren't born with broken legs, so maybe this point isn't quite in line with mine? (At the same time, how we break our legs is totally adaptive in a negative sort of way, i.e., breaking our legs in any other way with any other body might not have been as adaptive as how we break them now.)