What is madness?

Madness is a deviance from dogmas,and it is a a pestilence made ex nihilo.It is like a mixture inside everyone's mind.

I would consider madness to be the inability to tell the difference from the world inside one's mind with the physical world. Or to think that actions in one's mind can result in changes in the physical world?

What is madness , does it describe free will or the lack of it.Madness by certain posters would describe the ultimate in free will.

"'Madness' is knowing that 'free-will/choice' is impossible.
'Insanity' is believing in it." - Book of Fudd

Insanity is believing your right..

nameless said madness is when one's thoughts are outwith the majority thoughts. I think in terms of practical definition that this is scarily true. The definition of delusion is that it is '....outwith cultural norms'.

The reality is though, when we start to compare complex thought patterns we are all less than sane. Comparison leads to inaccuracy, and the current trend in over-diagnosis. When was the last time you saw a troubled genius...I would say, apart from Stephen Hamwkins, there hasnot been a popular scientist since the use of anti-madness drugs began about 50 years ago. (And Dawkins does not count)

Embrace Diversity

How do you know that the mad bloke walking down the street talking to himself is not actually talking to someone else on the other side of the world who's talking to himself too. Sorry guys just a joke of mine.

I think definitions of "madness" that rely on some sort of detachment from "reality" miss an important point, and that is for a person who we might label "mad" whatever they are experiencing is real to them.

First, those are not my words. Please attribute correctly.
Second, look up irony/sarcasm, as that was the context.
And it is true. There are many truths.

If you want to meditate and comment on something that I have posted of depth and value (rather than simple humor), feel free to try this one;

"'Madness' is knowing that 'free-will/choice' is impossible.
'Insanity' is believing in it." - Book of Fudd

Thank you for playing...

Do you believe that you are right?
(sorry, had no choice..)

No, i believe the truth is for those think its a fact.

Madness is when the ego fails to interpret the empirical distinctions/relations between itself and its objective surroundings in a manner that is coherent/consistent with the nature of the social contracts in which the subjective agent (ego) is engaged.

Whatever... piss up a tree next time mr Rhino, definately not down your leg. Ha

Madness is uncontrollably fun and terrible and all encompassingly strange. It gets into trouble and into fun times.

Finally there's a topic about which I know something and I can't think of anything to say except zsdflukghzxd;ilfsn;.gfdhxbn.svkg8oxf durhv7dfsvs,ydnd.seci,mdynrtgnl,eglmf.redrned.ejrm c.

That must be the way I feel. In fact it could be loosely translated but not now.

Madness is in my opinon when someone's behaviour is viewed to be significantly different from the typical behaviour that is found in there culture/society. Throughout History people have been defined 'mad' for behaviour that ran against the typical social norm's.

Is this your own phrase or is it borrowed. Crisp; I like it. By ego you mean self? Freuds view is disagreeble.
It fits with the psych term: ideas of reference. Your definition is useful in such a situation too. Acknowledge the seperation between, for example, the inferred and the reality. That one's interpretation is goverend by self. I like it. Something missing, I feel

Personal View:
Madness in my words would simply be described as a living being who has gone far out of the ring from a society in terms of point-of-view. If the society in majority has agreed that something rational such as two plus two is four, but the being who has decided that two plus two is not four, but indeed it is twenty-three. Therefore the being's views or thoughts on that particular would be declared "mad" or "insane", and most likely all of this being's ideas would be put into the trash pile labeled "Madness". Once such a thing has been decided, the being would be possibly declared "insane" itself. This does not only work for ideas, but can be put into other situations such as ethics. Some situations it does not fit, which you can read below.

Of course if you were to apply such a definition of this word into any topic such as religion, then whichever religion has the most people on their side the rest of us would be labeled mad, but that is not how my definition goes. Topics such as religion to me are just a beings idea who has decided to use this theory to help them give themselves will so that they are constantly under pressure to do the right thing, and if they do the wrong thing then they will be punished; which is the beings driving force. For those that do not wish to have religion probably just wish to be categorized individually, wish to stand out, have their own moral views, refuse to believe in something that cannot one-hundred percent be proven, do not wish to believe in something that they did not come up with, etc; there are many possible reasons.


Global/Society View:
I obviously cannot describe the view of this word by every being in the world simply due to the fact that I am not a supreme being that knows every being's point of view on the definition. Feel free to survey everyone though, maybe that will get you somewhere.

:a-thought:
For the most part it's just something lawyers use to try and get their clients who are in full control of themselves a lesser sentence.

Borderline madness is much more problematic... it makes one insane.

Insanity is never something you want to be, ever, for the most part when people see someone insane they feel jealous that those people do not have to bear the burden of society or reality, but it's very much different for those who may have been insane and no longer think like an insane person. You see Insane people probably know to some degree that they might be or are insane so they envy the sane people who have one reality and one society and who can control themselves.

OR rather this is what I believe, I might have gotten borderline insanity mixed up a bit. Yes for the last paragraph make it borderline insanity.

A title and attribute given from society to someone who does not accept social conventions and conditioning: running smeared with butter in the midst of the city - have a try. You could be betrayed by your own mind: kicking your face without your will, in other words, not controlling oneself. It could be an illness as well. It could even be a choice. It could manifest in a bird that slams into a glass: I would call that madness.
Madness could be so many things and so many manifestation: without it I would loose my identity.

Madness is only ever a term applied to other people, it is a description of external behaviour first and foremost. It is a term that we are familiar with from an early age at least if we are made to attend a public education institution, whereby we are taught what is acceptable behaviour, then it almost certainly stays with us unless we make an active choice to reject this label. It has ambiguous connections to governing peoples as it infers that a madman is a risk to society, and thus should be made to change if he is enjoy the benefits of being part of society. Of course the exact attributes of a madman are subject to cultural differentiation and as such the term remains ambiguous.

I know exactly what madness is becuase I have been mad, psychotic mania in fact

Madness is just losing touch with what the majority think is reality