Question on insanity

[PrimaVita]

Two questions,
One: Are you still crazy if you are right?
Two: If you are sane and everyone else is crazy does that mean by default you are crazy?

 

[gigastar]

1) No, that makes me crazy and right.
2) Yes. Not having a phsycological issue is not a phsycological issue in itself.

 

[BGH122]

Slight question here, what mental illness are we referring to? Obviously, it's possible to be both depressed and right, but it's not possible to be paranoid schizophrenic and right in regards to the specific paranoia.

Either way, if your view point is incomprehensible to the society of your day then it'll be viewed as crazy regardless.

 

[steeple]

1) care to explain more?
2) by the view of society, yes.
though noone ever said crazy was bad, mind you...

 

[theheroofaction]

I just think we should all stop pretending to be sane.

 

[ScoopMeister]

Slight question here, what mental illness are we referring to? Obviously, it's possible to be both depressed and right, but it's not possible to be paranoid schizophrenic and right in regards to the specific paranoia.

Why can't you be paranoid and right about your paranoia at the the same time?

 

[Neverhoodian]

"Sanity is for the weak!"

1. It's entirely possible to be right about something even if you're crazy, though the mental process used to reach a conclusion is most likely very different.
2. The concept of sanity is based on societal, cultural and religious norms, so by the common definition of the region a sane person would be regarded as crazy.

Speaking of crazy:

Recaptcha: "fund nalArt"

Sure, I'll fund that type of art, whatever the hell it is.

 

[BGH122]

Slight question here, what mental illness are we referring to? Obviously, it's possible to be both depressed and right, but it's not possible to be paranoid schizophrenic and right in regards to the specific paranoia.

Why can't you be paranoid and right about your paranoia at the the same time?

Part of the clinical characteristics of paranoid schizophrenia is that the paranoia be delusional i.e. false.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Two questions,
One: Are you still crazy if you are right?
Two: If you are sane and everyone else is crazy does that mean by default you are crazy?

2) Yes 1) Often.

 

[ScoopMeister]

Slight question here, what mental illness are we referring to? Obviously, it's possible to be both depressed and right, but it's not possible to be paranoid schizophrenic and right in regards to the specific paranoia.

Why can't you be paranoid and right about your paranoia at the the same time?

Part of the clinical characteristics of paranoid schizophrenia is that the paranoia be delusional i.e. false.

What if they were right by pure coincidence? I'm just sayin', it's possible.

 

[BGH122]

Slight question here, what mental illness are we referring to? Obviously, it's possible to be both depressed and right, but it's not possible to be paranoid schizophrenic and right in regards to the specific paranoia.

Why can't you be paranoid and right about your paranoia at the the same time?

Part of the clinical characteristics of paranoid schizophrenia is that the paranoia be delusional i.e. false.

What if they were right by pure coincidence? I'm just sayin', it's possible.

Good point and this is actually one of the points used against the operational definition of Paranoid Schizophrenia (and part of the reason for the redefinition of schizophrenia in the new DSM).

But, in my mind at least, this is too philosophical for a working operational definition. If we start getting into heavy epistemology and tripartite definitions of truth when we're supposed to be assessing patients then mental health care would grind to a halt.

 

[Communist partisan]

Two questions,
One: Are you still crazy if you are right?
Two: If you are sane and everyone else is crazy does that mean by default you are crazy?

1. You will always be crazy and in the end drown in the insanity while loosing control over right and wrong..

2. It means they are crazy and you need to fight to keep sane.

 

[ScoopMeister]

Slight question here, what mental illness are we referring to? Obviously, it's possible to be both depressed and right, but it's not possible to be paranoid schizophrenic and right in regards to the specific paranoia.

Why can't you be paranoid and right about your paranoia at the the same time?

Part of the clinical characteristics of paranoid schizophrenia is that the paranoia be delusional i.e. false.

What if they were right by pure coincidence? I'm just sayin', it's possible.

Good point and this is actually one of the points used against the operational definition of Paranoid Schizophrenia (and part of the reason for the redefinition of schizophrenia in the new DSM).

But, in my mind at least, this is too philosophical for a working operational definition. If we start getting into heavy epistemology and tripartite definitions of truth when we're supposed to be assessing patients then mental health care would grind to a halt.

Fair enough.

 

[Jonluw]

If Ugh the caveman one day goes over to Bog's cave and says "Me think earth be round", Bog is going to laugh at Ugh, and ask him why he thinks this is. Ugh doesn't have a reason. He just had a funny idea, and decided to believe it, even though the earth appears to be flat from anything else he can examine.

Now here's the thing: Even though Ugh's irrational belief happens to fit with reality, he is still wrong.

There may be a pink unicorn on the back of Pluto, but you'd have to be insane to actually believe it. If there actually turns out years later, that there is a pink unicorn on the back of Pluto, you're still insane.

 

[FalloutJack]

{1} Sometimes, you're crazy like a fox. Even madness can bring truth, or sometimes the truth makes you mad.

{2} No, and the Tick said so, so BACK OFF MAN!

 

[StBishop]

Slight question here, what mental illness are we referring to? Obviously, it's possible to be both depressed and right, but it's not possible to be paranoid schizophrenic and right in regards to the specific paranoia.

Why can't you be paranoid and right about your paranoia at the the same time?

Part of the clinical characteristics of paranoid schizophrenia is that the paranoia be delusional i.e. false.

What if they were right by pure coincidence? I'm just sayin', it's possible.

Good point and this is actually one of the points used against the operational definition of Paranoid Schizophrenia (and part of the reason for the redefinition of schizophrenia in the new DSM).

But, in my mind at least, this is too philosophical for a working operational definition. If we start getting into heavy epistemology and tripartite definitions of truth when we're supposed to be assessing patients then mental health care would grind to a halt.

Suppose that they are a paranoid schizophrenic but are right about something else.
for example they think that everyone is going to get killed by fire and therefore should go left. Everyone should go left, but that's because they will be able to save the life of an injured third party.
They're still right, but for the wrong reason.

If Ugh the caveman one day goes over to Bog's cave and says "Me think earth be round", Bog is going to laugh at Ugh, and ask him why he thinks this is. Ugh doesn't have a reason. He just had a funny idea, and decided to believe it, even though the earth appears to be flat from anything else he can examine.

Now here's the thing: Even though Ugh's irrational belief happens to fit with reality, he is still wrong.

You mean Bog's irrational belief fits but is wrong.
Or Ugh's irrational belief doesn't fit but is correct.

 

[PatSilverFox]

Yes if everyone is wrong and believes they are right then they are and you are not.
It's all a matter of perception.
Society rules that.

 

[BGH122]

Slight question here, what mental illness are we referring to? Obviously, it's possible to be both depressed and right, but it's not possible to be paranoid schizophrenic and right in regards to the specific paranoia.

Why can't you be paranoid and right about your paranoia at the the same time?

Part of the clinical characteristics of paranoid schizophrenia is that the paranoia be delusional i.e. false.

What if they were right by pure coincidence? I'm just sayin', it's possible.

Good point and this is actually one of the points used against the operational definition of Paranoid Schizophrenia (and part of the reason for the redefinition of schizophrenia in the new DSM).

But, in my mind at least, this is too philosophical for a working operational definition. If we start getting into heavy epistemology and tripartite definitions of truth when we're supposed to be assessing patients then mental health care would grind to a halt.

Fair enough.

I do agree with you however. I actually raised that point to my psychopathology teacher and she basically gave the reply I gave. But for a more philosophically workable definition I'd argue that it's justification that's important, rather than truth value since knowledge requires these three points:

* x must believe y
* x must be sufficiently justified in believing y
* Y must be true

and it's the second that paranoid schizophrenics typically lack.

Slight question here, what mental illness are we referring to? Obviously, it's possible to be both depressed and right, but it's not possible to be paranoid schizophrenic and right in regards to the specific paranoia.

Why can't you be paranoid and right about your paranoia at the the same time?

Part of the clinical characteristics of paranoid schizophrenia is that the paranoia be delusional i.e. false.

What if they were right by pure coincidence? I'm just sayin', it's possible.

Good point and this is actually one of the points used against the operational definition of Paranoid Schizophrenia (and part of the reason for the redefinition of schizophrenia in the new DSM).

But, in my mind at least, this is too philosophical for a working operational definition. If we start getting into heavy epistemology and tripartite definitions of truth when we're supposed to be assessing patients then mental health care would grind to a halt.

Suppose that they are a paranoid schizophrenic but are right about something else.
for example they think that everyone is going to get killed by fire and therefore should go left. Everyone should go left, but that's because they will be able to save the life of an injured third party.
They're still right, but for the wrong reason.

Another good criticism and exemplifying the reason I argue that justification is more important than truth value.

 

[PrimaVita]

If Ugh the caveman one day goes over to Bog's cave and says "Me think earth be round", Bog is going to laugh at Ugh, and ask him why he thinks this is. Ugh doesn't have a reason. He just had a funny idea, and decided to believe it, even though the earth appears to be flat from anything else he can examine.

Now here's the thing: Even though Ugh's irrational belief happens to fit with reality, he is still wrong.

There may be a pink unicorn on the back of Pluto, but you'd have to be insane to actually believe it. If there actually turns out years later, that there is a pink unicorn on the back of Pluto, you're still insane.

Why?

Even with some facts? SO scientists are right and insane?
Its creepy how horribly entertaining this really is.