Posted by Lou Pilder on June 18, 2010, at 6:17:01
In reply to Re: Being condescending is also an attack » Dinah, posted by chujoe on June 17, 2010, at 10:28:05
> Thank you, Dinah. I think you make a lot of sense here and I have tried since discovering Psychobabble to be tolerant and supportive.
>
> Like many of the anti-med folks, I am quite skeptical about reductionist, materialist, "scientific" explanations for mental illness. I am quite certain from my research and my reading that psychology is very important, that behavior is very important, that taking responsibility for one's self is very important. Sometimes, for some people, these will suffice to get them through whatever difficulties they are having. These people are the lucky ones, I guess, though if you have to turn yourself and your human agency over to some rigid system of belief, well, I'm not so sure it's a good trade.
>
> I even think that the experience of mental illness -- that's what our culture calls these various states of mind -- can be useful, both to the individual and to the society. Some societies, historically, have made room for such people as shaman, healers, prophets, artists, poets, etc. At the same time, the interior life of such people can be a misery to them, however beautiful the products of their imaginations. And sometimes the very forces that make them creative are so tormenting that they lose all ability to function -- that is what I'd call madness.
>
> Our money-driven society has very little room for the shaman, the witch, or the artist, which makes his or her lot even harder to bear. Ironically, that very capitalist, market-driven society has produced a number of chemicals that can alleviate the mental suffering of some people. And this is where it gets a little weird because two seemingly contradictory things can be true at the same time: 1.) Society has found it convenient to medicate away problems; this is probably better than burning witches and executing artists who offend the king, but it amounts to the same thing. 2.) The medications that have been developed to medicate away problems make life possible for some people who would otherwise find life intolerable. So: Yeah, big phrama is evil, but some of the stuff they sell works.
>
> Finally, as to disagreeing about the facts, you're right, I think, but with this caveat: One dosen't get to make up facts. The Whitiker book many of the anti-med folks cite so often is full of factual errors and misuse of statistics. "Science" and "facts" are put in the service of a cultural Puritanism that goes back to the 17th century in this country, an ideology that despises the body and that seeks to control, not just the behavior but the inner lives of citizens, that banned musical instruments, dancing, wine, beer, and all forms of pleasure because pleasure interferes with work. The new Puritanism believes -- though never states this explicitly -- that if one suffers from mental illness then you are simply destined to suffer (cf. Calvinism), or that perhaps you can work your way to health and mental purity; the new Puritanism despises the idea that suffering might be relieved, or that one might experience pleasure. Pleasure is a waste of time. Just like the medicating society of Big Pharma, the new Puritans seek to control the behavior of their fellow citizens.cj,
You wrote,[...the Whitiker book...is full of factual errors and misuse of statistics...].
I am unsure as to what you are referring to here. If you could post answers to the folowing, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
A. What are the factual errors that you are referring to?
B. What criteria do you use, if any, to determine that?
C. What are the statistics that you say are misused?
D. What criteria do you use to determine that?
Lou
poster:Lou Pilder
thread:951306
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20100321/msgs/951414.html