Greetings,
The argument over what constitutes insanity derives, I feel, from a misunderstanding.
Derrick writes: Geoff states that it is very hard to define the
difference between the sane and the insane. In real clinical practice
this is not the case. ........sanity or otherwise is determined by
standardised tests. These are laid out by strict guidelines in
'the book' (DSM IV....a standards manual). It is on the basis of
these standardised, normalised tests that individuals are deemed
legally sane or not.
This is simply a statement of fact. It IS the legal situation that this is how individuals are
DEEMED sane or not. Whether they 'are' sane or not depends entirely what one means by sane and if
anyone wants to posit another definition of the term, with differing truth conditions applicable to
it, then let them do so and let them explain why their definition is more useful than that of the
DSM IV. Pirsig, IMO, did this, in general terms, very well. Thus when David writes this:
David: Derrick, please try to hear this - I'm likely to offend, but
that's not my intent. Your (seeming) blind faith in the Gospel
according to the DSM scares me. "Sanity is determined by standardised
tests?" Yikes. No, it's not. The whole Sane/Insane split is
arbitrary. How could you have read Pirsig's books and not gotten
that? Sanity is culturally defined. It's just one more way to
seperate "them" from "us" - you from me. Just one more dualistic
split.
I do not see a bone of contention. Sanity IS determined by standardised tests and, yes, those tests
ARE culturally defined. This is not a contradiction. Derrick was very clear in his posting that this
is the case and unless one wants to argue that sanity (in our respective cultures and legal systems)
isn't determined by standardised tests, then it is impossible to take issue. The fact is that those
respective cultures and legal systems do determine sanity by standardised tests and so there is no
argument. Derrick himself made it clear that this is not necessarily the best way of doing it. The
argument so far boils down to this.
1) Our societies have strict systems for determining sanity.
2) They may or may not be the best systems.
Can anyone disagree with that?
As to the argument (which is a different argument) about whether the criteria used are the best, I
confess that I don't have sufficient knowledge to offer a valuable opinion. On the whole I am happy
to leave such things to the psychologists (and if algae do have proto-emergent mental problems, the
pychologists <grin>) as I don't for one minute accept the very American idea that being highly
educated in a particular field somehow makes one worse at it. That strikes me as the worst type of
anti-intellectual snobbery. If the argument above is taken a step forward to encompass the treatment
and rights of the clinically insane, then my field (ethics) might become pertinent. Whether a
patient can be treated against his will (very rare indeed) or whether a patient should be
manipulated into accepting treatment they would otherwise reject (probably a lot less rare although
very difficult to determine) are extremely problematic ethical issues. I can't see that the MoQ
helps here so will shut up.
-------------------------------------------------
This confused me:
ROGER:
"I guess it is easy to see the philosophical differences between Ayn Rand and
Robert Pirsig."
DMB:
"Roger: You've merged Rand and Pirsig?! Absoultuely outrageous! If you are a
solipsist, what is narcissism? I just can't take the non-sense anymore."
Bizarre conclusion, but not untypical of DMB. Once again it demonstrates the importance of actually
reading properly what others write before unleashing fictitious nonsense - or even non-sense.
Incidentally David, typing unsubscribe_discuss@moq.org at the bottom of the page will not
unsubscribe you. You have to send an e-mail to majordomo@moq.org with unsubscribe moq_discuss in the
body of the e-mail. I would hate to think that you are still here when you don't want to be.
Struan
------------------------------------------
Struan Hellier
< mailto:struan@clara.co.uk>
"All our best activities involve desires which are disciplined and
purified in the process."
(Iris Murdoch)
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:42 BST