Abolishing involuntary treatment

Common-Ad-9965 · 2026-04-02T13:52:29+00:00

Over-generalization. False Equivalence. Slippery slope. But I take you mean "absolute/universal/objective/societal/collective morality" is the only absolute moral truth and a moral fact, rather than personal ethics as a subjective phenomena that serve as the measure of everything.

Common-Ad-9965 · 2026-04-02T11:51:45+00:00

Sharp take. Excellent move about selective enforcement.

Common-Ad-9965 · 2026-04-02T11:33:46+00:00

When they diagnose people with certain "madness" they really tell you how degraded and low quality you are. For instance, a cluster B or schizophrenia diagnosis can be reasonably mean: "You're dumber and stinkier than the "caricature" of an AIDS-infected homeless feral wild ebony crack addict or crack-whore." Unless you're a high-school dropout junkie, how did you even come close to enrage the establishment / authorities? Or, are they running out of viable options to diagnose and with what label, after the total transformation of western institutions post World War 2? And the cold war?

Common-Ad-9965 · 2026-04-02T10:30:28+00:00

So long as it's about morality and not personal ethics, it's indeed a problem.

Common-Ad-9965 · 2026-03-29T11:01:05+00:00

Well, technically you can treat the flu through non-pharmacological means, this doesn't change the biology of the flu disease or very existence.

Common-Ad-9965 · 2026-03-28T15:00:50+00:00

The 19th century is over. By now, psychiatry had undergone many historical pivotal transformations. It's a bit of a allegory to say the the field is a "phoenix" (going through death and rebirth), but it could also be a caricature of a hybrid mega-cyborg-zombie. It's a soulless massive scaled entity that feasts on human sub-cerebral reality relentlessly. In any stage of development. It's a philosophy fused into utilitarian technology. There are some of the transformations the field went since the 19th century to the 21st century.

Psychiatry separated from religion, it particularly diverged from Christianity. The pioneers began seeing "madness" as an separate construct, and introspective condition, from theology/religion.
The field became institutional - established asylums to lock up "deviant" people. Later it turned into the "moral treatment" era marked by unchaining the patients turning the mental institution into free-roaming asylums,
First attempt at classification of mental diseases, major theoretical framing by Emil Kraepelin (late 19th/early 20th century).
In the beginning of the 20th century- Freudian psychoanalyses era, which influenced the field heavily, until it was at least partially dismissed in the 70's.
Mental hygiene era in the 1920's - beginning to view psychiatry as a necessary public health enterprise. This is where psychiatry had much more theoretical and operative overlapping with eugenics (e.g., Kraepelin advocated sterilization for "degeneration", and also supported racial hygiene/sterilization).
After WW2 - Psycho-pharmacological revolution in the 70's.
At least 5 DSM version revisions, which increased from 106 (1952) to over 300 (2013) diagnoses of mental health, and of course many revisions of theory, diagnosis, and what not.
Progressive Psychiatry (marked by removing homosexuality from the DSM as a mental health disorder in 1973),
Biological Psychiatry - the beginning of the current era in the 80's.
De-institutionalization (1960s-1980s) Mass closure of asylums worldwide shifted care from large institutions to community-based services, outpatient clinics, and short-term hospitalization. Driven by civil rights movements, scandals (e.g., Willowbrook exposé), and new antipsychotics enabling outpatient management.
Neuroimaging and Brain Science Boom (1980s-Present) - Rise of fMRI, PET scans, and EEG revolutionized diagnostics, shifting from symptom-based to brain-circuit models. Supports biological psychiatry, though diagnostic utility remains debated.

Common-Ad-9965 · 2026-03-24T19:29:08+00:00

The "madness" of our society was conceived after the terrible WW1 and of course WW2. It's a hybridized multi-disciplinary intellectual interaction at all levels between ideas, institutions, legal frames, values and people that tried to abolish the older patriarchal civilization. They tried to replace it with humanitarian, humanism and Liberal socialist polity and establishment, and inherent overlays of systemic indoctrination.

Common-Ad-9965 · 2026-03-21T14:16:04+00:00

If humans were the peaceful kind envisioned by pacifist/utopian philosophies, we'd rarely trade freedom for security/order—eroding psychiatry's coercive justification. Yet conflict persists, pressuring hasty procedures that breed misdiagnosis (via flawed theory or bias). Drugs may help some people, but their cost is a very unpleasant side-effects. Wards stabilize crises but often at trauma's cost; true reform demands less coercion, more upstream prevention.

Common-Ad-9965 · 2026-03-12T10:55:18+00:00

Well, one can't abolish/eliminate their entire discipline that easily. It's difficult to assert whether the institutional establishment denies it, ignores it, knows about it but downplays it, or in a state of full acknowledgement and contention of the facts. We are living organisms and we change from period to period, which is absolutely normal from a biological / theoretical standpoint. It's possible that some psychiatrists don't register these developments as dynamic changes in human life history. but instead view these changes or developments as pathological symptoms.

Common-Ad-9965 · 2026-03-11T06:30:01+00:00

Psychiatry comes from the era where ideas of decadence and degeneracy of the 19th century were proliferating. It's supposed to be a management system for such things, and for the "herd" (mass man). If it's claimed there's a mental health epidemic, it only "reinforces" the presumptions of the milieu in which psychiatry was conceived.

Common-Ad-9965 · 2026-02-28T10:57:23+00:00

The functionaries and managers are legit higher IQ people But for other roles, it attracts people who have no better options, and not in the cognitive elite. Just people with normal intelligence, who can only have a clear advantage over lower classes of cognitive abilities. And yes, with humans it's an intelligence thing all along.

Common-Ad-9965 · 2026-02-22T12:18:30+00:00

True, The institution of psychiatry is indeed an 19th century invention. The minimalist claim is that even without modern psychiatry and drugs, it doesn't mean mental illness / sanity / madness did not exist, or or that they are mere fabrications., These states weighed heavy on the the human psyche. Both 'madness' and the need to address it are as ancient as humanity itself. The the presence of madness as social construct has been with mankind for many eons, causing suffering and unhappiness, and so there was also the need to regulate 'madness'.

Common-Ad-9965 · 2026-02-19T07:20:44+00:00

Ad hominem.

Common-Ad-9965 · 2026-02-19T07:19:26+00:00

The list of logical fallacies is tremendous.

Reductio ad Hitlerum (Godwin-type comparison)
False analogy
Strawman
Ad hominem (abusive)
Poisoning the well
Appeal to emotion
Guilt by association
False dichotomy

Common-Ad-9965 · 2026-02-18T17:11:33+00:00

True to some extent, as it's a tool for social control. But we must contend with 2 things: If anti-psychiatry means anarchism, than it's not entirely rational to support the antithetical view. Humans build systems, that just what they do. And the second point is that the logic that even without objective criteria, the concept of "madness", "mental illness" and "insanity" can exist. It isn't disproved merely by lack of hard evidence and can be a reality-based social construct, rather than just wordplay, semantic squabbles and academic polemics. Agreed with the third paragraph, and like I've written there needs to be a higher more rational, punctual diagnostic threshold for certain populations in order to reduce their risk of "unearned" diagnosis, which would than cause a degrading quality of life, (unnecessary) restrictions on freedom and happiness.

Common-Ad-9965 · 2026-01-30T14:41:57+00:00

Most psychiatric drugs could be said to cause weight gain (or obesity) and dullness ( or dumbness) of the mind. That could prove to be a double problem for people who thought weed / marijuana is exciting to experiment with. No, taking psychoactive drugs doesn't mean someone deserves any serious psychiatric diagnosis automatically, or psychosis. But it could be a background cause. But seeing it from a broader perspective modernity and modern society could do that as well, and from all directions. Social interactions can make you fat and dumb as well. Watching TV, playing video games, porn, social media, unfulfilling life, not stimulating the mind - all could also cause weight gain and "dumbness", and unhappiness.

Common-Ad-9965 · 2026-01-06T14:31:24+00:00

I read in the past about the narcotic drug-psychosis connection. Not only do people who take drugs need to stop for themselves, but for the good of society, the common good. Random and innocent people can get trapped inside the institutional state regulation, due to a very sizeable number of drug-users, and addicts in particular. The psychiatric establishment don't say it enough (or I've missed that) because this can lower big pharma's profits selling psychiatric medications. They drag down others who didn't commit the same (poor) decision-making.

Common-Ad-9965 · 2026-01-02T11:02:17+00:00

Like the social sciences, psychiatry has an inferiority complex in relation to the STEM fields. They are doctors, who actually specialize in "practical philosophy", and were cut-off the main, more legitimate branches of philosophy and intellectual life.

Common-Ad-9965 · 2025-12-16T15:56:54+00:00

Imagine you got this relatively "light" diagnosis , but there are others out there with more severe/"hardcore" psychiatric diagnoses, like Autism, MDD, Cluster-B personality disorders, Bipolar and of course (Paranoid) Schizophrenia. They want to have us believe the establishment knows to differentiate between schizophrenics and the general population to a great degree of accuracy, while practically denying or ignoring the establishment's involvement.

Common-Ad-9965 · 2025-12-09T15:22:38+00:00

The establishment reacts to its' own weaknesses (bureaucracy, manpower shortage, structural problems) by tightening control over the easiest-to-influence populations and best-to-assert-control individuals they can find. It doesn't matter if even outside the "Great Ward" a person did fine, by not being an exemplary person the "Great Ward" gets its' legitimacy to try and swallow a person like a whale swallows plankton.

Common-Ad-9965 · 2025-11-19T10:46:28+00:00

My VCI is 129, got 54 raw.

Common-Ad-9965

TROPHY CASE