Customer Discussions > politics discussion forum

The implications of abolishing psychiatry


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 26-50 of 119 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on 2 Mar 2013 21:18:25 GMT
'The fount knows...but doesn't know...there is evidence and there is evidence....look into yourself...don't ask me to justify my inconsistency'

Or something like that

In reply to an earlier post on 2 Mar 2013 21:31:08 GMT
Ian says:
Anthony, you're too good at this.

Simon, you can leave the forum; we don't need you any more.

Posted on 3 Mar 2013 01:46:15 GMT
wee says:
Those of you wishing to abolish psychiatry clearly have little experience of a loved one suffering with a mental illness. Psychiatrists might not always get it right, but then neither do other branches of medicine, don't you be under any illusions that they do. So let's just get rid of all of them. Its akin to those who blow up animal testing facilities that research new medications. Controversial view maybe but I don't see any of them putting themselves forward for a bit of LD50 dosing. Can't be doing with these "I don't agree with it so let's get rid of it for all" people. They'd be the first ones to complain if and when... Oh and I'm a psychiatrist so perhaps I'm biased.

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Mar 2013 02:13:03 GMT
light says:
I hope your'e ok. I think it's important for people to talk out their problems, if someone has a good friend to talk to they really don't need psychiatrists unless they have a chemical imbalance that meds can try to correct.

It's important to clear one's consciousness from shame and guilt this will help with sleeping better, lowering stress which leads to better health in general.

take care light

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Mar 2013 04:56:37 GMT
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Mar 2013 04:58:00 GMT
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Mar 2013 07:28:28 GMT
kraka says:
Simon "THE FOUNT" Boyd, hi

You say, "The fount "promotes" nothing, the fount is a 'seeker of near truth'.."

I'm a little mystified and amused by your choice of terminology..'seeker of near truth'...
My understanding is that truth is truth, all else is therefor false, getting a *near truth* falls short of truth therefor remains false and truth is not attained. Seeking such a thing although amusing seems pointless. May be you are having fun, evading the truth by ....'almost lying'...

Posted on 3 Mar 2013 08:13:09 GMT
Last edited by the author on 3 Mar 2013 08:34:34 GMT
S.R.J says:
Psychiatry................I suspect there are a many myths about what psychiatric/mental health services do, first thing, there is no doubt it is primarily a medically led service, but the service provision is obviously a heck of a lot more than shoving meds down people. It covers a huge array of disciplines, but most people seem to focus on the role of the psychiatrist. But starting with the basics, there are many people who for a multitude of reasons, lose the will to continue living, and in fact are actively pursuing their demise, the hospital environment may or may not provide a therapeutic place of recovery (it often depends on the individual), but there is no doubt it keeps many many people safe until they recover from thoughts of self harm...................just realised I could write pages and pages.................worry not I wont, well not just yet. Anyway, from the standpoint of risk alone, it provides the security many need at some point in their lives...more later.
S.R.J

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Mar 2013 08:16:10 GMT
Last edited by the author on 3 Mar 2013 08:17:02 GMT
kraka...please explain how something, anything can be 'a', or, 'the' truth? Please give examples.

I await your reply with interest.

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Mar 2013 08:42:38 GMT
Permit me to save you the bother kraka: 'Grass is green, 2+2 = 4, I am wearing my red shirt, ' Do you need any more examples? How can they be truths? By stating what is the case rather than what is not the case.

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Mar 2013 08:47:43 GMT
Tony..oh dear...is grass "green" to a bat?

2 + 2 what = 4?

You are wearing a red shirt...red in what sense...?...is it red to a blind person?

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Mar 2013 09:03:57 GMT
Is it green to a bat? A bat can't see, but if it could it would see that it was green. That is because it is green. (a secondary quality of course, but that doesn't make it any less true). Likewise to the blind person.
You can't see my shirt, does that mean it isn't true that it's red? What have you got to do with it? When you die things will remain true or false. Likewise with me, the bat and the poor blind man. Just because someone or everyone or a bat doesn't know that something is true does not make it any less true.

2+2=4, this is true mathematical formula, as opposed to 2+2=5. Not 2+2 what, no what, we are talking number. If there were no 'whats' and no one to know it it would still be 4. Knowing this is called knowing how to do mathematics.

Why do you think they are not true?

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Mar 2013 09:11:08 GMT
'...red in what sense...?...' oh dear.

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Mar 2013 09:15:12 GMT
Ian says:
Grass is green regardless of who or what is observing it. Green is a wavelength of light which grass reflects; whether a bat can see this wavelength (all bats can see), distinguish it from other wavelengths (bats have poor colour vision) or choose to call it 'green' is irrelevant.

Is it 'green' to a Frenchman (or is is vert)? Is it green to a colourblind man? Neither changes the nature of green, grass is still green (and vert).

"2 + 2 what = 4?" Most things, so it's a lot of truths.

The shirt, continues to be red even when there is a blind person in the same room. Unless of course it isn't really red but a combination of other colours which fool human eyes into thinking it is reflecting red light.

You inability to see a truth doesn't make it any less true. Luckily for the rest of us, because you couldn't see a truth if I poked you in the eye with it.

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Mar 2013 09:15:14 GMT
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Mar 2013 09:17:35 GMT
Are you sure?

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Mar 2013 09:18:23 GMT
But what you say can't be true then. That's ok I didn't think it was.

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Mar 2013 09:19:09 GMT
Ian says:
"your nervous system creates the green" Yours might but green is wavelengths of 500-540nm which can be detected and measured by devices other than the human eye.

(one of) your (many) problem(s) is that the only evidence you are willing to believe is your own experience which is as limited as any one individual's must be and coloured by your own senses.

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Mar 2013 09:20:08 GMT
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Mar 2013 09:21:38 GMT
Sorry about my rather primitive grasp of language. My 'nervous system creates the green' I love this. And how pray tell do we know what the nervous system does?

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Mar 2013 09:27:53 GMT
"Pray tell"...I know (99.9% of the time) what my nervous system does...what your nervous system does Tony, I have no idea.

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Mar 2013 09:28:36 GMT
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Mar 2013 09:34:36 GMT
You know!!? But how can this be? There is no truth? You know what is not true? Isn't it your nervous system that is creating this so-called 'knowledge.'?

You must be right I don't understand language, at least not yours. Of course, like everyone else who has no scientific knowledge of the nervous system, I have no idea what mine does (other than the kind of vague beliefs one has about these things). But I know that grass is green.....

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Mar 2013 09:40:08 GMT
kraka says:
Simon "THE FOUNT" Boyd hi

Simon it would have been more curteous of you to answer my question with an answer instead of a question, or openly admit you can't answer.

However i will address your question. (as best i can)
My understanding is that there are two kinds of truth
The first...the *Truth*, God, absolute. the everlasting unchanging Truth. Truth of a Spiritual nature.
Second..transient truths, these are the empirical truths of the physical world, considered factual until proven otherwise.
I suppose many people hold also to a personal *home spun* kind of truth.

Many seek the first, which is where you get the term *seeker of Truth*
Everybody has knowledge of the second either drawn from experience and/or learning.

Now would you kindly answer the question i put to you?

Cheers..........................................................kraka

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Mar 2013 10:02:41 GMT
Where is the question?...........this is what you typed.

Simon "THE FOUNT" Boyd, hi

You say, "The fount "promotes" nothing, the fount is a 'seeker of near truth'.."

I'm a little mystified and amused by your choice of terminology..'seeker of near truth'...
My understanding is that truth is truth, all else is therefor false, getting a *near truth* falls short of truth therefor remains false and truth is not attained. Seeking such a thing although amusing seems pointless. May be you are having fun, evading the truth by ....'almost lying'...
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


ARRAY(0xa7210804)
 

This discussion

Discussion in:  politics discussion forum
Participants:  23
Total posts:  119
Initial post:  2 Mar 2013
Latest post:  26 Jun 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 2 customers

Search Customer Discussions