Merged Psychological conditions are illusory

[Jonesboy]

No the symptoms make it an illness. Show me using real science that not treating the condition has a better prognosis. By what objective measures do your patients do better than patients that get clinical intervention?

Hi/ Hope ypou like the nw merged format.

 

[Jonesboy]

Aftermath of traumatic experience: uncontrolled anger, flashbacks, trouble concentrating/sleeping and so on makes it illness.

Plus person needs medication and talk/cognitive therapy. And it takes time to minimize symptoms.

Please respond to the post I was merged with.

 

[Jonesboy]

Snake oil:

Great an experience, but no benefit, just hooey.

http://www.holotropic.com/about.shtml

"The process itself uses very simple means: it combines accelerated breathing with evocative music in a special set and setting. With the eyes closed and lying on a mat, each person uses their own breath and the music in the room to enter a non-ordinary state of consciousness. This state activates the natural inner healing process of the individual's psyche, bringing him or her a particular set of internal experiences. With the inner healing intelligence guiding the process, the quality and content brought forth is unique to each person and for that particular time and place. While recurring themes are common, no two sessions are ever alike."

Please respoind to the merged post.

 

[Jonesboy]

If there's no illness, what is it that the "inner healing intelligence" needs to heal?

I am not inclined to respond to someone elses thread.

 

[Jonesboy]

Where are the studies supporting the claim that this is a viable treatment for anything?

This is not my thread. Start a new thread please.

 

[Jonesboy]

I think I have a fair question for jonesboy:

Do you really think that all psychological conditions are illusory, or just the ones you named?

Because that wasn't ever quite clear to me.

It might help to understand why you hold that opinion.

Thanks in advance.

Start a new thread or respond to the original thread writer.

 

[Jonesboy]

Since all the previous threads started revolving aroung similar strange attractors, they've been merged into one meta-thread. Do not start threads about the Myth of PTSD, Autism and Eugenics, or sadness as a scam.

Posted By: kmortis

I have reported your active bias.

 

[Bram Kaandorp]

I have reported your active bias.

Actually, having everything in one place is very handy, because all of them are so similar that it would be pointless to have the same discussion four times at once.

That's why I asked my question here.

So what's your answer?

 

[iknownothing]

I am not inclined to respond to someone elses thread.

This is your post, right?:

If you in USA try holotropic breathwork workshops.http://www.grof-holotropic-breathwork.net/
among others

Are you really not going to respond just out of a hissy fit because your threads were merged?

 

[Lowpro]

I'm still waiting for Jonesboy to address degeneration of brain tissue and Alzheimers...

 

[23_Tauri]

What makes anything an illness? Because humans choose to associate something with the word "illness". But we can drop this terminology, and use the word "problem" instead.

I agree with this. I've always wondered why a set of behaviours and emotions is labelled as an illness.

The dictionary definition of illness is:

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/illness
ill·ness (lns)
n.1. a. Poor health resulting from disease of body or mind; sickness.
b. A disease.
2. Obsolete Evil; wickedness.

So an illness is a disease. A disease must have a pathology, that is an observable physical cause. How can the mind, which is a non-physical abstraction, have a disease? It cannot! By definition, the mind cannot be 'diseased' because it doesn't exist in the physical realm. Therefore, I have to say I disagree with the above dictionary definition, because it refers to the mind.

There are brain diseases (like Alzheimer's, for example), but those are not what we refer to in modern parlance as 'mental illnesses' (although some neurological diseases can give rise to symptoms similar to those attributed to said 'mental illnesses').

I'm not belittling those suffering from mental or emotional pain and resultant dysfunctional behaviours by raising this question, only asking whether we should cease to refer to such suffering as an illness. A more modern term is 'behavioural disorder'. Perhaps this is more appropriate?

 

[Philosaur]

Please respond to the post I was merged with.

Please respoind to the merged post.

I am not inclined to respond to someone elses thread.

This is not my thread. Start a new thread please.

Start a new thread or respond to the original thread writer.

I have reported your active bias.

Looks like Jonesboy's going to pout now because the mods won't play his "start a new thread for irrelevant variations on a single topic" game.

 

[Jonesboy]

This is your post, right?:



Are you really not going to respond just out of a hissy fit because your threads were merged?

Hi. I'm not inclined to. I don't know why you think I should. Is the post that important?

 

[Jonesboy]

Looks like Jonesboy's going to pout now because the mods won't play his "start a new thread for irrelevant variations on a single topic" game.

Not sure what your intense interest is here, if it's not the posts.

 

[Jonesboy]

I'm still waiting for Jonesboy to address degeneration of brain tissue and Alzheimers...

According to the moderator this has all been covered before, as I am sure you will agree. yOu could try looking back through old posts, not all of them mine.

 

[Bram Kaandorp]

Hi. I'm not inclined to. I don't know why you think I should. Is the post that important?

And what if the mod who merged them would put them back? Would that make it better?

Could you please get over it, and just answer the questions?

If not, too bad. At least I've tried to understand your motivations, if nothing else.

 

[Jonesboy]

Actually, having everything in one place is very handy, because all of them are so similar that it would be pointless to have the same discussion four times at once.

That's why I asked my question here.

So what's your answer?

We've already discussed it. At least four times, so I've heard. You'll have to look back through old posts. I can't do that for you. Please, don't pester me on this.

 

[Jonesboy]

And what if the mod who merged them would put them back? Would that make it better?

Could you please get over it, and just answer the questions?

If not, too bad. At least I've tried to understand your motivations, if nothing else.

I rarely follow authors, I just follow posts. The merger - the alleged equivalence of threads, forces my posts into a single conceptual pigeon-hole of your own making. I'm sorry, but that's how it is. You only have yourselves to blame.

 

[Twiler]

I rarely follow authors, I just follow posts. The merger - the alleged equivalence of threads, forces my posts into a single conceptual pigeon-hole of your own making. I'm sorry, but that's how it is. You only have yourselves to blame.

I don't think Bram Kaandorp is part of the Mod team.

 

[Bram Kaandorp]

We've already discussed it. At least four times, so I've heard. You'll have to look back through old posts. I can't do that for you. Please, don't pester me on this.

The question is: Do you really think that all psychological conditions are illusory?

Either the answer is yes, or the answer is no.

Quite simple, I'd think.

You don't even have to elaborate on it.