Soberpotamus

This is EndGame's area of expertise, though. Not mine.

Soberpotamus

Probably not a true paradox. Probably a better word for it.

PhoenixJ

Maybe not paradox- however the concept of a schizoid state in the realms of existentialism is thought provoking. Could be the other way around. Is reality a state of delusion? Thinks if I actually read Laing a bit- might actually have an idea what I am thinking about.

Soberpotamus

It is thought provoking, for sure. Existentialism is often approached by or handled best by ontology (the study of the nature of the existence of things, the the study of the nature of being); Laing describes the schizoid as a person of ontological insecurity (someone unsure of or not OK with the nature of his own being-in-the-world). So there's the framework he lays. And that's oversimplification.

After this, I'm going to read The Paradoxes of Delusion by Louis Sass -- this is looking at schizophrenia through Wittgenstein's philosophy and solipsism.

Solipsism might be one answer to 'is reality a state of delusion.' Although, it's pretty 'out there' and just too weird to be practical. But I can already see how it might elucidate the state of being 'schizophrenic.' In parentheses because there's not agreement over what is schizophrenia, lol. Some believe it to be an umbrella term for individual disorders.

PhoenixJ

SP- need to chase up Camus as well. When asked how I cope so well (?) given my last year and is there a purpose to my existence- I usually say- that because of the absurdity of it all, I laugh at it, take stock and move on. Well that's the plan anyway.

Soberpotamus

Sounds like you are handling it well.

GroundhogDay

Done well, sci-fi can inspire humanity to achieve great things -- things that improve our quality of life and expand our horizons. The best also illuminates mankind's recurring struggles through the various Ages. Unfortunately, most of it is done poorly.

Soberpotamus

My first sci-fi experience was reading 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea. I adored that book. And I have ever since been somewhat fascinated with submarines.

I would say I like literary science fiction, and its arguable, but Handmaids Tale by Margaret Atwood, The Road by Cormac McCarthy, and a few by Haruki Murakami are probably in this vein.

GroundhogDay

20,000 Leagues Under the Sea was the first real book I read (meaning, not of the See Spot Run variety). I was in first grade and had to keep referring to the dictionary. Took me forever to get through it.

Soberpotamus

Lord of the Flies was probably my first serious book. It was the book that really stayed with me. I felt horror reading it. Pretty heavy book for a kid to read. I mean, I really felt the implications and themes were huge and heavy.

EndGameNYC

I and many others who've worked with people who carry a diagnosis of schizophrenia, and those of us who've worked in research on schizophrenia, refer to the disorder as the "schizophrenias," largely because the major subtypes within the diagnosis present with very different symptoms. The most obvious common thread among all subtypes is the differences in brain composition or volume of brain matter in the frontal lobes -- I can't think of a better word or phrase at the moment -- as compared to people who don't carry the diagnosis.

There is one way that makes doing research a bit more simple, and that's by dividing the schizophrenias into those with positive symptoms and negative symptoms. Positive symptoms mostly refer to the more florid symptoms of psychosis, such as audio and visual hallucination, whereas negative symptoms are more about such things as an obvious absence of motivation, lowered overall activity, poverty of speech and more.

What's also common among subtypes, and the primary symptom of the disorder which goes back to Kraeplin's early conceptualization of schizophrenia, is a dramatic deficit in volition.

PhoenixJ

The problem with 'labels' is that grey area of definition. How to define the quality of humanity? A self aware, animated bag of meat? A complex diaspora of chemicals and stuff with a reality within a delusion? Brain exploding stuff. What ever I am- I am. A place to start from...

Soberpotamus

If you enjoy thinking about that stuff, philosophy is a great playground.

In school, I studied both philosophy and psychology, so I am always attracted to anywhere these two can intersect.

My favorite philosophy classes: existentialism, ethics, philosophy of mind, aesthetics.

Soberpotamus

I have another short training day at the PO today. Will be back sometime before noon.

PhoenixJ

Q: What is a good question in philosophy?
A: That is.

Q: What is a good answer?
A: This is.

PhoenixJ

How Absurd.

Soberpotamus

Fwiw, PJ, labels don't have to be perfect or always spot on, I mean, they're for categorization and ultimately, to facilitate communication (understanding). Lots of labeled things are oddly labeled or are just easily understood common-sense concepts and phenomena, right? Still, it helps to use 'labels.'

Gilmer

Along that line, do you think that generalizations can ever be useful?

PhoenixJ

Labels and generalisations have their place. Global communities rely on them. Conformity to humane rules, mores (so I do not catch a bus naked with a bloodied axe, say). I t is when a label or generalisation maketh the person or the society. Was Jesus the perfect 'communist?' Do not trust her- she's an 'alcoholic'. The strength of human experience suggests change and evolving perceptions depending on circumstance. A 'label' in war time- nazi, facist or a religious belief- gnostic, Jehova's W's.
So long as labels and as such are a starting point- but not an absolute ends to a means, they have their place. Like it or not.

Gilmer

I agree. They're very useful to a point--but when dealing with individuals, there comes a time in which one has to look at people as individuals within the group. Though we all share a common humanity, each of us is unique at the core.