Total Posts:33|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Over-medicalization?

Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2013 6:24:55 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Are some otherwise "normal" variations in human behavior, being treated as medical conditions?
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2013 9:39:28 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/25/2013 6:24:55 PM, Polaris wrote:
Are some otherwise "normal" variations in human behavior, being treated as medical conditions?

Yes, research the "Neurodiversity" movement for a feel for just how far it' gone.

The DSM IV has grown something like 50% in the last decade, unique personality traits are being defined as pathological now.
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
YYW
Posts: 36,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/27/2013 3:42:44 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/25/2013 6:24:55 PM, Polaris wrote:
Are some otherwise "normal" variations in human behavior, being treated as medical conditions?

Yes. Psychology delineates sanity from insanity on the basis of a deviation from the norm -whatever the norm is. This is one of the many reasons I am skeptical of the industry of mental health.

Moreover, a lot of the things we consider to be "disorders" like depression, ADD/ADHD, hyperactivity, etc. are side effects of physiological conditions (like B12 or vitamin D deficiencies). What's worse is that many conditions which ostensibly appear to be a neural chemical imbalance -especially in first world countries- are no more than the result of improper nutrition.
Tsar of DDO
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/27/2013 8:21:58 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/27/2013 3:42:44 PM, YYW wrote:
At 2/25/2013 6:24:55 PM, Polaris wrote:
Are some otherwise "normal" variations in human behavior, being treated as medical conditions?

Yes. Psychology delineates sanity from insanity on the basis of a deviation from the norm -whatever the norm is.

Sanity is a legal term, not a medical one. Contrary to popular belief, Insanity is not a psychological concept.

Moreover, a lot of the things we consider to be "disorders" like depression, ADD/ADHD, hyperactivity, etc. are side effects of physiological conditions (like B12 or vitamin D deficiencies). What's worse is that many conditions which ostensibly appear to be a neural chemical imbalance -especially in first world countries- are no more than the result of improper nutrition.

Wouldn't that indicate that they were real medical conditions, and not just natural behavioral variation?
YYW
Posts: 36,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/27/2013 8:34:18 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/27/2013 8:21:58 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/27/2013 3:42:44 PM, YYW wrote:
At 2/25/2013 6:24:55 PM, Polaris wrote:
Are some otherwise "normal" variations in human behavior, being treated as medical conditions?

Yes. Psychology delineates sanity from insanity on the basis of a deviation from the norm -whatever the norm is.

Sanity is a legal term, not a medical one. Contrary to popular belief, Insanity is not a psychological concept.

It is a legal term because it is a medical term. How can you possibly not understand this?



Moreover, a lot of the things we consider to be "disorders" like depression, ADD/ADHD, hyperactivity, etc. are side effects of physiological conditions (like B12 or vitamin D deficiencies). What's worse is that many conditions which ostensibly appear to be a neural chemical imbalance -especially in first world countries- are no more than the result of improper nutrition.

Wouldn't that indicate that they were real medical conditions, and not just natural behavioral variation?

To the extent that a nutrition deficiency is a medical condition, the symptoms which can be misdiagnosed as a psychological disorder (but which are caused by a nutrition deficiency) are not naturally occurring behavioral variations. However, in the absence of physiological causes, the behavioral conditions which are sufficient for a diagnoses of a psychological disorder may still be disorders, whether they are naturally occurring or not.
Tsar of DDO
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/27/2013 11:15:57 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/27/2013 8:34:18 PM, YYW wrote:
It is a legal term because it is a medical term. How can you possibly not understand this?

I do understand what you're saying, but it's false.

"The forensic mental health specialists submit their evaluations to the court. Since the question of sanity or insanity is a legal question and not a medical one, the judge and or jury will make the final decision regarding the defendant's status regarding an insanity defense."

http://en.wikipedia.org...

"Some opponents attack the insanity defense for confusing psychiatric and legal concepts, in the process undermining the moral integrity of the law. Both sides agree that the word insane is a legal, not medical, term."

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...

To the extent that a nutrition deficiency is a medical condition, the symptoms which can be misdiagnosed as a psychological disorder (but which are caused by a nutrition deficiency) are not naturally occurring behavioral variations. However, in the absence of physiological causes, the behavioral conditions which are sufficient for a diagnoses of a psychological disorder may still be disorders, whether they are naturally occurring or not.

Then that wouldn't be over-medicalization, that would just be misdiagnosis.
YYW
Posts: 36,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/28/2013 1:25:51 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/27/2013 11:15:57 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/27/2013 8:34:18 PM, YYW wrote:
It is a legal term because it is a medical term. How can you possibly not understand this?

I do understand what you're saying, but it's false.


"The forensic mental health specialists submit their evaluations to the court. Since the question of sanity or insanity is a legal question and not a medical one, the judge and or jury will make the final decision regarding the defendant's status regarding an insanity defense."

http://en.wikipedia.org...

"Some opponents attack the insanity defense for confusing psychiatric and legal concepts, in the process undermining the moral integrity of the law. Both sides agree that the word insane is a legal, not medical, term."

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...



To the extent that a nutrition deficiency is a medical condition, the symptoms which can be misdiagnosed as a psychological disorder (but which are caused by a nutrition deficiency) are not naturally occurring behavioral variations. However, in the absence of physiological causes, the behavioral conditions which are sufficient for a diagnoses of a psychological disorder may still be disorders, whether they are naturally occurring or not.

Then that wouldn't be over-medicalization, that would just be misdiagnosis.

You would literally argue with a stop sign, wouldn't you.
Tsar of DDO
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/28/2013 1:37:47 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/28/2013 1:25:51 AM, YYW wrote:
At 2/27/2013 11:15:57 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/27/2013 8:34:18 PM, YYW wrote:
It is a legal term because it is a medical term. How can you possibly not understand this?

I do understand what you're saying, but it's false.


"The forensic mental health specialists submit their evaluations to the court. Since the question of sanity or insanity is a legal question and not a medical one, the judge and or jury will make the final decision regarding the defendant's status regarding an insanity defense."

http://en.wikipedia.org...

"Some opponents attack the insanity defense for confusing psychiatric and legal concepts, in the process undermining the moral integrity of the law. Both sides agree that the word insane is a legal, not medical, term."

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...



To the extent that a nutrition deficiency is a medical condition, the symptoms which can be misdiagnosed as a psychological disorder (but which are caused by a nutrition deficiency) are not naturally occurring behavioral variations. However, in the absence of physiological causes, the behavioral conditions which are sufficient for a diagnoses of a psychological disorder may still be disorders, whether they are naturally occurring or not.

Then that wouldn't be over-medicalization, that would just be misdiagnosis.

You would literally argue with a stop sign, wouldn't you.

No, but I'm starting to think you would. I was first informed that Insanity was a legal concept, not a psychological one by a professor of Psychology with a Ph.D in psychology, and I have several sources which do confirm this.

Your argument thus far amounts to "Na Uh!".
YYW
Posts: 36,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/28/2013 2:00:44 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/28/2013 1:37:47 AM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/28/2013 1:25:51 AM, YYW wrote:
At 2/27/2013 11:15:57 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/27/2013 8:34:18 PM, YYW wrote:
It is a legal term because it is a medical term. How can you possibly not understand this?

I do understand what you're saying, but it's false.


"The forensic mental health specialists submit their evaluations to the court. Since the question of sanity or insanity is a legal question and not a medical one, the judge and or jury will make the final decision regarding the defendant's status regarding an insanity defense."

http://en.wikipedia.org...

"Some opponents attack the insanity defense for confusing psychiatric and legal concepts, in the process undermining the moral integrity of the law. Both sides agree that the word insane is a legal, not medical, term."

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...



To the extent that a nutrition deficiency is a medical condition, the symptoms which can be misdiagnosed as a psychological disorder (but which are caused by a nutrition deficiency) are not naturally occurring behavioral variations. However, in the absence of physiological causes, the behavioral conditions which are sufficient for a diagnoses of a psychological disorder may still be disorders, whether they are naturally occurring or not.

Then that wouldn't be over-medicalization, that would just be misdiagnosis.

You would literally argue with a stop sign, wouldn't you.

No, but I'm starting to think you would. I was first informed that Insanity was a legal concept, not a psychological one by a professor of Psychology with a Ph.D in psychology, and I have several sources which do confirm this.

Your argument thus far amounts to "Na Uh!".

Sane behavior is behavior that is consistent with norms, insanity is only that behavior which is inconsistent with norms which may be attributable to some sort of mental defect. The reason that insanity exists as a legal concept is on the basis that modern psychology suggests a degree of reduced accountability for one's actions because of some relevant mental defect. Your argument is that I've used a word out of place -which is pointless. The point which you have missed is HOW the sanity and insanity are determined, the latter is based on behavioral differentiation from the former -but the cause of that differentiation is attributable (at least according to psychology) to some mental defect. The absurdity of that is that the defect itself is categorized by behavior which itself differs from the norm. It's a tautological bout of nonsense.

Do you actually read the post you respond do before you respond to it? I have to wonder...
Tsar of DDO
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/28/2013 2:45:54 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/28/2013 2:00:44 AM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 1:37:47 AM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/28/2013 1:25:51 AM, YYW wrote:
At 2/27/2013 11:15:57 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/27/2013 8:34:18 PM, YYW wrote:
It is a legal term because it is a medical term. How can you possibly not understand this?

I do understand what you're saying, but it's false.


"The forensic mental health specialists submit their evaluations to the court. Since the question of sanity or insanity is a legal question and not a medical one, the judge and or jury will make the final decision regarding the defendant's status regarding an insanity defense."

http://en.wikipedia.org...

"Some opponents attack the insanity defense for confusing psychiatric and legal concepts, in the process undermining the moral integrity of the law. Both sides agree that the word insane is a legal, not medical, term."

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...



To the extent that a nutrition deficiency is a medical condition, the symptoms which can be misdiagnosed as a psychological disorder (but which are caused by a nutrition deficiency) are not naturally occurring behavioral variations. However, in the absence of physiological causes, the behavioral conditions which are sufficient for a diagnoses of a psychological disorder may still be disorders, whether they are naturally occurring or not.

Then that wouldn't be over-medicalization, that would just be misdiagnosis.

You would literally argue with a stop sign, wouldn't you.

No, but I'm starting to think you would. I was first informed that Insanity was a legal concept, not a psychological one by a professor of Psychology with a Ph.D in psychology, and I have several sources which do confirm this.

Your argument thus far amounts to "Na Uh!".

Sane behavior is behavior that is consistent with norms, insanity is only that behavior which is inconsistent with norms which may be attributable to some sort of mental defect. The reason that insanity exists as a legal concept is on the basis that modern psychology suggests a degree of reduced accountability for one's actions because of some relevant mental defect. Your argument is that I've used a word out of place -which is pointless. The point which you have missed is HOW the sanity and insanity are determined, the latter is based on behavioral differentiation from the former -but the cause of that differentiation is attributable (at least according to psychology) to some mental defect. The absurdity of that is that the defect itself is categorized by behavior which itself differs from the norm. It's a tautological bout of nonsense.

Do you actually read the post you respond do before you respond to it? I have to wonder...

Before I address this, answer this question for me please:

Insanity is a legal term, not a medical term, correct?
YYW
Posts: 36,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/28/2013 3:29:55 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/28/2013 2:45:54 AM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/28/2013 2:00:44 AM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 1:37:47 AM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/28/2013 1:25:51 AM, YYW wrote:
At 2/27/2013 11:15:57 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/27/2013 8:34:18 PM, YYW wrote:
It is a legal term because it is a medical term. How can you possibly not understand this?

I do understand what you're saying, but it's false.


"The forensic mental health specialists submit their evaluations to the court. Since the question of sanity or insanity is a legal question and not a medical one, the judge and or jury will make the final decision regarding the defendant's status regarding an insanity defense."

http://en.wikipedia.org...

"Some opponents attack the insanity defense for confusing psychiatric and legal concepts, in the process undermining the moral integrity of the law. Both sides agree that the word insane is a legal, not medical, term."

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...



To the extent that a nutrition deficiency is a medical condition, the symptoms which can be misdiagnosed as a psychological disorder (but which are caused by a nutrition deficiency) are not naturally occurring behavioral variations. However, in the absence of physiological causes, the behavioral conditions which are sufficient for a diagnoses of a psychological disorder may still be disorders, whether they are naturally occurring or not.

Then that wouldn't be over-medicalization, that would just be misdiagnosis.

You would literally argue with a stop sign, wouldn't you.

No, but I'm starting to think you would. I was first informed that Insanity was a legal concept, not a psychological one by a professor of Psychology with a Ph.D in psychology, and I have several sources which do confirm this.

Your argument thus far amounts to "Na Uh!".

Sane behavior is behavior that is consistent with norms, insanity is only that behavior which is inconsistent with norms which may be attributable to some sort of mental defect. The reason that insanity exists as a legal concept is on the basis that modern psychology suggests a degree of reduced accountability for one's actions because of some relevant mental defect. Your argument is that I've used a word out of place -which is pointless. The point which you have missed is HOW the sanity and insanity are determined, the latter is based on behavioral differentiation from the former -but the cause of that differentiation is attributable (at least according to psychology) to some mental defect. The absurdity of that is that the defect itself is categorized by behavior which itself differs from the norm. It's a tautological bout of nonsense.

Do you actually read the post you respond do before you respond to it? I have to wonder...

Before I address this, answer this question for me please:

Insanity is a legal term, not a medical term, correct?

The term is a legal one which carries the weight of psychological evaluation. It is legal plea which is offered because of a psychological diagnosis. It is not as if we are talking about legal v. psychological, where the former is informed by the latter -the former (legal) cannot be without the latter (psychological). Does this make sense to you?
Tsar of DDO
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/28/2013 7:48:03 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/28/2013 3:29:55 AM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 2:45:54 AM, Polaris wrote:
Before I address this, answer this question for me please:

Insanity is a legal term, not a medical term, correct?

The term is a legal one which carries the weight of psychological evaluation.

Yes, but is it a medical (or psychological) term, yes or no?
YYW
Posts: 36,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/28/2013 10:43:58 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/28/2013 7:48:03 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/28/2013 3:29:55 AM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 2:45:54 AM, Polaris wrote:
Before I address this, answer this question for me please:

Insanity is a legal term, not a medical term, correct?

The term is a legal one which carries the weight of psychological evaluation.

Yes, but is it a medical (or psychological) term, yes or no?

Did you not read the post?
Tsar of DDO
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/28/2013 11:22:58 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/28/2013 10:43:58 PM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 7:48:03 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/28/2013 3:29:55 AM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 2:45:54 AM, Polaris wrote:
Before I address this, answer this question for me please:

Insanity is a legal term, not a medical term, correct?

The term is a legal one which carries the weight of psychological evaluation.

Yes, but is it a medical (or psychological) term, yes or no?

Did you not read the post?

Your response was a non-denial denial. Your response didn't state whether or not you thought it was a medical term. By answering a similar but different question than what was asked, you gave the impression that you answered the question, when in fact you did not.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

So let's try this again: "Is insanity a medical (or psychological) term, yes or no?
YYW
Posts: 36,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/28/2013 11:35:53 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/28/2013 11:22:58 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/28/2013 10:43:58 PM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 7:48:03 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/28/2013 3:29:55 AM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 2:45:54 AM, Polaris wrote:
Before I address this, answer this question for me please:

Insanity is a legal term, not a medical term, correct?

The term is a legal one which carries the weight of psychological evaluation.

Yes, but is it a medical (or psychological) term, yes or no?

Did you not read the post?

Your response was a non-denial denial. Your response didn't state whether or not you thought it was a medical term. By answering a similar but different question than what was asked, you gave the impression that you answered the question, when in fact you did not.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

So let's try this again: "Is insanity a medical (or psychological) term, yes or no?

This is pointless.
Tsar of DDO
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/28/2013 11:52:53 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/28/2013 11:35:53 PM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 11:22:58 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/28/2013 10:43:58 PM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 7:48:03 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/28/2013 3:29:55 AM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 2:45:54 AM, Polaris wrote:
Before I address this, answer this question for me please:

Insanity is a legal term, not a medical term, correct?

The term is a legal one which carries the weight of psychological evaluation.

Yes, but is it a medical (or psychological) term, yes or no?

Did you not read the post?

Your response was a non-denial denial. Your response didn't state whether or not you thought it was a medical term. By answering a similar but different question than what was asked, you gave the impression that you answered the question, when in fact you did not.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

So let's try this again: "Is insanity a medical (or psychological) term, yes or no?

This is pointless.

You were using a dishonest debate tactic, and you were called on it. Own up to it. Just answer the question.
YYW
Posts: 36,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/1/2013 12:02:11 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/28/2013 11:52:53 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/28/2013 11:35:53 PM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 11:22:58 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/28/2013 10:43:58 PM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 7:48:03 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/28/2013 3:29:55 AM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 2:45:54 AM, Polaris wrote:
Before I address this, answer this question for me please:

Insanity is a legal term, not a medical term, correct?

The term is a legal one which carries the weight of psychological evaluation.

Yes, but is it a medical (or psychological) term, yes or no?

Did you not read the post?

Your response was a non-denial denial. Your response didn't state whether or not you thought it was a medical term. By answering a similar but different question than what was asked, you gave the impression that you answered the question, when in fact you did not.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

So let's try this again: "Is insanity a medical (or psychological) term, yes or no?

This is pointless.

You were using a dishonest debate tactic, and you were called on it. Own up to it. Just answer the question.

I'm taking issue with the premise of the question, which I explained. Insanity is a legal term which carries medical (or psychological) gravity, such that one may only be declared insane, when demonstrated a doctor/psychiatrist to have some sort of mental defect. I used the term to refer to a deviation from the norm, however, not in a legal context. His question presupposes that the use was out of place, and it wasn't, because the concept remains the same.

So, to be EXPLICITLY CLEAR once more:

legal ==> psychological/medical

NOT

legal v. psychological/moral
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/1/2013 12:03:11 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/1/2013 12:02:11 AM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 11:52:53 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/28/2013 11:35:53 PM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 11:22:58 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/28/2013 10:43:58 PM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 7:48:03 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/28/2013 3:29:55 AM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 2:45:54 AM, Polaris wrote:
Before I address this, answer this question for me please:

Insanity is a legal term, not a medical term, correct?

The term is a legal one which carries the weight of psychological evaluation.

Yes, but is it a medical (or psychological) term, yes or no?

Did you not read the post?

Your response was a non-denial denial. Your response didn't state whether or not you thought it was a medical term. By answering a similar but different question than what was asked, you gave the impression that you answered the question, when in fact you did not.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

So let's try this again: "Is insanity a medical (or psychological) term, yes or no?

This is pointless.

You were using a dishonest debate tactic, and you were called on it. Own up to it. Just answer the question.

I'm taking issue with the premise of the question, which I explained. Insanity is a legal term which carries medical (or psychological) gravity, such that one may only be declared insane, when demonstrated a doctor/psychiatrist to have some sort of mental defect. I used the term to refer to a deviation from the norm, however, not in a legal context. His* question presupposes that the use was out of place, and it wasn't, because the concept remains the same.

So, to be EXPLICITLY CLEAR once more:

legal ==> psychological/medical

NOT

legal v. psychological/moral

Sorry, *your question, not his question.
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/1/2013 12:06:21 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/28/2013 11:39:13 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 2/28/2013 11:35:53 PM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 11:22:58 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/28/2013 10:43:58 PM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 7:48:03 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/28/2013 3:29:55 AM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 2:45:54 AM, Polaris wrote:

http://imgur.com...

Do you think Polaris is sincere or a troll? I mean, if he is a troll, he's a very convincing one... but I truly can't tell.
Tsar of DDO
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/1/2013 12:37:07 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/1/2013 12:06:21 AM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 11:39:13 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 2/28/2013 11:35:53 PM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 11:22:58 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/28/2013 10:43:58 PM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 7:48:03 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/28/2013 3:29:55 AM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 2:45:54 AM, Polaris wrote:

http://imgur.com...

Do you think Polaris is sincere or a troll? I mean, if he is a troll, he's a very convincing one... but I truly can't tell.

I don't think he's a troll any more than you are. You're both really smart, but I think your personalities also incorporate an amount of hubris sufficient to make sincere dialogue between you difficult. I mean, most of this thread consists in you two either being passive-aggressive or accusing each other of posturing/being dishonest ("Did you read the post?"; "So let's try this again"; "This is pointless"; "You would argue with a stop sign, wouldn't you?"/"no u"; "Here's this wikipedia article on non-denial denial for you to read"). I know you do it, and it seems like Polaris also gets bogged down in it, cf. [http://www.debate.org...].

My experience is that the best discussions happen with people between whom there is a positive personal understanding/connection (in which case the ego does not intrude); I just thought this thread was funny because there's clearly no open communication or intellectual kinship between you guys, and defensiveness/frustration surface as a result. So, popcorn.
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/1/2013 1:20:31 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/1/2013 12:02:11 AM, YYW wrote:
I'm taking issue with the premise of the question, which I explained. Insanity is a legal term which carries medical (or psychological) gravity

I don't deny there is a psychological gravity to the question of insanity, but you very clearly stated that it was a medical term. I disputed this and provided two sources, that stated in no uncertain terms that it is a legal term only.

Why not simply say "It's not a medical term but it does have medical significance"? You're so wrapped up in "winning" that you can't admit trivial errors. I am guilty of this too on occasion, but perhaps there is something to be learned from this.
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/1/2013 1:25:00 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/1/2013 12:37:07 AM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
I don't think he's a troll any more than you are. You're both really smart, but I think your personalities also incorporate an amount of hubris sufficient to make sincere dialogue between you difficult.

I appreciate the compliment, and I will attempt to abate my hubris.
YYW
Posts: 36,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/1/2013 1:25:50 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/1/2013 1:20:31 AM, Polaris wrote:
At 3/1/2013 12:02:11 AM, YYW wrote:
I'm taking issue with the premise of the question, which I explained. Insanity is a legal term which carries medical (or psychological) gravity

I don't deny there is a psychological gravity to the question of insanity.

I'm glad we agree.
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/1/2013 1:26:40 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/1/2013 12:37:07 AM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 3/1/2013 12:06:21 AM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 11:39:13 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 2/28/2013 11:35:53 PM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 11:22:58 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/28/2013 10:43:58 PM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 7:48:03 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/28/2013 3:29:55 AM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 2:45:54 AM, Polaris wrote:

http://imgur.com...

Do you think Polaris is sincere or a troll? I mean, if he is a troll, he's a very convincing one... but I truly can't tell.

I don't think he's a troll any more than you are.

Fair point.... lol
Tsar of DDO
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/1/2013 1:10:53 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/1/2013 1:25:50 AM, YYW wrote:
At 3/1/2013 1:20:31 AM, Polaris wrote:
At 3/1/2013 12:02:11 AM, YYW wrote:
I'm taking issue with the premise of the question, which I explained. Insanity is a legal term which carries medical (or psychological) gravity

I don't deny there is a psychological gravity to the question of insanity.

I'm glad we agree.

Are you going to acknowledge the other part of my post?
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/1/2013 3:40:13 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/1/2013 12:06:21 AM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 11:39:13 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 2/28/2013 11:35:53 PM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 11:22:58 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/28/2013 10:43:58 PM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 7:48:03 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/28/2013 3:29:55 AM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 2:45:54 AM, Polaris wrote:

http://imgur.com...

Do you think Polaris is sincere or a troll? I mean, if he is a troll, he's a very convincing one... but I truly can't tell.

Good question, I think he's young and enjoys being a contrarian, pushes the same buttons on me as he does with you and enjoys it, so there's troll like qualities, but in general, I think he really doesn't get the posts he responds to. Perhaps it's because he doesn't want to, maybe it's a comprehension thing, but my read is he responds the way he does because he really doesn't follow what you are saying. I think he repeats his dogmatic assertions because he isn't clear on your point but figures he should disagree and then declare he won.

I don't know if that's actually troll, but it sure feels like when you are trying to make a point.
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/1/2013 3:52:13 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/1/2013 3:40:13 PM, Sidewalker wrote:
At 3/1/2013 12:06:21 AM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 11:39:13 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 2/28/2013 11:35:53 PM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 11:22:58 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/28/2013 10:43:58 PM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 7:48:03 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/28/2013 3:29:55 AM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 2:45:54 AM, Polaris wrote:

http://imgur.com...

Do you think Polaris is sincere or a troll? I mean, if he is a troll, he's a very convincing one... but I truly can't tell.

Good question, I think he's young and enjoys being a contrarian, pushes the same buttons on me as he does with you and enjoys it, so there's troll like qualities, but in general, I think he really doesn't get the posts he responds to. Perhaps it's because he doesn't want to, maybe it's a comprehension thing, but my read is he responds the way he does because he really doesn't follow what you are saying. I think he repeats his dogmatic assertions because he isn't clear on your point but figures he should disagree and then declare he won.

I don't know if that's actually troll, but it sure feels like when you are trying to make a point.

I expect this kind of response from you.
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/1/2013 3:58:07 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
The re-occurring problem I've noticed Is that if I dispute a statement someone makes, posters automatically assume I'm also disputing their conclusion. If I ask a question, they try to anticipate the point they think I'm trying to make and argue that instead of he actual question I'm asking. This is where the miscommunication happens.
YYW
Posts: 36,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2013 1:39:51 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/1/2013 3:40:13 PM, Sidewalker wrote:
At 3/1/2013 12:06:21 AM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 11:39:13 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 2/28/2013 11:35:53 PM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 11:22:58 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/28/2013 10:43:58 PM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 7:48:03 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/28/2013 3:29:55 AM, YYW wrote:
At 2/28/2013 2:45:54 AM, Polaris wrote:

http://imgur.com...

Do you think Polaris is sincere or a troll? I mean, if he is a troll, he's a very convincing one... but I truly can't tell.

Good question, I think he's young and enjoys being a contrarian, pushes the same buttons on me as he does with you and enjoys it, so there's troll like qualities, but in general, I think he really doesn't get the posts he responds to. Perhaps it's because he doesn't want to, maybe it's a comprehension thing, but my read is he responds the way he does because he really doesn't follow what you are saying. I think he repeats his dogmatic assertions because he isn't clear on your point but figures he should disagree and then declare he won.

I don't know if that's actually troll, but it sure feels like when you are trying to make a point.

I've just noticed this as a general pattern of his forum behavior.

Person(x) will make claim (A)
Polaris will confuse the meaning of claim (A), change it to what he likes and refute a claim which is not (A).
Person (x) will repeat claim (A), for clarification.
Polaris will either repeat the aforementioned, change the subject, confuse the issue or attack the speaker. I have noticed that the longer a person interacts with Polaris, the more likely he is to in some way call them less than his intellectual equal -which is ironic because his was the first misunderstanding.
It all devolves from there...

When I was discussing war, laws of war and combatant statuses, the more I read over his posts, the more I realized that I was dealing with someone who truly did not understand what he was talking about and could not without a considerable degree of effort allocated to the process of understanding that subject area. So, it's not that he's necessarily stupid, only that he's ignorant and believes himself to be quite a great deal more profound than he is.

In my case, there are a litany of subjects on which I am incompetent to speak -so I don't speak on them. Nuclear physics (or hard/life science in general), astronomy, engineering, computer stuff, accounting, the history of the Mongol empire, etc. Truly, the list goes on... But what I've noticed also with Polaris is that what he posts seems to come off of google, and while he may be able to make effective use of the internet for research, his grounding of basic factual knowledge and logical reasoning are remarkably underdeveloped. Arguing with him is like arguing with a precocious college freshman trying to interpret a regression model. Fun. Fun. Fun.
Tsar of DDO