One must conclude that every time civilization draws upon itself the adoption of a single, dominant interpretation of the world (i.e., religion or science) that it is indicative of every Dark Age that misleads people into a great confusion out of which arises, in the case of today, the marketing of a new savagery, a new induction into animalism. Today the masses are being socially and psychologically emancipated via technology, and technological social ethics, to accept collective depersonalization (i.e., the collective inhibition of the individual as thinking subject and the subliminal promotion of a kind of lemminghood.) To measure psychological health against the standard economic survival aptitudes of the masses is equivalent to the suggestion that original mankind possesses an archaic mentality and that the “spirit-consuming mindless sloth” (as average civilian) is the typified model of evolutionary competence. Our humanity, our spiritual appreciation of high culture and art, our religiosity, intellectual rigor and brightness, essentially our eccentric fragility and bordering madness is what the animal creature has not completely evolved, for it is yet to be graced by the selective complexity that produces culture, tools and art. It simply is not intellectually rigorous enough, educated enough, mature enough, wise enough or bright enough to accept the reality. An animal or savage is by definition an artless creature; "artless" or "naive" as one would say in French. Creativity and creative complexity makes it's appearance as humans evolve from naivety into an artistic, tool-bearing, inventive species as the savage soon develops into a tribal being that later becomes a civilized being.
Social psychiatry is centered around an infantile philosophy that believes in this "healthy animal" who is intellectually and politically decapacitated from his highest possible process, who lacks critical awareness and psychological complexity, and is economically expendable to the spirit of consumer corporatism. The mental patient on the other hand does not question his condition or his environment as having a causal relation to his symptomology; his mind is something independent of reason and is assumed to be without cause. However irrational he may be, however resistant he may be to outside influences, the origin of his condition should have a reason, a cause, that psychiatry should know if it is to be an exact science. His irrational idealism however prevents him from attributing external causes because, in his self-idealizing narcissistic tendencies, the external environment cannot be pardoned by him or his therapist (lest we assume psychiatry itself is an irrational doctrine as mad as what it treats.) As even a foolish minion with thin intelligence should know by what is immediately obvious that psychiatrists certainly aren't the brightest folks the system employs. Those who take their contemporary social modicum of human health seriously have immature minds with very little awareness of where we are in the world today. Materialists working in any field were at once subordinately responsive to the wisdom of authority, usually the authorities were people called "philosophers". Childish assumptions, totalitarian ’bottom-lines’, and malignant animal-egoism makes it impossible to govern the hopeless minds of today's people. Continental methods of psychoanalysis offer nothing but hope to the hopeless.
According to the praxic philosophy of psychiatry there are no material-environmental causes for delusional psychosis or manic depression, it's genetic abode, it's inheritance, is historically irrelevant and thus intrinsic to mere genetic effects whose causes are "unknown". Industry has proven it's allegiance to the evolutionary genetic theory of neo-Darwinism which places the environment in a position secondary to the acausal or random mutation of the genome. Original Darwinian science, before its rapid degeneration into a serviceable philosophy for techno-science, placed environmental conditions in the first order of Marxian historical materialism (i.e., the environment shapes man and by historical conditions adaptations evolve or deaptations result from stress.) Psychiatry for the most part takes even the most subtle etiologies at face value, the affective behavior and the lore of modern psychotic delusion; the repertoire of outrageous fantasies cited by psychiatrists from the history of medicine: All of this is lumped together whether or not the subject's etiology manifests as an impulse from his own cluttered psyche or, conversely, if he is merely channeling the collective lore of madness and having an experience with the fantastic. Either way the dispirited culture of today's 'humanity' would not be fit to evaluate what constitutes genuine spirituality since for them the progressive state of spirituality could never enter the ranks of liberating the soul from the confines of cultural traditions and ceremonial beliefs no matter how refined they are with inverted psychological babblings and convenient household toilet-training wisdom. Rigor is then to be left to the exact sciences, the logistic ones, that apply reason until all unknown phenomena has been understood and misunderstood subjects are made sensible by being understood. Generalizations of madness prevail in the practice and it is true that the industry itself is inventing more ailments then it can synthesize new antidotes. All within the surely positive faith in absolute materialism does this pill-pushing religion continue to sanction it's affected characterization of normalcy as the standard of correctness: the least fragile mind is the most sociable and therefore the most well received mouthpiece for representing what the people should follow as truth. Likewise the most socially wholesome, mentally sterile, and fantasy-free scientist must be the most psychiatrically competent and therefore his theories should be preferred over others of more radical intelligence.
To classify the eccentric or vigorous personality as having a potential degree in the spectrum of mania pushes the good attention away from the enlighteners as if they had something in common with social undesirables or madmen. But this is exactly what the gross politics of the masses is doing when it takes everything as a general without making rigorous distinctions that can often be so great that the opposite is true or that what one judged was in fact in an entirely different category or simply was not the case at all. The fascist also takes everything as it's fasci, at it's 'face' value -- it's facsimile or outward appearance -- and looks no deeper to the actual causes and hence it condemns itself to disillusionment. Whether beautiful or ugly, benign or authoritative, well-nigh or astute, joyous or without expression; the external appearance of an individual determines his social modus, his conditioned role and status, to his fellow mass. It determines what, within a certain range of necessities of very specific capacities, he can or cannot accomplish in society even if he does or does not wish to do so he is inclined to play his respected role.
Psychological testing, whether by actual trained professionals, or the one's people conduct on eachother every day, are born of the agitated little theories that men of lesser brightness have expounded over the course of the past century or so and this is especially true in psychiatry since it is the latest syndication of scientific psychology. If you are a scientist, or in most cases a scientific technician, conducting a test, or if you are a non-scientist but simply a testy or itinerant individual then what you do is you set up your parameters based on a theory, then, based on your theoretical beliefs, you observe the subject as if it were being tested. The 'test by a pest' scenario cannot result in anything more objective than being a nuisance to the subject who sees through the scandalous test parameters that have been set up around him. His responses are now contaminated by default, the outcome will now be deterministic based on the indirectly influenced information of the observer and the test subject.
No comments:
Post a Comment