You can't tell about the ways of dealing with it available to him unless you have more information than he wrote here.
I can't see what's wrong with what he wrote anyway(?).
You needn't suffer from any mental illness to write such things, to dislike racists or to have/express the wish to be free
Hi Nie. There is a reason why people said things like... " :?:" and " sorry i have no clue what your saying or where your coming from" in response to highandlows posting- on the one hand it maybe
possible that they just think his writings are just plain wierd. But, I am not alone in saying that some of his writings have no context and some of us
probably 'just do not understand where he is coming from'. Usually when somebody sees irractic behavior (or expressions through writing) then that behaviour appears unusual to them. Is that a definite sign of mental illness?
NO, it could be a number of things,
possibly could be only eccentrism? Is there anything wrong with saying things like 'I dislike racists' or expressing a desire to be free? Of course not and I was never implying that those statements if examined as individual statements are a sign of mental illness. But, all of his statements as a whole do not offer a logical train of thought and in
some situations that is a
possible sign of mental illness. This is a classic symptom of schizophrenia and some other schizoid disorders "Disrupted thoughts and behavior- trouble concentrating and maintaining a train of thought (conversation might not make sense-may respond to queries with a seemingly completely unrelated answer; or sentences that start with one topic and end somewhere completely different).
I should know,
my brother is schizophrenic. Is he a good person, Yes, a very good person... does he deserve dignity and respect- YES, difinitely- as all people with any degree of mental or physical illness should be afforded respect and dignity. So, I meant know disrespect at all when I said what I said--- looking at his writings at a whole seemed a little strange and disjointed--- You are absolutely right- I can not
definitely say that he is mentally ill and I am actually against anyone at this site acting as 'armchair' psychologist and trying to
definitively diagnose anyone without knowing the person's story and personality very well. For example, even if we feel that 'we just know' that somebody else has social anxiety disorder because we know the illness very well from personal experience. That person may have all the actual symptoms of SAD but these symptoms may be concomitant with another disorder. What a person is bipolar or schizophrenic and has SAD and we give advice on how to deal with SA when they should be dealing with that and alot more? Do we want to be held responsible if we are wrong? That is why I believe it ok to offer a thoughtful and educated
opinion as long as it is stated as only an opinion.
With all that being said (in order to put things into
context and give a proper unassuming perspective) I never implied and expected anyone to take what I said about Highandlow as definite fact.. I was offering possibilities of his behaviour so that people would respect him instead of simplying saying things.. like-- 'this is why you shouldn't do drugs' in response to his behaviour. I offered a variety of what I thought were possibilities, but I thought probably that he was just behaving eccentrically and/or possibly didn't speak english very well.. There is nothing wrong with any of that. I considered the possibilities, afforded him respect and reserved any definite judgement.. I have talked to him more and I am also more interested in learning more (not to judge character or make a value judgement) about him and his culture.
It's not paranoia.
Seems like a prejudice
my response- Paranoia is the irrational suspiciousness and distrustfulness of others. Paranoia can lead to prejudice, which is, a positive or negative evaluation of a social group and its members. So, if I am putting your statement "Seems like a prejudice" into context (sorry, it was unclear, please elaborate more if I need to be corrected) you are stating that you have a prejudice against scientists. Maybe you are irrational in your evalutation of scientist, maybe not; I do not know you well enough to know that definitively,and only you can answer that. But I assumed that because you seem to view science as something that will or can potentially reduce our freedoms (I agree that in some case it may, but I can not generalize that to all science or branches there of). Do you fear that? I don't know. Anywho, the word paranoia wasn't a value judgement- most people are paranoid about something at some time or another. You may or not be paranoid, but am I correct in my understanding that you have a prejudice?
Whether malicious or whatever intent simply doesn't matter.
Malicious intent means alot. If harm is done on somebody through ignorace or lack of understanding then those actions can potentially be corrected through education. Yes, harm is bad either way but I believe malicious intent is much worse because this is an injustice and it is harder to correct somebody's malicious behaviour if they are convinced that they are right or are possibly sociopaths who just do not give a damn. Can somebody change as they mature especially if any harm they caused was done out of ignorance, ignorant passion, general passion, or immaturity- yes, but sociopaths (and BPD'ers) are a different story all together.
Reality isn't objective; even for scientists.
Only the attempt to measure and unify to such.
You are correct- attempts to measure reality can be objective. But, I believe that there is objective reality out there (i.e, natural laws) but only people's interpretation of what is reality is not objective. As far as scientist go-- I place more faith in rules established to reduce biases and incorrect measurements and incorrect interpretations of those measurements-- than the common guess work and potential harmful intuitive thinking that most people try to reason by (because knowledge based on intuition and here-say, can be biased and under-informed). If you want then study about the scientific methods and the methodology of scientific research.
To be fair and not to lump all sciences or the process of logical and scientific thinking together in one broad generalization- I must say that not all sciences are equal in that some
maybe potentially harmful towards
some aspects of society. For example, I would be very interested in having unbiased and scientific studies on the effects of our rapid paced and
technology filled society on our personalities and whether or not this can contribute to some mental difficulties and social problems such as ADD or reduced empathy. But I do not know, and I would trust science much more than simple guess work to figure that out. Regarding hypothesizing (which we all do), once again, it is ok to offer an opinion as long as it is stated as such (but I prefer well informed and thought out opinions rather than emotive and superficial ones). Also, science is a potentially liberating and enlightning tool- it is not always anticulture or antisocial as long as a person or scientist makes his best attempt to use it in an ethical manner. Can there be unintended consequences, yes.. but harmful consequences occur much more often to society because of people who think erroneously, process information superficially, and react because of that manner of thinking and emotional reasoning in an argressive (and often violent) way. (*disclaimer- emotions are a good and useful evolutionary trait- when the are extreme and out of control then the can be bad... and yes, at the other end of the spectrum- [in my opinion
] stoic thinking can be self-distructive and simply lead to an unfulfilled life).
If everyone knew the full truth about you; if you were entirely revealed, maybe it's up to you if it would make you unfree.
Yea, it's just your opinion.
If 'everyone'? That is quite a broad and general hypothetical scerio, but here goes
- If
everyone knew the full truth about me? Would I feel unfree- if everyone were more powerful than me based on the dynamics of our relationship or if I somehow gave them power over me- then yes, I would feel unfree. But a response that might be just as unlikely and unrealistic as that hypothesis would be- if this was a world where people respected each other and did the best they could not to be bias but to be realistic and fair- if we all tried to clear up misunderstanding through respect, dialogue, education, and perspective seeking, then no I wouldn't feel especially restrained or restricted (acutually I would feel quite free and safe)- but that is also unrealistic, no? because nobody can ever know anyone completely unless we found a way to read minds or accomplish temporary brain transplants
even then
what we know about somebody at one point in time doesn't necessarily reflect what or who that person maybe in the future, because most of us live, learn, and grow.. that is called development and maturing. Sure maybe as we get older our personalities change more slowly but we are always changing
to a degree.
There is something relatable to racism if you wish
. With all due respect, I am unsure what you mean by that. It is ambiguous so I won't even bother to consider and respond unless it is put into a context and elaborated on.
Your belief is only subjective after all
Yea, it's just your opinion
hmm... my beliefs are based in part on fact and educated reasoning... it's not all entirely unobjective opinions and guesswork-- and I do try to be resonable when it comes to my subjective opinions.
That is my opinion- do you tout the emotional validity of all opinion? If so, then I deserve respect for my opinions- meaning nobody deserves defensive sarcasm in an open and respectful dialogue.
