Jonathan - our views are compatible with the exception that you
believe insanity to exist and I see it as a social construct, created
by man to help seperate/classify people. There is no such thing as
normal - we all stray from this imaginary "center" - we group people
who are similar to us as normal and those who are different as
abnormal. It is this same basic idea that leads us to sane versus
insane.
Johnathan wrote: The people we normally consider insane are people
who
are completely unable to function under what we consider to be
"normal"
conditions.
David: aha. what WE consider to be "normal" - this is the crux of
my position - it all comes down to what a group of people (either the
majority, or those with the power) decide is normal. If you fall
outside that range (which is arbitrary and human cretaed) - volia -
you are abnormal (and possibly insane) If the majority's opinion
changes (or the power bases shifts) - you might all of the sudden be
considered sane when once you were insane. (The reason for the
DSM/homosexuality example)
Jonathan - you can assure me that "insanity does exist, but
unforunately, I need more than just your assurance. The way I see it,
whether or not you are deemed insane depends ENTIRELY on what is
considered sane by your culture. Period. And if insanity is as
relative a truth as that - how can it "exist"?
Ian wrote: "We hold that all men are equal" This is patently untrue
yet I hold it as a wonderful philosophy.
David writes: The phrase is (if we're thinking of the same one) "We
hold that all men are CREATED equal" - what the man (or woman) does
AFTER being created can certainly affect the equality.
Marco wrote: "Being different isn't bad or wrong, as long as it
doesn't damage someone else's right to be different"
David: Hmmmm...interesting twist. How about "Being different isn't
bad or wrong, as long as it doesn't damage someone else's right to
continue being the same?" (I don't agree with that last phrase, but
more often than not, I think, being different only becomes an issue
when juxtaposed with being the same.) I wear different color hi-tops
regulary. It's amazing the responses I get. Mostly, people respond
warmly with jokes. On occasion though, I get people who actually seem
offended by the fact that I would violate such a basic thing as
wearing matching shoes (I actually had some one see them and then in
an angry tone say "what the f--- is wrong with you? what's your
f---ing problem?" ah....life)
Marco wrote: What's important IMHO in Pirsig's thought is that
"insanity" can be a richness. So we must make all what's possible to
understand and listen to
who's "insane", as maybe he is going to show us a new direction.
David writes: Aha.....my point again - but it seems that society's
attempt to classify certain people as insane/sane actually gets in the
way of listening to what those people have to say. And it's not
"insanity" (IMNSHO) that is the richness, but DIFFERENCE in whatever
shape or color it comes in)
Something to ponder.....It appears that in all of the posts on this
subject - the writers believe there is a "thing" called insanity.
Except for me. Am I insane for not believing in something that all
the other posters believe to be real? Or if I'm right, are the
posters insane for believing in something that doesn't exist? Again I
contend that insanity does not exist. Just differences between
people. But to make life a little easier, we have created labels.
Insanity is just another way of saying "they" are different from
"us."
Shalom
David Lind
Trickster@postmark.net
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