We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
She points out the (rather obvious) practical and economic advantages of committed relationships. I can't imagine handling all of the complexities of life without a partner.
"Science has become an international bully." I doubt that I will change my mind about this being the best essay of 2014, by Yale's computer scientist David Gelernter: The Closing of the Scientific Mind.
It's about subjectivity, mainly - being human, and a defense of Nagel in part. The essay is so rich and deadly-serious that it cannot really be taken in in one reading, and it is difficult to select a representative quote so I'll post a random one:
The dominant, mainstream view of mind nowadays among philosophers and many scientists is computationalism, also known as cognitivism. This view is inspired by the idea that minds are to brains as software is to computers. “Think of the brain,” writes Daniel Dennett of Tufts University in his influential 1991 Consciousness Explained, “as a computer.” In some ways this is an apt analogy. In others, it is crazy. At any rate, it is one of the intellectual milestones of modern times.
How did this “master analogy” become so influential?
Well, because we derive our metaphors from the world around us. Freud's first metapsychology was modeled on the steam engine. The essay deserves study. Take a Ritalin and dig into it.
Another:
Many scientists are proud of having booted man off his throne at the center of the universe and reduced him to just one more creature—an especially annoying one—in the great intergalactic zoo. That is their right. But when scientists use this locker-room braggadocio to belittle the human viewpoint, to belittle human life and values and virtues and civilization and moral, spiritual, and religious discoveries, which is all we human beings possess or ever will, they have outrun their own empiricism. They are abusing their cultural standing. Science has become an international bully.
Nowhere is its bullying more outrageous than in its assault on the phenomenon known as subjectivity...
Samizdata found this gem by Rauch in The Atlantic. A couple of quotes:
"Introverts may be common, but they are also among the most misunderstood and aggrieved groups in America, possibly the world."
and
"Do you know someone who needs hours alone every day? Who loves quiet conversations about feelings or ideas, and can give a dynamite presentation to a big audience, but seems awkward in groups and maladroit at small talk? Who has to be dragged to parties and then needs the rest of the day to recuperate? Who growls or scowls or grunts or winces when accosted with pleasantries by people who are just trying to be nice? "
From the Editor of The Atlantic, Surviving Anxiety - I've tried therapy, drugs, and booze. Here’s how I came to terms with the nation's most common mental illness:
I wish I could say that my anxiety is a recent development, or that it is limited to public speaking. It’s not. My wedding was accompanied by sweating so torrential that it soaked through my clothes and by shakes so severe that I had to lean on my bride at the altar, so as not to collapse. At the birth of our first child, the nurses had to briefly stop ministering to my wife, who was in the throes of labor, to attend to me as I turned pale and keeled over. I’ve abandoned dates; walked out of exams; and had breakdowns during job interviews, plane flights, train trips, and car rides, and simply walking down the street. On ordinary days, doing ordinary things—reading a book, lying in bed, talking on the phone, sitting in a meeting, playing tennis—I have thousands of times been stricken by a pervasive sense of existential dread and been beset by nausea, vertigo, shaking, and a panoply of other physical symptoms. In these instances, I have sometimes been convinced that death, or something somehow worse, was imminent.
Even when not actively afflicted by such acute episodes, I am buffeted by worry: about my health and my family members’ health; about finances; about work; about the rattle in my car and the dripping in my basement; about the encroachment of old age and the inevitability of death; about everything and nothing. Sometimes this worry gets transmuted into low-grade physical discomfort—stomachaches, headaches, dizziness, pains in my arms and legs—or a general malaise, as though I have mononucleosis or the flu. At various times, I have developed anxiety-induced difficulties breathing, swallowing, even walking; these difficulties then become obsessions, consuming all of my thinking.
It's a vivid description of what we used to call Anxiety Neurosis but now term Generalized Anxiety Disorder. Stossel says that nothing has helped him except for moderate use of Xanax and/or alcohol. He has concluded that he just needs to live with it, if not to embrace it.
81% of kids have a mental disorder? "Everybody has Psychiatric symptoms."
The point is, you need a diagnosis for your insurance. Even if you're a troubled normal neurotic, we'll stick a label on you as a favor to you. Dr. Alan Francis, et al (h/t, Boring Old Man)
Asperger's Syndrome has been removed from the DSM and folded into Autism Spectrum. I'm not convinced that people with Asperger's-like symptoms have anything in common with what was traditionally termed Autism, and my suspicion is that Asperger's is just a normal human variation which, a while ago, might have been termed "slightly eccentric."
The DSM is ultimately an instrument for weakening human resilience, self-reliance, fortitude, and resolve. It turns human beings into mechanisms, deprives their conduct of meaning, and makes them prey to entrepreneurs of human misery. The authors, one could say, suffer from PNOD—psychiatric nosology overvaluation disorder—the criteria for which are as follows:
A: The grandiose belief that all human weakness can and should be divided into valid diagnostic categories.
B: At least two of the following: a firm and unshakable belief that all human distress arises from malfunctioning serotonin metabolism; a firm and unshakable belief that functional MRI scans will soon teach humans how to live; a firm and unshakable belief that the seven deadly sins have been scientifically superseded by psychiatric diagnoses.
People joke about how bitchy and cranky, if not downright hostile, many women become around menopause. Bitchy, cranky, and raging may drive family members and friends away, but are not depression in themselves. On the plus side, sometimes, women become much more horny as their estrogen lowers in proportion to their testosterone (yes, women's bodies do produce some of that).
What qualities do people look for in elected (or unelected) leaders? The question applies to all areas of life, not just politics.
What qualities stimulate people to "follow," or choose, a leader? Among others, physical presence, ability to speak, self-confidence, and reliable decision-making play important parts, but some of it is difficult to express. This post stimulates the discussion: What is the "Presidential Presence"?
One component of it, perhaps not a large one, is a person's aptitude for being a target of positive transferences. That, plus the power, is what transforms an employee of the citizens (ie a politician) into something that seems special, probably too special. After Washington, my favorite President was Coolidge.
When it comes to politics in the modern era, one part of it is simply celebrity. "Charisma." TV, video, and film create celebrity, as in "famous for being famous." What qualities support that? Why does anybody listen to, or pay attention to, celebs?
A “disorder” is a socially constructed label that describes a set of symptoms occurring together and its associated behaviors, not a real entity with etiological homogeneity. Labeling emotional problems “disordered” assumes that happiness is the natural homeostatic state, and distressing emotional states are abnormal and need to be changed. A diagnostic label can help improve communication and understand maladaptive behaviors; if that label is reified, however, it can lead to assumptions that the etiology, course, and treatment response are known. Proponents of the diagnostic psychiatric nomenclature have acknowledged the dangers of over-pathologizing normal experiences of living (such as fear) by way of diagnostic labeling.
That's what I've been saying for years, but she says it better.
It depends. As Freud knew, memory is distorted by our choice of defensive narrative of the moment. One of the many fascinating things about Psychoanalysis is to see how memories change over time.
It's an opiate agonist/antagonist. Apparently it's a mild high. I know a doc who prescribes it. He is all about $.
My bias tends to be in favor of sobriety and standing up and facing life and oneself directly, but those things are difficult for everybody. In the UK, however, certified addicts can pick up their heroin etc at the docs' office on the way to work. The NHS figures it's cheaper than rehab. Of course, the NHS also considers death cheaper than cancer treatments.
This article explains nothing: Why Teenagers Are So Impulsive, but it's a good example of the nonsense that is coming from brain imaging.
The article spins the imaging data to be about crime. It's not about crime, it's just about the young male brain as compared to the female. It's not a bug, it's a feature. Young male humans are designed to defend the tribe, to kill food, and to be willing to die doing those things, but no brain scan can explain that. Vive la difference.
For difficult patients who need more than outpatient treatment or short-stay stabilization. Over the years, I have found Gould Farm to be very helpful to patients: Gould Farm.
He says, about this "novel," that "A mad person is like a faulty machine." What he doesn't quite mention is that, in the DSM, essentially everybody has at least one DSM disorder. That satisfies insurance companies, which is the main point in the end.
A blissful marriage is the stuff of teenage fantasy. Real life gets in the way of romance, and our unappealing traits become more evident over time. It's amazing how people put up with us.
The age-old institution remains, for us, a sacramental covenant, a secular contract, and a practical arrangement for building a good, decent, wholesome family life. Especially so in an era in which we, and our kids, all quickly move from home, and the extended family in the neighborhood is a thing of the remote past.
IQ is part of it. If you and a spouse each have average IQs of 100, the marriage should have an IQ of 200. If your judgement is mediocre, you can find a spouse with better judgement. If your social skills are weak, a spouse can help compensate. If your taste in decor stinks, your spouse might do better.
And unless you are very wealthy and can afford plenty of help, four hands can get more done in a few hours than can two.
It all just makes good sense as a life foundation, as something to try to build whatever one wants in life on top of. As much as I may even hate and abuse my spouse at times, my life would be lousy without him. At this point, I could not do it without my companion to rely on 100%. It is a permanent bond, as we vowed in the beginning. We put up with eachother's flaws, and benefit from eachother's strengths. We are loyal to eachother and to our life together, above all else. We even confide in eachother, which can be a bit sexy. Fantasy is fun.
The political Left is ambivalent about marriage. They like the idea of marriage to the State instead of to people, but they like gay marriage. Go figure. Historically, however, marriage did not strictly require monogamy despite the spoken vows in church, and allowed room for adventure. We do not do that because that was not our deal.
Charles Murray has been on this topic for years. Marriage works well for society as a whole, but it probably works well for individuals too. Marriage is increasingly the big sociological divide in American life: Getting and staying married makes you part of a privileged elite.
I don't think she is blaming the booze business for this. Women have always had their secret Mothers' Little Helpers, of one sort or another, since the beginning of time. Laudanum, alcohol, coca leaf, tobacco, areca nut and betel leaf, you name it - long before TV advertising and Mad Men.
Every human has at least a touch of sadism in them. A touch of other unpleasant things too, such as sociopathy. When these normal traits (eg, have you even felt schadenfreud?) reach some threshold level, we label them.
Let those without sin or sinful thoughts cast the first stone.
“Eighty to 90 percent of people who use crack and methamphetamine don’t get addicted,” said Dr. Hart, an associate professor of psychology. “And the small number who do become addicted are nothing like the popular caricatures.”
Boys in all ethnic groups and social classes are far less likely than their sisters to feel connected to school, to earn good grades, or to have high academic aspirations. A recent working paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research documents a remarkable trend among high-achieving students: In the 1980s, nearly the same number of top male and female high school students said they planned to pursue a postgraduate degree (13 percent of boys and 15 percent of girls). By the 2000s, 27 percent of girls expressed that ambition, compared with 16 percent of boys. During the same period, the gap between girls and boys earning mostly A’s nearly doubled—from three to five percentage points.
This gap in education engagement has dire economic consequences for boys.
As I have said before, all boys have some ADD. The best male students have some OCD to compensate.
The really curious thing about minds and brains is that the truth about them lies not somewhere in the middle but simultaneously on both extremes. We know already that the wet bits of the brain change the moods of the mind: that’s why a lot of champagne gets sold on Valentine’s Day. On the other hand, if the mind were not a high-level symbol-managing device, flower sales would not rise on Valentine’s Day, too. Philosophy may someday dissolve into psychology and psychology into neurology, but since the lesson of neuro is that thoughts change brains as much as brains thoughts, the reduction may not reduce much that matters. As Montaigne wrote, we are always double in ourselves. Or, as they say on the Enterprise, it takes all kinds to run a starship.
The constant fuss about prescribed pain meds is puzzling to me. To Cut Abuse, F.D.A. Is Altering Painkiller Label Rules. I believe that pain relief is one of the best things doctors have to offer the suffering, so I believe in generous opioid use when needed.
Here's what I have learned, over time:
- Abusers of precribed narcotics are a trivial social problem - Habit-forming opioids can make a lot of people functional - The biggest social problems with narcotics are their illegality - Addiction is a psycho-social-spiritual challenge for the individual
