U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Psychology
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-10-2019, 10:39 AM
 
Location: In my skin
9,065 posts, read 14,373,460 times
Reputation: 8916

Advertisements

With all the mass shootings, there is endless discussion on mental illness.

I regularly hear/read things like "hatred is a choice" and these people made "conscious decisions" to kill others, so they aren't mentally ill.

Except hatred is not an action. It's an emotion and a response to an action and a cause of action.

Indoctrination serves to create a reality that effects a desired outcome. Ideology doesn't require an epistemic basis so that reality need not be real. And while many people function under these belief systems, cults are also born of them. Extremists are the product of their ideologies, as is their hatred.

As such, wouldn't the belief in these ideologies qualify as a mental illness? Wouldn't hatred for people because of their immutable characteristics (skin color, sexual orientation, ethnicity), for example, be a symptom?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-10-2019, 10:55 AM
 
Location: Germany
221 posts, read 39,317 times
Reputation: 430
Quote:
Originally Posted by PassTheChocolate View Post
With all the mass shootings, there is endless discussion on mental illness.

I regularly hear/read things like "hatred is a choice" and these people made "conscious decisions" to kill others, so they aren't mentally ill.

Except hatred is not an action. It's an emotion and a response to an action and a cause of action.

Indoctrination serves to create a reality that effects a desired outcome. Ideology doesn't require an epistemic basis so that reality need not be real. And while many people function under these belief systems, cults are also born of them. Extremists are the product of their ideologies, as is their hatred.

As such, wouldn't the belief in these ideologies qualify as a mental illness? Wouldn't hatred for people because of their immutable characteristics (skin color, sexual orientation, ethnicity), for example, be a symptom?
The problem is that when we speak of mental illness there is no clearly defined quantification. The extremely clear cases such as schizophrenia are widely accepted as a mental illness, but a murderer for example can either pass as a mentally ill person, or a person that is "bad" and is consciously out to kill people.

I believe that in the future, we will slowly come to the realization that all of these extreme cases, are cases of "broken" people. people that are have mentally contracted a disease - in this case hatred - and are unable to see clearly because of their experience in life so far.

If I was raised by terrorists and didn't have a beacon of hope and love, I too would probably become one. If I am scared for my life, I won't be as resistant to manipulation. If it goes on too long, it will become a part of my reality. And at that point, who is the real me? Is it the terrorist? Is it the scared person? In a way I will have become a twisted being who can't think logically any more. That is in my opinion what mental illness is all about. Being so emotionally scarred that you can't look at your actions objectively.

Of course there are different "amounts" of mental illness. From simply being sad, to severe depression.
Sometimes you can get over a cold without medication. But sometimes your immune system is so devastated that you need help from your environment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-10-2019, 11:33 AM
 
Location: In my skin
9,065 posts, read 14,373,460 times
Reputation: 8916
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gohangr View Post
The problem is that when we speak of mental illness there is no clearly defined quantification. The extremely clear cases such as schizophrenia are widely accepted as a mental illness, but a murderer for example can either pass as a mentally ill person, or a person that is "bad" and is consciously out to kill people.

I believe that in the future, we will slowly come to the realization that all of these extreme cases, are cases of "broken" people. people that are have mentally contracted a disease - in this case hatred - and are unable to see clearly because of their experience in life so far.

If I was raised by terrorists and didn't have a beacon of hope and love, I too would probably become one. If I am scared for my life, I won't be as resistant to manipulation. If it goes on too long, it will become a part of my reality. And at that point, who is the real me? Is it the terrorist? Is it the scared person? In a way I will have become a twisted being who can't think logically any more. That is in my opinion what mental illness is all about. Being so emotionally scarred that you can't look at your actions objectively.

Of course there are different "amounts" of mental illness. From simply being sad, to severe depression.
Sometimes you can get over a cold without medication. But sometimes your immune system is so devastated that you need help from your environment.
Agreed.

Folks do their own quantifying on the basis of their own ideologies, really, while making exceptions for others, even within the psych community.

We are hyper-fixated on personal responsibility and accountability, for example, to the point that we ignore the realities of the human condition. As such, being raised by terrorists should have no influence at all. "You, and only you, are responsible for your actions". It simply isn't true. "You're old enough to know better". The magic number 18 doesn't undo a lifetime of brainwashing.

bin Laden and the Army of God come to mind. They thought they were soldiers for their cause. They believed what they did was right. They knew people would suffer and die, but that was just the reality of their work. It wasn't what they did that made them mentally ill. It was their beliefs.

Good believers will then distance themselves and assert that these people were not "true Christians/Muslims". Allah/God/JC were just the excuse. This suggests that those who believe are not capable of such atrocities. And I get it, who wants to be associated with them? But they would also have to examine their own beliefs. That's not going to be comfortable.

And the powers that be in the field of Psychology also make exceptions for ideology when Christian-based counseling is a thing, in a field of science. So, I'm afraid we may not get there soon enough to avoid more casualties.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-10-2019, 11:38 AM
 
Location: Germany
221 posts, read 39,317 times
Reputation: 430
Quote:
Originally Posted by PassTheChocolate View Post
Agreed.

Folks do their own quantifying on the basis of their own ideologies, really, while making exceptions for others, even within the psych community.

We are hyper-fixated on personal responsibility and accountability, for example, to the point that we ignore the realities of the human condition. As such, being raised by terrorists should have no influence at all. "You, and only you, are responsible for your actions". It simply isn't true. "You're old enough to know better". The magic number 18 doesn't undo a lifetime of brainwashing.

bin Laden and the Army of God come to mind. They thought they were soldiers for their cause. They believed what they did was right. They knew people would suffer and die, but that was just the reality of their work. It wasn't what they did that made them mentally ill. It was their beliefs.

Good believers will then distance themselves and assert that these people were not "true Christians/Muslims". Allah/God/JC were just the excuse. This suggests that those who believe are not capable of such atrocities. And I get it, who wants to be associated with them? But they would also have to examine their own beliefs. That's not going to be comfortable.

And the powers that be in the field of Psychology also make exceptions for ideology when Christian-based counseling is a thing, in a field of science. So, I'm afraid we may not get there soon enough to avoid more casualties.
We will never be able to avoid casualties in this world. We can only do our best to teach people that suffering is not a necessary prerequisite for living. There is such a thing as altruistic love and being selfless. And if hatred is like a disease that spreads, love is an antidote that heals much more effectively than we can even imagine.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-10-2019, 04:27 PM
 
Location: Pennsylvania
505 posts, read 211,200 times
Reputation: 891
It has almost nothing to do with mental illness. It feels like people are blaming mental illness for these things, because they're subconsciously too scared to accept that many of these shooters are relatively stable mentally, but have been convinced the world is a certain way that they have to take action. Many "normal" people are only "normal" because their environment allows it. Strip away their necessities or perceived security/future/hopes/dreams (as is with these shooters), and they will become violent. You are all capable of terrible things, but fortunately we have built a society to provide for our needs so we can act upon our higher, civilized mental functions.

I recently made a massive post (you can see it in my post history, it is a five point list with a yellow hazard sign) on another thread explaining some of the psychological factors in young America today that many older posters just don't understand, and I can copy and paste it here if you would like.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-10-2019, 04:36 PM
 
Location: Germany
221 posts, read 39,317 times
Reputation: 430
Quote:
Originally Posted by sad_hotline View Post
I recently made a massive post (you can see it in my post history, it is a five point list with a yellow hazard sign) on another thread explaining some of the psychological factors in young America today that many older posters just don't understand, and I can copy and paste it here if you would like.
would be nice, since it sounds like it is very relevant.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-10-2019, 04:37 PM
 
Location: Pennsylvania
505 posts, read 211,200 times
Reputation: 891
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gohangr View Post
would be nice, since it sounds like it is very relevant.
Here it is. Forgive its slightly aggressive tone, I was in the midst of a serious argument. Note that it is not all encapsulating in the context of this thread, as I had written it for the context of another thread. It may also come off as very socio-politically biased, but I had argued from a relatively moderate standpoint in the thread, generally speaking. Also note that this is merely my observation, and my observation is inherently limited of course:

BEGIN QUOTE
--------------------

Unfortunately, the problem is far more grave and nebulous beyond work. If you care at all what is actually wrong, consider these points:

1) Men are falling behind. While this has been mostly smokescreened as women "taking the lead" in educational attainment, men are starting to falter and fall behind as boys. Some have suggested this being due to initiatives to boost college-readiness being suited towards girls. Boys fall behind because of this, but if women are succeeding, then everyone is satisfied with the status quo. This might not seem like an issue, until they become adults, and socio-economic standing and educational attainment suddenly control their dating prospects. Men, who have traditionally been the higher achievers and the breadwinners, are suddenly finding the tables turned, and just as many men are not open to the idea of their partner being more financially dominant, so too are many women uninterested in "dating down" to a lesser educated, lesser earning male. This is likely a part of point 3 below.

2) Confusion over manhood. #MeToo has brought to light many disgusting characters, but has also altered what it means to be a man. Many men are now incredibly cautious around women, for fear of being labeled a harasser. I don't know how many insufferable stories I've heard from boomers about how they asked a women out several times or followed her as some display of affection. If you did that now, you would absolutely get the social can. Men, who have been and still are expected to be the gender to "make the move" are suddenly having any mite of male bravado being labeled an offense. Suddenly, many men feel as if they are walking a very thin line.

3) Sex. 28% of young men are sexless, greatly increased from its typical variance of 12-18% since the late 90s. Meanwhile, 18% of young women are sexless, only slightly increased from its typical of variance of 10-15% since the late 90s. This can be due to a variety of factors, such as porn crushing men's drives, men being too cautious (see point 2), men falling behind and being less datable (see point 1), etc. One reason I postulate from my own experiences is online dating. With men now more cautious to act in person (point 2), dating is funneled into the online realm, where people are summarized by looks and brief summaries, rather than their real-life personalities and warmth. Women have a far easier time finding dates (many women's profiles I have seen are absolutely inundated with matches), while men tend to experience radio silence and having few matches. This has given rise to one branch of online hate that has lead to a few mass-casualty events in North America: incels. Incels can have a whole book about them, but basically they are a large sub-culture of extreme self-hatred and misogyny.

4) Loss in national pride. Shifting curriculum in schools have lead to many young Americans being taught extremely critical views on American history. America is now a shame for many young Americans who no longer care for what this country has stood for. In a general survey, only 40% of millennials reported to want to live in a capitalist society, with 46% preferring socialism, 6% preferring communism, and 8% preferring fascism. Mindless do-gooding of previous generations to "right America's wrongs" have created such a hostile environment for any degree of American patriotism to flourish, that it is common to see nothing but negativity and disgust towards America in young people. There is such a supreme focus on injustice and wrong, that many people forget just how good many of us have it. You see this grotesquely in the latest Kaepernick debacle, where he calls the Betsy Ross 13-star flag "racist" without a single educated argument, and Nike pulled their shoes with the flag off their shelves as a result. Politics will only get far more ugly as we see my generation gain power and turn their extremely critical eye on America.

5) Loss of identity. This is the part I expect people over 35 to understand the absolute least about. Many societal standards are rapidly being edited and re-edited month by month. "Toxic masculinity" has become a common theme that young people often cite, referring to either perceived male arrogance/ignorance/inaction/etc. It is as unclear as ever what a man is supposed to be. Likewise, many people are being called out on their race, especially if they are white. I am 'not really that white', so I don't feel this as much, but the constant "call out" of white people as wrongdoers has helped contribute to the rise of the alt-right. This group is even more nebulous than incels, and includes harmless commentators to dedicated, violent fascists. Whiteness has long been the societal norm, and now it is being changed in real time, and much of alt-right propaganda has sought to draw in impressionable young men over the majority-minority shift that will come in the 2040s. In a rapidly changing social climate where whiteness and maleness are often derided, many young men of ALL races, and of the lonely 28%, are reverting to more extreme ideologies to find identity, hope, guidance, and strength.

[Edited out for brevity]

We are entering a potential Weimar Republic scenario. Maybe it can be averted, but maybe it is too late.

-------------------
END QUOTE
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-10-2019, 04:42 PM
 
3,882 posts, read 1,511,905 times
Reputation: 7580
"As such, wouldn't the belief in these ideologies qualify as a mental illness?"
well, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) had
homosexuality as a mental illness until 1973. so, yeah, try another one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-10-2019, 04:48 PM
 
1,144 posts, read 257,294 times
Reputation: 2307
Quote:
Originally Posted by PassTheChocolate View Post
With all the mass shootings, there is endless discussion on mental illness.

I regularly hear/read things like "hatred is a choice" and these people made "conscious decisions" to kill others, so they aren't mentally ill.

Except hatred is not an action. It's an emotion and a response to an action and a cause of action.

Indoctrination serves to create a reality that effects a desired outcome. Ideology doesn't require an epistemic basis so that reality need not be real. And while many people function under these belief systems, cults are also born of them. Extremists are the product of their ideologies, as is their hatred.

As such, wouldn't the belief in these ideologies qualify as a mental illness? Wouldn't hatred for people because of their immutable characteristics (skin color, sexual orientation, ethnicity), for example, be a symptom?
Suppose I really, really hated global warming and I had a YouTube channel and on my YouTube channel I explained how driving gasoline cars contributes to global warming. So far, so good...not too many people would push back on that.
Now, some chick listens to my YouTube broadcasts and really agrees. She REALLY hates global warming. She subsequently walks in the Exxon and shoots half the executives with a gun.

At point is she mentally ill?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-10-2019, 04:51 PM
 
Location: NY
4,060 posts, read 1,048,766 times
Reputation: 2391
Quote:
Originally Posted by PassTheChocolate View Post
With all the mass shootings, there is endless discussion on mental illness.

I regularly hear/read things like "hatred is a choice" and these people made "conscious decisions" to kill others, so they aren't mentally ill.

Except hatred is not an action. It's an emotion and a response to an action and a cause of action.

Indoctrination serves to create a reality that effects a desired outcome. Ideology doesn't require an epistemic basis so that reality need not be real. And while many people function under these belief systems, cults are also born of them. Extremists are the product of their ideologies, as is their hatred.

As such, wouldn't the belief in these ideologies qualify as a mental illness? Wouldn't hatred for people because of their immutable characteristics (skin color, sexual orientation, ethnicity), for example, be a symptom?


How about the performance and verbal IQ factor?
Chronic adult offenders ( incarcerated ) have an average IQ of 85.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Psychology
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top