h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Since I've come to understand and appreciate that I suffer from a mental illness, I've devoted a huge amount of time and effort towards trying to find 'sanity'. What is sanity? What is it worth? What is it for? Where is it? What's good about it? What's bad about insanity?

Well ... in myself I have discovered lots of possible 'leads' towards answers. I cannot say I have found complete and perfect sanity yet. But I certainly have found insanity. What is insanity? It is the inability to make sound judgements. The inability to make good decisions. The inability to separate probable truths from probable falsehoods. Sanity is the ability to think *right*. When you are incapable of making sound judgements, all of your thinking counts for nothing. You can think obsessively about a certain topic, but the thinking is wasted and no amount of it achieves any 'success'. Success in using one's head, is making *headway* ... headway with ideas, headway with finding solutions. When you're insane, you think and think and obsess but you make no headway, you find no solutions.

So ... when you're 'sane' your thinking should be successful. You should make headway. You should find solutions. You should come to conclusions. You should get ANSWERS. And those answers should be as reliable, as dependable as possible.

And that's a problem right there. In our times. In our times, there seems to be problems with all solutions, all conclusions, all answers. Almost everyone seems to be in a fog, and people who are *not* in a fog, are out of touch with the rest.

Really ... looking at the world today ... society itself is insane. The majority of people are insane. The ideas they have ... the conclusions ... the solutions ... the answers ... are all faulty ... or at least the majority of them are *CLEAR* mistakes to anyone who would think about them - I mean think effectively, clearly, soundly. Look at the world. Look at the problems we have. Really, look at the *mess* we've made on this entire planet. Just do some reading. Find out how things go in other countries. Read up some history. Read about wars, and think that millions of people *allowed* them to happen, or even actively participated. Read and think about crime, about poverty, about pollution and the laying waste of the living environment of planet Earth and ask yourself, if we humans as a species were truly 'sane', why we would do all that.

Those things are elementary. If you actively work to develop a more sane mind, you may stumble upon hundreds or even thousands of other 'insane' things that we do as a species, and in our society and in our communities. Look for OBVIOUS inconsistencies, contradictions, and absurdities, in notions, ideas and beliefs, that are nevertheless not recognised by the majority of people, though they are incredibly obvious at anyone who would inspect them. Finding out just how bad things are, demands some active work on your part. If that is what you really wish to do, you can, if you're willing to take on the challenge. Get rid of the ideas inculcated in you by your society, by the mass media ... investigate *everything* trying to find truly dependable justification for *everything* and see if every idea you had can stand up to such scrutiny. I would be *very* surprised if all your notions could pass such a test. I know mine couldn't. And I'm not being a radical about this. I will accept a heck of a lot, merely on some *suggestion* or some chance of it being true, or good, or just useful. Even a *very* mild sort of testing-process, like this, will point out a *lot* of absurdities.

And if you find that your notions do not pass such tests, then what? That is what I don't know. In working on my own mind, I've tried to substitute notions that made sense - using the limited abilities and resources that I have - and they all certainly *seem* to make sense to me now - but this has come at an exceedingly high price. The price has been that of feeling truly alienated from my fellow human beings. I now look at people and I think - how could they have such incredible delusions? I can say with fairly 99% certainty that these things *ARE* delusions. I find it incredibly hard to sympathise with people who entertain these delusions ... because first of all, these delusions are *so* deluded, when thoroughly considered and examined ... and secondly, these delusions are not innocent and innocuous, but potentially extremely harmful ... and thirdly, these delusions are entertained by people who are supposed to have *sound* minds!

And what a catch-22 situation I'm in! I started out being 'crazy' amongst sane people. As a result I was alienated from my fellow human beings. I took responsibility for trying to get myself sane. I worked on improving my mental soundness. I worked hard. I found the source of my own delusions. I achieved a great feat - I am now - and I am fairly sure of that - of sound mind. Not perfect but much better than I was. Closer to sane than to insane. But now ... now I see the delusions of others! So, so many delusions. I am now sane ... amongst crazy people. As a result I am alienated from my fellow human beings.

Very dear Willem,

Brilliant letter brilliantly written.

Have you read Merleau Ponty's "Phenomenology of Perception"? It is a book that has really charted my life since I had to study it at Stellenbosch University- word by word, line by line. It was brilliant.

The greatest liberating effort is to let others do their "own" thing even if one does not see the raison d'etre for it.
You have done so brilliantly in your search for both happiness and understanding. Now just enjoy it. You have a wonderful ability o
t write and express yourself. You have am affinity to Mother Earth
and her generosity that you share with others. You really have
been given so many gifts. Use them, and try not to get worried about what others think about. It's their life and their problem and if it does not run absolutely counter to yours then let it be.

You will save yourself a lot of stress and be able to devote time to the many gifts which you have.

With much affeftion my so dear friend
Christiane
alsoRan80



christiane. Alsoran80

Hello Willem,

That is a very interesting post. I want to think about it before I reply, and I would like to chat to you on email about your condition, but I have been too afraid to ask any questions for fear of offending you. It would help me a lot to talk to you.

<<>>

Does that mean that, though you are now much better, you are still alienated from people/ That is such a shame if that's how you really feel.

You are so multi-talented and articulate, it might be that which separates you from ordinary mortals - have you ever considered that?

Websailor

Hello Websailor! Thanks for reading and for responding. Yes, I still feel alienated from people! In 'real life' I literally have no-one to whom I can talk freely and openly. The people around me would either not understand what I'm saying, or would be very hostile to what I have to say. It is better with speaking to people on the internet, but this mode of communication has serious limitations as well. As for being articulate and talented ... thanks for the compliment. I may be articulate, but that doesn't help if no-one listens to me. As for talented, again, I really would like it if I could use my talents in a way that others would appreciate. I want to contribute to the world, to human society, not be a dead loss to it. The problem is I really think I *have things* to contribute! But I'm locked into some private universe of my own and don't know how to get out or get through to other people!

AR1, thanks for your response as well. The above might tell you why it's hard for me to accept the 'insanity' that I see around me. I really do think I am sane, well - *now* I am - and I really do think that the society I live in is insane. I really do think the people around me are afflicted with a kind of insanity that makes it impossible for them to understand *me* or the 'sane ideas' I would like to present to them. I really do think that their insanity is merely accepted as sanity because they are in the majority. In the end this insanity will be exposed as such because this society will land itself in a horrible mess it could have avoided had it been sane. But I don't want that. I want people to 'see the light' and save themselves (and others) from disaster, before it's too late. And that feels like a heavy responsibility, a heavy weight I have to bear. I want to make people 'see the light' but I don't know how. People tell me I mustn't think I have this responsibility for putting things right ... but who else? I think I *know* what is right, how things should be ... there may ... there *must* be others who also know this, but I don't see them effectively putting the message out. If no-one else does it ... then what excuse have I for not doing it? And if it doesn't get done ... by me or by anyone else ... and the 'message' doesn't get out there ... and our civilisation meets its predictable doom ... it's not that I would feel *responsible* for that ... it's just that it would be a very sad, sad thing to happen.

Folks, you might think my use of the word 'insane' or 'insanity' a bit strong when I apply it to general society. So let me just put down the dictionary meanings - the ones most relevant to what I'm discussing:

insane: lacking reasonable thought; showing a complete lack of reason or foresight

insanity: lack of reason or good sense; extreme foolishness or an act that demonstrates it.

Now: speaking of *other* societies than my own ... just consider the situation we were in before the 'collapse' of communism, where the USA and the USSR had stocks of nuclear bombs aimed at each other which, when used as intended, would have wiped out not just the Americans and the Russians *both*, but the rest of us as well, just for good measure.

Well that situation is over now. But now we have other kinds of war and conflict, conflicts potentially without end, and the ordinary citizens of the world don't know or understand what it's all about, and can't think of anything to do about it.

These wars and conflicts are inimical to human life, to civilised life, to human rights, to any kind of lofty ideal or principle that we want for us and for other people. We can't have them, and everything else we want as well. So why do we still have them? If we were truly using our *reason*, our ability to *think*, to have *foresight* (see definition above) we would have found a way to eliminate war completely, long ago ... we would have found reasonable ways to mediate or better yet, *avoid* conflicts, ages ago.

And what about the way we pollute our one-and-only planet? What about the way we destroy absolutely irreplaceable biodiversity? Is that not extreme foolishness? And the acts of destruction most of us can witness on small and large scales around us - are those not the acts that demonstrate extreme foolishness?

But all in all - I DO NOT THINK HUMANS ARE INNATELY INSANE. I think it's a phase our species goes through - though I'm not sure we're going to make it through. I think the problems we see right now are the inevitable outcomes of 'false turns' our species made long in the past. False philosophies. False belief systems. False value systems. We are now picking the bitter fruits. If the average person today can 'wake up' and suddenly realise how he/she has been brainwashed by the mass media, by politicians, and even by authority figures in their own communities and societies ... such average person could again start *thinking* and using the human mind for the purpose intended, and start discovering ways out of all of our predicaments.

You know, Willem, I agree with everything you say, but I think the difference is that though I try to make a difference, I can't allow myself to feel as strongly as you do, because I think I would go mad with frustration and anger, and that doesn't help anybody. I used to react like you do, but you know, I found it alienated people - they backed off in the face of my strong feelings. A bit like the way people back off if you push your religion in their faces. I found that working for a big charity I realised that a saying we have:

'softly softly catchee monkey' works better. In other words gentle persuasion works better than lecturing or putting our own feelings forward too strongly. Persuading people to make small changes, and to think carefully does gradually make a difference, even if it is not fast enough for the likes of you and me.

I will talk to you by email in more depth. I really would like to chat more freely, rather than on a public message board.

I will email you as soon as I get a chance. My son is here at the moment and I don't see him often, but I will try and get online later tonight or tomorrow.

Take care, and please don't feel you are so alone in your feelings.

Websailor

Thanks for your response, Websailor. You are welcome to talk about this to me by email. All the same, I want to talk about it here as well. This site is potentially accessible to the whole online world, and thus, potentially at least, the ideas I discuss here are 'out there' for people to read and potentially learn from. Also, this topic - sanity - concerns first and foremost a lot of people who are mentally ill or who have to deal with people who are mentally ill. But secondarily, it is relevant to *everybody* - especially if, as I assert here, it is true that there are mental health 'defects' that run in entire societies and that even afflict human civilisation as a whole.

I know about the 'softly softly'-approach idea. Really, this *is* my softly-softly approach! I'm merely using some fairly strong words - but I can justify them. I want to point out a situation that is quite extreme, and I don't know how to adequately describe it without extreme terms. It is impossible to underestimate the importance of what is at stake: the wellbeing, and perhaps even the very existence, of humanity and all life on Earth!

I don't think people will necessarily shy away from looking at the big picture and seeing just how bad things are, overall. I sometimes think you are a bit too 'sensitive' and apologetic in your approach because of your own experience in trying to make a difference - working for the cause of wildlife preservation amongst a public with very little sympathy or even comprehension. You have learnt people will hesitate making big changes and would rather make small changes. I honestly am not sure that is always the case, for all situations or 'causes'. Consider - we live in very different countries. I live in a country where IN PRACTICE it has happened that people have made ENORMOUS changes - because small changes simply would not have done the trick! So - I think that people *can* be called to make big changes. People *can* be persuaded, using very strong language. There are many people in the world urging people to make little changes ... I'm going to try the different approach, trying to get people to see the BIG picture and to get them willing to make BIG changes!

But at any rate. I would like to discuss these issues with you and with others, here or by email. I am thinking of perhaps working this stuff into a book ... or two! I know I still have much to learn about communicating these ideas to others.

Hi very dear willem,

Hoorah!1

You have been talking about your book for ages. Now is the time to put it into practice. It will undoubtedly be a best seller in south africa if not abroad. It would be important to go back to the time when you had not yet accepted the fact that you had changed. !1 Or could change! or were going to change. I wonder if you can remember that?
Like you I believe that h2g2 is an excellent forum to express ideas. One gets a very phenemological approach/critique of one's work.and then one can really write something which is truly objective and unbiased.

with much affection

Christiane
AlsoRan80

,

OK let me now get back to the topic itself ...

I will now look at some elements of insanity and show how these are present in 'ordinary' people and entire societies!

First ... apathy!

Dictionary definition:

1. Lack of enthusiasm or energy: lack of interest in anything, or the absence of any wish to do anything.

2. Emotional emptiness: the inability to feel normal or passionate human feelings or to respond emotionally.

Now first of all, looking at how this manifests in recognised mental illness. I have extensive experience of this in myself. My 'classification' of schizophrenia in fact comes mainly from the manifestation of apathy, a lack of motivation and energy. Left to myself, if given no treatment, and if I did not *actively* counter this in myself, I would degenerate into a condition of complete apathy: doing nothing more than lying in bed or sitting in a chair, *perhaps* reading a book, at most, all the day, every day. I would cut myself off from the outside world, entirely. I have experienced long periods of 'minimal' life - doing nothing, wanting nothing, being like a sort of 'zombie'. A complete lack of motivation, a lack of energy to do something, and also a lack of 'caring'. This is a recognised symptom of mental illness and it is a debilitating condition! I understand this now and these days I work very, very hard to counter this in myself! I work AGAINST APATHY in myself. I go to great lengths to motivate myself to do things. I have to motivate myself to get out of bed each morning ... to dress myself properly ... to take care of my personal hygiene. I even have to work hard to motivate myself to do the things I enjoy most - drawing and painting, writing, caring for my plants, going out into nature. I have to actively force myself many times each day to do something productive. I even have to force myself to sit here and write this. I am still having a hard time with the apathy. I still don't work as hard and as much as I should. I still would be totally incapable of holding down a regular job. I still have few friends - I find it very hard to force myself to call people up, chat with them, visit them etc. I still have had no romantic relationship whatsoever in my life. I still lead a very minimalistic sort of life.

The second aspect - having the capacity to have feelings, even passions: again ... if I 'let myself go' I could easily stop feeling anything, stop caring at all. Goodness knows I very regularly experience the inclination to stop caring, to stop having anything to do with other people at all.

When you see me being 'passionate' here ... it is my way of trying to counter this disease in myself, to fight against its trends! Maybe I go too far in the opposite direction ... but I wonder: is it really possible to care too much?

So ... I know from experience about apathy and how it can debilitate a life. 'Normal' people don't experience the same kind of apathy that schizophrenics experience. They manage to get jobs, have friends and relationships. But is this 'enough'? There are other things that they are apathetic about. Many people do not really care, for instance, about people beyond their small circle of family, friends and acquaintances. Many people care more than that, but don't care much for people living in countries far away. Many people care for people, but they don't care for animals and plants.

Apart from a lack of caring, there's a lack of interest. Many people are not interested in much. They don't have a thirst for knowledge. They don't try to find out much about their world, or about themselves. Even if this knowledge could enrich them and their lives immensely. Even if this knowledge is *necessary* for their wellbeing.

Many people 'dull' their own feelings - using a variety of means to do so. In the sort of polite society we live in, it seems people have to disguise whatever feelings they have, in many cases.

These are all aspects of 'apathy'. The question is - is this apathy normal and acceptable, or is it a 'symptom' of some kind of affliction?

Remember we are now considering something bigger than a single, troubled person. We are considering communities and societies. Mainly I'm thinking of 'regular' supposed modern affluent society. In an *individual*, one would 'rate' apathy to see if the level of apathy of that individual seriously affects his or her quality of life, relative to 'normal' life. So, in a seriously schizophrenic person one might note an extreme lack of motivation in that the person just sits or lies around and shows no inclination for any kind of productive activity. This makes the person incapable of working at a job and getting an income, which puts that person at a disadvantage relative to other people in our competitive world. But how does one 'rate' the level of apathy in an entire society? Looking at the supposed 'affluent' mainstream society ... how does one gauge its level of apathy? One doesn't have other more successful societies to measure it against to see if it has serious drawbacks.

The only method I know of, is using one's imagination, *informed* by whatever knowledge and experience one can get. Reading up on history, psychology, human societies, politics and more, have helped me form some ideas - and the same strategies can help others as well. And ... it seems to me ... truly ... that if our society was less apathetic, we would be better off! We would respond to large-scale problems *much more quickly*. It would not be such an effort trying to get people to care, trying to get them to act. When we imagine an 'ideal' society ... and not going to absurd lengths of wishful thinking or unrestrained imagination ... we can imagine a society that 'works' a lot better than ours *because* such a society is less apathetic. The people in it are much more motivated and driven, they are much more caring, and they are much more interested in themselves, each other and their world. Compared to this society, ours is, indeed, seriously debilitated by apathy.

But we don't have such an ideal society 'for real' to compare ours against and to show us how poorly we're doing.

I will in future writings go into the issue of apathy, and how it afflicts people and societies, in greater depth.

But apathy is merely a symptom. What is the cause?

In schizophrenic people, apathy is the result of a chemical imbalance in the brain. But what is the right balance? Is it possible that even in large groups of people, the same imbalance can exist? Maybe the 'optimal' balance, is something that is not actually 'normal' and common.

This also comes down to looking at different explanations. There's the materialistic, deterministic view that everything is caused by chemicals or genes. There's the other view, that I subscribe to, that there's also a kind of 'wholeness' of the mind itself, and of the mind in its functioning and in its external environment, that goes beyond the mere components and internal activities of the brain. A person is normally sad not just because there are 'sadness chemicals' being released in its brain cells, but because something happened that made that person sad. External circumstances as well as internally-generated thoughts and attitudes also play a part. I would like to examine this in the context of apathy in future writings.

I also want to point out something: apathy can actually be generated in people. One of the most marvellous things we have invented to generate apathy, is television. But it's not the only thing that is used. It is in the interests of some groups with power, to keep 'ordinary' people apathetic, ignorant, and consequently ineffective, i.e. harmless. Some of you may think this is a 'conspiracy theory' ... another topic for future writings. Suffice to say, there is 'reasonable' evidence for this actually happening in our world.

Hello AR80, we simulposted! Thanks for reading and for your reply. Actually I already have quite a 'body' of writings here on h2g2 ... and there's a huge amount of things I can write about still! At some point then maybe I could collect and organise everything into a book!

I don't know if one could ever write a truly objective and unbiased book. If I write a book, the best I could hope for, would be to clearly state my own subjective position and biases, so the reader could perhaps correct for that.

Yes dear Willem,
You are correct.

But the point is that because you have written so openly and well about your problems, you have gained from the insights of your friends. This in turn has an effect on you.

Keep at it.

Christiane
AR80

Willem,

You have made a good many very strong points which have given me food for thought, and particularly an insight in to schizophrenia which is helpful.

I hadn't realised I had come across as apologetic That's interesting. I shall have to think about that. I have never been forceful, and I have suffered many of the things you mention but which were produced by parentage, circumstances and happenings, as well as perhaps a degree of depression. The difference as you point out was that there were reasons for the feelings, which could have been resolved.

I shall have to think about how I respond to the rest of your posts and that will take time as I don't have your superior intellect. I admit too, that I have shied away from deep thinking as it depresses me.

I will come back when I have more time. In the meantime I appreciate your thoughts, especially your comments about me. Your insight on such short acquaintance was a shock.

Websailor

Hi Websailor and thanks for your response!

You hadn't really 'come across' as being apologetic! I just suggested the possibility, in the context of your having done charity work, working for wildlife conservation, and your writings here on h2g2. It is a common characteristic of people who try to advocate environmentalism (and that includes me as well!), that in a way, they're always having to justify and defend their positions, since there's so little sympathy for such causes amongst the general public! And this can lead to a lack of confidence in the wildlife-advocates. This is not necessarily *wrong*. As you say, people who carry the message too forcefully, can actually offend others, come across as arrogant, or even 'eco-terrorists'. But at the same time ... a *lack* of confidence, and always feeling oneself to be on the defensive, can also hamper one's ability for getting the message across. I am *not* saying you're the one, or the other! But if you yourself consider this, you might decide you might be *more* of this, rather than that ...

The thing is ... I say, environmental awareness is *such* an important issue ... that a person who has given it a *lot* of thought and devoted lots of time and effort to it, needn't be apologetic about it! The cause is just, it deserves a high priority. Your views are very much more likely to be right, than wrong. You can perhaps afford being more forceful ... *without* being arrogant or steamrollering people!

The above is just in terms of 'environmentalism'. But of course in these postings I'm talking about more than just that. I'm making a very strong and controversial statement, namely, that our human societies, in general today, and in fact our supposed 'civilisation' as a whole, suffer from serious 'mental health' defects. I want to talk about sanity in general - and this impacts pretty much everybody, and entire belief systems, so the field is vast. I'm being very forceful here ... because first of all, I have a lot of confidence in my views right now. That is, partly, because I'm not considering my views to be 100% certain! So I'm making no absolute statements. I can say something like, I'm 90% or 99% certain about this or that. Which is a very high degree of certainty - but not arrogantly so! A truly arrogant person admits NO uncertainty. I admit uncertainty. In fact if I can develop these ideas further I will show how important uncertainty actually is! The right understanding of uncertainty, can save a person both from too little as well as too much confidence.

Websailor, the very gist of what I'm saying here, is that characteristics or 'symtoms' that can be found in *extreme* forms in seriously-mentally-ill people, can also be found in 'normal' people, and in some cases, their effect might be negligible, but in other cases, they *may* be causing some damage, though this damage is subtle and not easy to see. But once discerned, once their causes are understood, they can be remedied. I really want to develop these ideas further in these writings.

There is such a huge amount of things related to mental health and wellbeing that I would like to discuss. The field is vast.

Websailor, like I said earlier, I would like to write about these ideas here with the idea of ultimately making a book of them. In other words - these writings could become quite voluminous. I don't expect you to read everything, seeing as how first of all your time is limited; secondly you have difficulty reading on the computer screen; thirdly, you may find some of the issues I discuss distressing! I will need to go into some pretty horriffic stuff because I also would need to talk about people's capacity for evil. So ... if you find it rough going readingis thread, don't! I'll keep on posting entries about wildlife, like the one about the nuthatches, and those you would probably enjoy much more, and not feel 'out of your depth'!

Oh ... and by the way, you do have a superior intellect! Not one in a thousand people can write as well as you do!

Willem,

I don't think I feel out of my depth exactly, and I agree with much of what you say. I have no idea how to define 'normal' as everyone is, and should be, different. I also agree that there is a large degree of insanity in the way the world is run, but much of that that is because of people 'in power' and power can create the greatest insanity of all. There is also increased 'insanity' in the way many people conduct their lives, though few would describe it as such. The increase in mental illness generally is not down to the fact that such people are more 'visible' than they once were, but to their inability to cope with a crazy world and crazy lifestyles, where the things that really matter - Wildlife, people and the future of the world are forgotten in the day to day scramble for 'progress'.

It seems to me that there are several types of mental illness, some down to genetic or physical reasons, which cannot be cured but just alleviated, and those brought on by enormous stress, which if treated can be cured, and those brought on by drugs, both legal and illegal, which may or may not be permanent. Yes, I know that is a simplification, but having experienced the strange things that brains can do, I am not sure I would ever regard anyone as insane. In fact I hate the word, perhaps because that was what my mother was called, when it was actually Altzheimers.

As for being apologetic, or not forceful enough in my writings, I have deliberately watered down my views for because I don't want to use the opportunity I have been given, to rant, or lecture. I want to try and touch people who don't think as we do, and try to engage their interest and thoughts. I am afraid for the most part if I wrote a lecture most people would not read beyond the first few lines.

I have learnt that 'sowing seeds' in this way is more effective, and has longer term results than the other way. That is not to say there is not room for people with strong views such as yours. I hope you will find a way to 'make a difference' that suits you. I have in the past had some very heated discussions on the environment and wildlife, and I won't back down, because like you I feel I am 99% right, but I have the misfortune to be able to see both sides of an argument in many cases!

Also, my friend, I am a heck of a lot older than you, and maybe some of that apathy you talk about has rubbed off. I am tired and sometimes disheartened for all the reasons you give. Plus a husband with health problems, two sons, a house and garden (and a job for most of my life) is enough to cope with and doesn't leave a lot of time for what I want to do. Had I had the opportunities when I was younger, I might be a very different person. I urge you to use your current single status to do what you want in life, before you have to consider others full time. I once had your conviction and energy but it has waned. You can tell me off for that if you like

I shall continue reading your posts, whether distressing or not, and if I feel I have anything useful to say, I shall contribute, time permitting. I am very interested in what you have to say on all subjects, as you think very deeply, something I have shied away from for a long time as I now take one day at a time, and try not to think too much about the future. It is all I have the energy for now.

I now have to go and do mundane things I am afraid, but rest assured I will read your posts and no doubt learn a lot. I might even learn to be a bit more forceful, but my husband thinks I am too 'full on' as it is! Excuse the modern parlance but it is a good description of me when I get the bit between my teeth.

Take care,

Websailor

Hi again Websailor and thanks for still reading!

Firstly ... great if you don't feel out of your depth! Also ... I agree with most of what you say in your posting as well. It's not an issue of defining 'normal'. I totally agree that every person is different and that is how things should be. My issue is with when certain 'mental' aspects become *harmful*.

I don't agree with 'labelling' people as insane or even mentally ill. I use the word 'insane' to refer to acts or attidudes that are, in fact, insane: showing a complete lack of reason or foresight, extremely foolish, etc. and in my view, these attributes and acts are - again like you say - very common amongst the 'powerful' people in the world! They are *not* labelled with 'insanity' but the 'lesser' mental defects of less-powerful people - often the most vulnerable people in our societies - get labelled with 'insanity' or 'mental illness' or whatever. This is in fact what I also want to address here. I want to speak about the issue of labelling - which I in general reject - but also 'diagnosis'. A diagnosis needn't become a label. I want to talk about how a disservice is done towards people with mental health problems, in that there is not enough of an understanding of what 'sanity' really is. A point I would like to make is that just as physical health cannot simply be dividided into 'healthy' people and 'sick' people, so mental health also cannot be divided into 'sane' (or 'mentally healthy') people, and 'insane' (or mentally ill) people. The issue to me, is to look at aspects causing problems. On the one hand there are 'symptoms' - like some I have been diagnosed with myself - that cause people to be labelled mentally ill, when those symptoms do not actually cause any debilitation - they merely depart from what is 'normal'. Then there are symptoms that do cause problems and they can be present in people apparently normal and healthy. And in entire societies.

You mention the causes of mental illness: genetic or physical reasons, enormous stress, drugs, etc. That is another area I want to go into! At the moment the 'going' opinion is that mental health problems are caused by chemical imbalances and that they can be treated with drugs. Now I don't want to argue totally against this. After all, I do use my own medications faithfully and they do seem to help. But the drugs alone do not provide all the 'treatment'. I want to say that the issue is much more complex. There are genetic factors; chemical factors; environmental factors; and factors having to do with the nature of the 'realm of mind' - and this is controversial and I'll have to work hard to substantiate my claims or even just to get people to understand what I mean! It is about our nature as beings with a *will* that interacts with our inner and outer circumstances.

At any rate ... I hope that people with Alzheimers aren't still being called 'insane'! This disease goes somewhat beyond the scope of what I'm speaking about here ... it is a seriously debilitating disease and there is no known cure. It certainly involves 'symptoms' that are relevant to what is understood as 'sanity' - the mind's abilities break down as a result of the disease. But there shouldn't be a stigma about it! In fact I want to argue for the de-stigmatisation of mental health problems. Any 'diagnosis' can become a stigma ... Alzheimers, schizophrenia, Asperger's ... and not only a stigma, but a stereotype. In truth every 'sufferer' is different and the symptoms manifest differently in different people. Consequently doctors may 'miss' important clues when they fall back on a certain 'standard' diagnosis.

If you agree with that, then we're basically in agreement!

OK next ... I *like* your wildlife writings here on h2g2! I really do not think your views come across as 'watered down'. They come across as enthusiastic but 'level-headed'. If you can touch people who do not think as we do, then great! In my own case - this is a personal choice - I am *not* aiming at a 'large' audience. I'm aiming at a minority: a minority that is actually very interested already, and also, a minority that is capable of engaging with the ideas on a high level. (Like, for instance, someone who writes a specialist article for a scientific journal. Laypeople would have no clue what it's about.) This automatically reduces my potential readership enormously. But - if those readers 'stick it out' - they could (I hope!) learn a lot, and they would learn things that people without this huge amount of interest and ability to deal with complex concepts, could never learn. So ... if we aim at different 'target groups' then our strategies needn't be similar! Remember ... over here at the moment, I'm still working on my own ideas and also on how to communicate them! If I eventually write a book ... depending on how things develop, I might indeed phrase my ideas in a more moderate way.

I want again to re-iterate ... when I talk about things like 'apathy' - it is not a criticism or 'telling people off'! It is an observation about 'how things are'. When I get to say all I have to say about apathy (and a myriad other aspects or 'symptoms'), I will talk about ALL the factors (that I can discern) that cause it in the first place; I will talk about how to recognise just how much of a problem it is, for any particular person; I will also discuss ways of countering it. There are so many issues I've still left 'up in the air' in my postings so far. One is related to the hypothetical question I threw out earlier ... can one care too much?

Willem,

I agree with everything you say. Rest assured that if I don't I will say so.

I particularly agree with this:

<<>>

I have always maintained that doctors should not treat our 'bits' separately, but as a whole. I believe strongly in holistic medicine, if only because the whole being is taken in to account. So many of the factors you mention are involved in many illnesses, but are ignored. Time is another essential ingredient in diagnosis, and no doctor here has time to listen to a patient, or get to know them, so any diagnosis is only based on very limited knowledge.

I think there is more understanding of Altzheimers and senile dementia now,(with my Mum it was some thirty years ago) but schizophrenia is still very misunderstood, mainly because it hits the headlines when someone does something serious while off their medication, or as a result of cannabis consumption. There seems to be no understanding that properly treated, sufferers can lead a normal (there's that word again!) life as a useful member of the community.

<<>>

Yes, I do think one can care too much. I have had to back off from caring too much - about the environment, my husband's health, even my sons, in order to cope with everything that is thrown at me. I just could not sustain that level of caring without being ill, and I am needed, so that is not an option.

Websailor

Hello again Websailor! Thanks very much for your comments. Everything you say gives me new ideas, and new 'angles' from which to look at all this, and helps me to talk about it.

I am glad you mentioned holistic medicine! I myself am a 'holist' in totality, and really I think this is the way to go. I have *an* holistic philosophy which I would not insist is *the* holistic philosophy to end all others. But nevertheless, my own kind of holism has come about from my own attempts at 'unifying' the bits and pieces of my psyche and belief system. I was very much disconnected and disorganised, mentally, before. One of the characteristics of schizophrenia is this sort of mental disorganisation. For me, philosophy has helped with re-organising myself. I think it can help others as well. But the problem in today's world, is that philosophy is not recognised for its potential value. In large part this is due to philosophers themselves: they get into all sorts of esoteric discussions and use all sorts of 'jargon' terms so the general public feels left out and that it's all a bunch of nonsense. I think this has done a disservice to philosophy and also to the public in general. We live in very anti-intellectual times and there's also very little 'rationality' out there. Many people have misconceptions about logic and rationality. This too in my view contributes to 'poor mental health' in the public and in the world. Philosophy should equip people with 'thinking tools' that they can put to good use in their own lives. Without this, they are less well equipped to deal with life! A good sensible kind of 'holistic' philosophy and attitude can help people very much to better understand their world, themselves, their fellow beings, their planet and indeed their universe and their relationship to it. And it would help people not just to understand, it also would help them to act and to react. I don't wish to sell my own 'philosophy' as if it were the best or the only one out there. I *would*, though, like it to 'enrich' people's understanding of philosophy and what it could do for them, and especially of the value of 'holism' - a point of view where we look at how things are interconnected and interdependent. I don't want to 'tell' people everything but I can contribute lots of ideas and possibilities and would like to spur them on to doing some of their own research.

I find it quite incredible that philosophy is not recognised as an aid to mental health and wellbeing. I've never encountered a psychologist or psychiatrist who seemed to have any meaningful concept of philosophy. And yet, to me, philosophy has relevance to *everything* related to mental health! For instance, how can a person talk about a 'delusion' without any understanding of what is meant by 'truth' or 'reality', or of how and to what extent humans are able to know (or not know) truth and reality? There are 'mainstream' ideas of what is true and what is real ... but it has been my experience that these 'mainstream' ideas are anything but rock-solid.

Or how can one talk about a person being 'happy' or sad (or in more clinical terms, for instance, 'depressed') without an understanding of happiness and the factors impacting it?

I want to emphasise again that I don't think my 'philosophy' or any others give 100% reliable answers. But philosophy *can* give answers, though they may be 80% or 90% reliable or whatever (of course one could not tell exactly how certain or uncertain they are in exact percentages) ... and along with an awareness of possible answers, could come the realisation that one could be wrong, an acknowledgement of uncertainty. But even uncertain, or not-quite-100%-certain answers, can offer good guidelines ... and also, being aware of what is *not* known, is equally valuable. Many people think they know something when in fact that thing is not nearly certain enough to constitute knowledge ... and that makes it a misconception or in a stronger case, a delusion.

When I look at the world out there, society, I see incredible 'fragmentation' of ideas, beliefs, principles, values, attitudes and so forth. It seems as if the average person is swimming in a kind of conceptual soup. They can't relate one thing to another. They can't see cause and effect relationships. They can't see the implications and consequences of things. Every day I read the Afrikaans newspaper, every day I encounter people's confusion and their misconceptions. I don't wish to put myself 'above' the rest of my people ... but I do know for sure, that I know certain things that lots of people do not know, and I have mental abilities that most people don't have. I also have experience ... my own journey, my own struggles and achievements. I don't think I'm better than others but I do think I have something special to offer ... I can give others a lot of help. Really, this is what I wish to do ... writing a book titled 'The Search for Sanity' and speaking about issues like I'm doing here, with the hope of improving mental health awareness and realising the all-pervasiveness of the topic. If only a few people could read such a book and become more 'attuned' to mental health issues, I'd be very happy! But of course my crazy ideal is that such a book would culminate in a global mental health awareness revolution!

OK I'll post this now ... I have to go and make my own food for lunch! But when I get back later today I'll talk about about 'caring too much'; about apathy in terms of social conditions - possible 'apathy generating' influences; about a possible 'barometer' for measuring overall social mental health; and I'll see what else.

Willem, I have just skimmed through your post, but need to read it properly before I say anything.

There is just one favour you could do me if you would. Could you write shorter paragraphs so it is easier to read? I have a little trouble reading your posts with the very long paragraphs!

I have to go and get some food for myself, before I forget, as my other half is not here!

Back later.

Websailor

Hi again Websailor! OK I'll cut up the paragraphs a bit more.