What is Insanity? Are we all Insane?

Insanity is a colloquial word. Not a clinical word (though it once was). So if I give you how we in medicine think of mental illness, it doesn't really answer a question about insanity. You may mean something entirely different.

Mental illnesses are a heterogeneous group of conditions, including those with disordered affect (like depression, bipolar, and anxiety), disordered thought (like schizophrenia), disordered personality (like borderline personality, obsessive-compulsive disorder), eating disorders, substance use, learning disabilities, dementia, and many others.

What makes them illnesses is that they interfere with people's normal functioning in life. This can't be perfectly defined and is somewhat case-by-case, but if people are overwhelmed with symptoms, they can't take care of themselves, they underachieve in work / school / relationships, etc, that is what is meant by interference with normal functioning.

I'm just not so sure about normal being a useful measure. Rather, I'm worried that the use of normal, if often useful, can also be dangerous. I mean, I'm certainly not normal, and in many cases I do not function normally. Maybe I'm insane (given the colloquial use) but I'm not clinically ill... well, I hope not, anyway.

Or is my concern that this sort of judgment might be heavily influenced by a doctor's personal views regarding lifestyle completely unfounded? If I recall correctly, homosexuality was once thought to be such an illness...

It's not a "measure". Patients tell you when they can't live what they consider a normal life; and if the patient cannot tell you, you can often as a clinician glean when that's the case. I took care of a schizophrenic patient once who kept getting fired from his jobs because the crows in the parking lot were saying nasty things to him and he had to keep running out to throw things at them. I've taken care of god knows how many people who are unable to take even the most basic medical care of themselves because of disabling depression. I've taken care of suicide attempts, severe eating disorders, severe dementia, etc. And you see the degree to which this is affecting their lives.

If you want more info about how mental illnesses are strictly defined, you need to pick up a copy of the DSM-IV-TR, which is the canonical diagnostic manual for psychiatry. Given that there is no truly objective test for psychiatric illnesses, i.e. no blood test or biopsy or MRI or EEG that gives you a diagnosis, a great deal of research has gone into defining and describing them. This has a lot of clinical importance, because it guides therapy.

Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thankfully medicine continues to revise itself as we learn more.

So I shouldn't worry that some redneck whack-job is going to diagnose me with a mental disorder because he doesn't like my Grateful Dead t-shirt?

I think Grateful Dead t-shirt wearers and redneck whack-jobs can both be found in the DSM-IV-TR.

... to folks other than those on this forum, philosophers are a pretty odd bunch - if not downright insane ... is there an entry in the DSM-IV-TR for that, too? ...

Aedes, you seem to know the field and that is why I am addressing your post. The following is my insight. Unorthodox to say the least. But I think it fits the parameters you have outlined. It's a bit out there and I would like your comments. Thanks

Insanity, whew. Not even the doctors can answer that one. All we know, is how to provide a "chemical prison" for those who can't rationalize this reality, in my humble opinion. I honestly think there are some who do not have they ability to adapt to this reality and what is needed to be a "social" person. They have the uncanny ability to see through the facades and phoniness of so many who seem to have no problem "adapting". "The end justifies the means" makes no sense to them. So they "create" their own reality away from what they are incapable of understanding and that is where they live.

Anyone, IMO, who cannot adapt will, I assume, take it personally in that they feel something is wrong with them, when in truth, there is something very "right" with them. They put their minds in "high gear" to enable them to alter themselves so they will "fit" and this is when they begin to lose touch and find solace in what their mind provides for them. They escape so to speak, IMO.

The mind, I think, can provide man with a euphoria beyond imagination, and it also can create a hell beyond belief. The more we consciously "ask" it the more it will effort to fulfill our wishes based on what "it" knows. The problem is it knows a lot more than we think it does. Now this is just my thinking out loud and, if you will pardon me, I am going to "get out there" of a second. Here goes.

I, with all my soul, believe we are "eternal" entities. All that we have experienced is a part of that "universal mind" we refer to as God. Much of our past is erased from our "consciousness", leaving what is compatible with the evolution of the universe and it's continuum intact to be accessed through out our lives. What we do not consciously know is for our benefit and protection and not meant to be accessed. The hell of it is the mind "can" access it, if forced to.

The mind "at ease" will automatically access what we need, to maintain that eternal journey as it will also enable the individual to latch on to that "new" information we are introduced to that will be compatible with what we have learned. Nothing else will "stick" unless we "make" it stick. Here is where all our problems come from. We are force to make "stuff stick" we should not have to in order to survive and that "disrupts" that compatibility, or throws a "monkey wrench" into the mix.

All that we have ever experienced is in there, the good, the bad and the ugly. We carry "the good" with us through our this journey and unless the mind is forced the bad and the ugly are not accessible. Only when the mind is stressed will it reach into "Pandora's box" (our past) in order to alleviate that stress. Exactly what it is capable of is beyond understanding. But we want to keep pandora's box closed. Nothing good can come from it. Much of what we learn through our educational process comes from "force" in an effort to maintain the status quo and that is not a good thing considering the chaos we find ourselves.

In my humble opinion, we will never understand the mind. All we can do is alleviate the stress upon it. Hard to imagine in the world we live in. You want to see insanity, eliminate the trillion dollars worth of drugs we take every year and watch what happens.

It is understandable why we are in the shape we are in. Well it is to me anyway. Explaining it in such a way that will make it fit into what most have been conditioned to think is where it becomes difficult. One day our bodies will become immune to the drugs we are taking. It is inevitable. I honestly think that is what science is all about, to keep us alive until we begin to understand the truth. It is not my intent to "convince" you to believe what I am saying because it is not empirically possible to do that. Much is just common sense and deductive reasoning on my part. I have no idea of where anyone is on the "eternity meter" and that makes it oh so difficult.

So in answer to this inquiry, what is insanity. It is an escape people are force to choose simply because they do not have what it takes to "deal" with this reality we have created. In all honesty they who are deemed insane are doing just fine in their own minds, it is we, the "sane" who have to "put up with them" and that is our burden to bear.

In the move "NEXT OF KIN" Patrick Swayze's character made a statement, and I am paraphrasing, "..you ain't seen trouble yet; but it's a comin'". Perhaps it is time for a wake up call. I personally, have lost a most beautiful daughter to her mind. She suffer's from a mental disorder called "Schizo-effective personality disorder" and the mental health community hasn't a clue as to how to treat it. I lost one of the most beautiful human beings this Earth has ever seen. This reality, along with my inability to know what a true gift she was, took her, chewed her up and spit her out.
For what it's worth, my two cents.

William

"Sanity is a vague term, and also a legal term in which I completely denounce its use."

If one confines sanity to its proper, legal definition, it is precise and "objective" in its application, as there are clear rules. When used colloquially to include a whole and complex range of mental "disorders" better described by clinical definitions, it leads necessarily to confusion because of its vague use.

Ahh....:brickwall: I was under the assumption that the legal definition was in context of disorders.

Ok, I'm so sure you're ahead of me on this one so I'll just see that we are on the same page here. As William gets at (though I don't necessarily agree with the way it was notioned), somebody is not deemed insane because they do not conform to the social norms.

So, in order to define insanity the way you see it Aedes, we have to assume that what is logical is also not a relative term. What you suppose Aedes, requires that we people are ideally meant to adhere to a logical standards, a normative. If this is true then go ahead and flat out say it, but I just don't see it as so.

I believe that we can deviate from what we'd deem ideal mental conditions; disorders, illnesses. But deeming somebody insane just doesn't fit that narrow picture.

If there is a logical ideal, then what defines this? It obviously cannot be moral rightness otherwise my original post would make sense, which it must've not. So what else could define this generally speaking. Virtue? (again, relative term)

Sanity seems to be spoken of the person's state of being, and justice the state of the actions (reactions, whatever).

I do realize that insanity is only used in pleaing insanity. I have experience with "family situations" and know that clinically speaking people are classified by disorders or illnesses like Aedes provided.

Also, could anyone here refute the idea that an insane action is depicted as emotion (or perhaps other cognitive processes) trumping the ability to rationalize the situation?

... if I hear voices in my head telling me to kill my neighbor and I want the voices to stop, isn't it rational for me to kill my neighbor? ... or maybe I will rationalize that I would hate prison time more than putting up with the voices in my head and so decide not to kill my neighbor - does that make me any less insane? ...

It seems logically plausible to associate one's own reactions to the reality. However, I think people are logically aware of the rationale of the actions they could potentially do. It's just that the rationality gets trumped by something.

One of my brothers will at times believe that all the food that is given to him is poisoned, and on a normal basis he will believe that the food is absolutely fine. I ask him, "Well, how can you believe that the food is poisoned when you must surely know it is not, if you can believe it on a normal basis?"

And he replies, " Oh I know that the food is not poisoned now, and I knew then but it doesn't matter when I'm having an episode. I can't think straight. I can not seem to think the fact that my food is fine"

So I wonder if beliefs are truly determined by rationale/logical/critical thought, when it seems to me there must be an emotional or moreso irrational (and I don't mean that negatively) implication deciding the belief.

So I wonder, how can any of us be inherently sane if our actions may not be rationally determined anyways. Or, I am also supposing that an insane action is based on perception with trumped rationale. No person can be considered insane, because every reaction is based on a different chemical situation in the body, let alone a different reality situation.

... I think one of the issues here is that there may be as many ways of being insane as there are ways of experiencing the world ... it may be your rationality that's not working right; it may be your perception of facts that's not working right; it may be ... ... ...

Yes, there is. It just might not be the same entry for every one though.

I think the insanity that everyone has to worry about is the inability to relate, and at its worse, it is present in all premeditated murders, and all acts of violence... The young almost all have that form of insanity, but so do rich people, military men, and politicians... We all put ourselves first, but not all of us put everyone else in the street, or in a grave -to have our satisfaction...All the people running around with pants too long or short, or stripped naked in the dead of winter don't worry me much... But if you can cause or witness pain, or even think of it long, then I am afraid of you...All of you, Ideologues and Christians included... Get some help even if the world thinks you're normal because you are all alike... We are supposed to care, and God knows I turn off to people's pain, but only out of self defense, and I try to not forget to turn my sensitivity on again...

INTRO: After long, contemplative consideration of this topic's question I've enjoyed an Epiphany I'd very much like to share. Please excuse the length of this post, but understand that it comes as a result of many hours of research, toiling and consultation with the greatest minds in the world. In consideration of such, I should not want to inflict the injustice of sacrificing content for brevity.

QUESTION: "What is Insanity? Are we all Insane?"

ANSWER: No


Thanks

I would like to address this subject.
First criminal insanity is a defense and there are lot of legal defenses but these defenses are all built around the judgement and punishment of an action. The evidence with regard to the state of mind of the actor is only pertinent with regard to the specific act.
Generally, though your mind can be condemned by the state via a mental institution. In Georgia and Tennessee, it is the verdict of three doctors. In these states, adult can be held and evaluated for 3 days before verdict. Children can be held for 40 days. In Tennessee, the grounds are whether the person will hurt himself or others. This is strangely similar to the probation. To qualify for probation you must be a threat to society. In Georgia there were two conditions that might qualify you for commitment - the first was basically an inability to care for yourself - the second was homicidal or suicidal tendencies. The funny thing this is not something that you can argue rationally. They don't appreciate rational ideas in a philosophical ideas. They look at you as a material thing to experiment on and judge you on your behavior solely as behavior. So if you find yourself looked up the most important thing is to behave as calmly and socially acceptable no matter what.
Many of the drugs given are to to incapacitate the mind so that the patient acts acceptable. In the past this usually meant shaking, twitching, and drooling in a catonic state. Still today the drugs are becoming a little less destructive. However it is not uncommon to see the side effect of death on the drugs they have forcefully injected me.
There are of course a minority of political prisoners. A lot of animals have a fight or flight mentality. The majority of these so called doctors will condemn you if you show signs of these natural behavior and do not behave in a way they judge as acceptable not natural or normal. Therefore it is a very clock work orange type of thing now a days.
It would be like if you gave snake oil salesmen Nazi power and they let you go when you acted "right"
I have been through it a lot. I won a writ of Habeus Corpus once, judged sane on a split decision once. In the end I gave up. Because once you admit to having "accepted in patient mental treatment" it is on your medical record and will haunt you.
In tennesee you must be triaged at a normal medical hospital which is kind of ironic because once you have a "behavioral disorder" you usually no longer qualify for medical treatment. In georgia I could not even get aspirin or my glasses.
So by far the most people I have seen being commited are people who did behave appriopriately as a patient in a medical hospital and get sent to a mental institution for a "behavioral evaluation" because the given body was not compling with the doctor. The first time I went because I wanted to leave for a cigarette

The medical establishment does not really seem to value the dimension of tangible ideas.

And then what is socially acceptable in our society's mindset today? It seems to be about being a part of the norm; being cool or a loser. Condemning oneself to a social atmosphere because it is easier and perceivably logical does not make it right.

That's not at all what I said nor what I meant, so I can't really respond to all you've written that follows.

The only assumption is that in general, people need a legitimate means to get money (i.e. work), they need a certain amount of self care (nutrition, personal hygiene, shelter, etc), they have interpersonal relationships, etc.

And it happens that people who are unable to achieve these things -- people who can't hold a job, people who destroy their relationships, people who can't take basic care of themselves -- usually don't do so by choice. They do so because of grossly eccentric behaviors, emotional states, and thought processes.

I've met perfectly sane vagabonds before. I was hiking near the Blue Ridge Parkway last year and I met this strange old guy who said that he was independently wealthy and just spent all his time travelling around the country in an RV and had been doing it for years. He smelled like ass and he was bizarre, but eccentricity isn't the same as mental illness.