Moralizing Anti-Philosophy in Psychiatric Pseudoscience

Post Reply New Topic

It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society. - Jiddu Krishnamurti
What we call psychiatric practice is a certain moral tactic...covered over by the myths of positivism. - Michel Foucault
When the last Puritan has disappeared from the earth, the man of science will take his place as a killjoy, and we shall be given all the same old advice but for different reasons. - Robert Lynd

This began as a message to someone on here, but I think it deserves its own post. I hold that psychiatry is a pseudoscience, largely for philosophical reasons, but I will not belabor the point. Read Szasz, et. al. If you don't already agree with this, well, that's your problem.

Rather, I wanted to point out that psychiatry is full of this presumptive BS and is anathema to philosophical reasoning. This disguised moralizing is so embedded - people are naturally so mentally warped by the morality meme - that they can't even see their subjective opinions as anything but 'the Truth'. Look at the entire notion that a lack of empathy is a 'disorder', rather than a very useful trait to avoid being a conformist, unreflective toolbag.

It's very similar - indeed, it's part of - religion. Most psychiatric advice is all premised around this: that whatever most people do in your culture is right, and if you are unhappy with it, there must be something wrong with you! Many of the behaviors, attitudes and views which psychiatrists would jargonize were once considered valid and insightful philosophic and psychological notions. One can't help but wonder what these pin-heads would make of a Diogenes or a Nietzsche. How dare he deny the intrinsic value of humanity?! How dare he not fit in!

Asceticism and renunciation of sex (really, of women and relationships) are logical methods to avoid getting involved in situations to which you know there is no satisfactory conclusion (socializing) because people are incapable of being reflective and you are incapable of not being reflective. Yet for me to reject women as uninteresting, regular work as not worth the payoff, and small talk as pointless and tedious is no longer a lifestyle choice but a sign that something must be 'wrong'. DO NOT DOUBT THE DIVINE WARMTH OF THE HERD. There is so much 'advice' on here and all over on how to fit in, make small talk, get along with women, engage in romantic relationships, etc. Not only do these show a moralizing asses' conceit that whatever the clay-golems (think: Gnosticism) do is automatically natural and desirable, they show an attitude of unreflective antipathy toward philosophy which has and does call into doubt all of their precious little notions: that human life has intrinsic value, that 'going along to get along' isn't sheer base cowardice, and that there even is any such thing as a 'right' way of thinking or dealing with people.

I do not believe in 'Asperger's syndrome', but I do believe that people vary immensely. I also believe that most human beings are not really people, and have nothing to contribute with me. There is probably nothing I despise more than some boring, self-deluding half-wit projecting his neurotic cravings onto me as though he is the expert on me. This is why I refuse to even speak to psychiatrists and counselors, it is an infuriating waste of time.

Almost everyone has 2 identities: their personal identity (real self) which is directly shaped by their experiences and surroundings, and their social identity (fake self) which is artificially constructed in order to appeal to others. I have what's known as Pathological Demand Avoidance, which means that I have no social identity. My experiences that shaped my personal identity have been influenced by my social surroundings, but I never artificially constructed a social identity from those experiences. A lot of people would view it as a bad thing that I never rejected my real self in order to appeal more to others, but I wouldn't want to have a social identity if I was capable of constructing one. Preferences, beliefs, and philosophies are only real when they are part of someone's personal identity. My preferences, beliefs, and philosophies don't really have much of a social function because I usually keep them to myself. I didn't construct any of those pieces of my identity to fit in or to stand out, they just came naturally. I don't understand why people try to find meaning in life through things that are fake. The meaning of life should be more obvious to people who are more real, because they can more easily find answers by looking inside themselves.

Despite that I have no social identity, I wouldn't reject cultural etiquette. It serves the function of maintaining peace and order in society. I'm opposed to creating unnecessary conflict with other people. Not every hypothetical cultural issue needs to be dealt with. Unless there's something seriously wrong with a cultural norm, then it's not worth making a big deal out of it. I can't change the world, but I can change myself. I can find peace in my mind that will most likely never exist in the world as a whole.

I maintain my happiness, further my success in college and my job, and have good relations with my family members as well as a few friends. I don't know what part of me is supposed to be disordered. I don't care what the psychiatrists say is wrong with me. Society seems more disordered than me, from my perspective.

I quite envy you, Mike. One of the biggest issues I have is dissonance between my social and personal identities. My social identity is very willing to sacrifice ideals, for example.

I'm not sure what a social identity is or even if I have one.