Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Mental health, and by extension, mental disorder seem to be major human phenomena. In terms of animal behavior we humans get into some pretty unprecedented insanity. It amazes me just how much mental derangement a human animal can tolerate and still function/survive/make babies. From the standpoint of species survival, humans can tolerate a mountain of psychological guck without it having any noticeable impact.

---

I'd disagree that it was ONLY a human phenomenon.

---

Quote:

---

I'd have to say that this is where Frem's discussion becomes very interesting and pertinent. Animals that are not allowed to be as their species intended often suffer from similar neurosis as humans, in so far as we can measure by their behaviour. That has been well documented in zoos, and why they now try to recreat more natural conditions for them to live in. And why there as so many over pampered neurotic pooches out there. Cesare Romero is very clear that dogs are happiest and sanest when they are treated as dogs.

And I think that Frem is correct in that it applies to people as well. Being a social species means we should be living together and caring for our young together. Social isolation and disconnection and poor parenting by inexperienced, isolated and disconnected parents in a major contributor to mental illness. And unfortunately that doens't impinge on our ability to have babies but it does have a major impact on our functioning as a society and I believe we see a lot of the result of that now. Will that impact on our survival as a species? You can't actually rule it out.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

But just because the species can survive stuff like serial killing and pedophile rings doesn't nullify their status as maladaptive and disordered behavior, does it? So bringing up evolution in a discussion of mental health strikes me at the very least to be irrelevant--just as so much of mental health has proven to be irrelevant when it comes to species survival.

As conscious beings, we are no longer obsesses with mere individual survival or subject to the vagaries of the evolutionary process. Humans now can benefit other humans on the other side of the planet without regard to our own immediate survival and many of us, across all cultures, put our efforts toward doing so. Are y'all gonna put such humanitarian interests on the same footing as war and genocide, just because neither makes a dent in the gross human population?

---

Because of course we hardlined, coldhearted, amoral, inhuman posters are all in support of war, genocide and serial killings just because we understand values to be learnt rather than innate and because we understand that human physiology, psychology and behaviour to have evolved rather than been created in some fairytale universe?????

---

Quote:

---

I'd say that truly understanding ourselves as humans, rather than holding onto some romantic ideal, as well as accepting that values are learnt rather than morality being fixed places us in a very good position for choosing what sort of society we can live in, don't you?

---

Quote:

---

You *don't* think that. You *wouldn't* think that. And that's what gives CTS's argument credibility while your facile reversal is nonsense. Folks like CTS and Byte and I are trying to acknowledge that little elephant in the room. You are a moral person, Signy. Sorry to be the bearer of good news.

For all the talk in this thread about how violent and cruel and warlike human beings are, none of us here (that I know of) conform to that model. Even Raptor talks a good game, but he's as comfortably removed from the battle field as any of us. It's this fact that quietly supports CTS's argument and makes you sound schizoid--you're a thoroughly decent person somehow convinced that humans are naturally violent and cruel.

---

Quote:

---

I gotta tell ya: a lot of what you say here disgusts me/sickens me/freaks my shit out. The arrogance it reflects, the contempt for children it implies are disturbing. I can only hope you and I are misunderstanding one another in the biggest possible way. I offer my point of view in the hope that you might have just a moment or two of self-reflection, if only to refute me.

---

Quote:

---

Why you feel the need to tell me that you never said that anyone enjoys being raped or murdered, I just don't know. And so what if ya did? There are people who have enjoyed both. How is that germane?

---

Quote:

---

Can we even agree that, barring some kind of maladaptive weirdness or dastardly intervention, human creatures do not themselves enjoy being murdered and/or raped?

---

Quote:

---

The interesting question to my mind is: can we say that such enjoyment is unhealthy, or "wrong" in some objective sense, or is all just cultural? To me, it's kind of a no-brainer--of course we can, naturally. But, my sense from what's been said in this thread is that folks on your side of this discussion would feel obligated to make all kinds of qualifying statements to the effect that, ultimately, there is no objectively unhealthy (wrong) thing in this world.

I can understand that as a scientist in the laboratory that kind of neutrality and skepticism of all truths could be very useful, laudable, but to espouse such "know-nothingism" in our actual lives seems kinda nutty.

---

Quote:

---

You seem to say that you have your cultural biases and you like them and live by them, but if you don't think those biases are "true" in some larger sense, why would you hold to them?

---

Quote:

---

This kind of misreading drives me nuts. Basic reading comprehension. I never said it was "ONLY" a human phenomenon. If I'd wanted to say that, I coulda said that. I'm talking about humans as animals, among other animals, other animals that suffer mental disturbances. I was suggesting that humans both suffer from a lot more and more complicated derangements and we seem to be pretty well-suited to weathering our psychic storms, oddly enough. We can tolerate a whole lot o' crazy and keep on keeping on. Other animals, not so much. A lot of animals simply die in the kind of "captivity" we take for granted in our modern lives.

---

Quote:

---

This part here is entirely sensible, and congruent with my own thoughts on the matter. But I gotta say that you do seem to suggest that there is a natural right and wrong way for humans to live and that's all I've been suggesting.

---

Quote:

---

I don't know how to begin unraveling the multi-faceted misunderstanding of my position you have there in that sentence. Not talking about any "fairytale universe," just this one here. Just suggesting that concepts of right and wrong have their basis in reality.

---

Quote:

---

I hardly know what to make of this conclusion of yours. I wonder how you get here from what you said above (emphasis mine): "Being a social species means we SHOULD BE living together and caring for our young together. Social isolation and disconnection and poor parenting by inexperienced, isolated and disconnected parents IS A MAJOR CONTRIBUTOR to mental illness. And UNFORTUNATELY that doens't impinge on our ability to have babies but it does HAVE A MAJOR IMPACT on our functioning as a society and I believe we see a lot of the result of that now." You use a lot of valuing language that suggests that there's something kinda-sorta objective about what humans should and shouldn't be doing with ourselves. That's all I've ever meant to say. I just call that "the truth" as best we humans have come to know it. But because I believe this, as it seems you do, I live in a fairytale universe? Really, really strange.

---