What exactly is madness?

Venus, what you are describing about your travels and cheezy hotels and all the other things you mention. What if that was taught to be the "IN, ACCEPTED, COOL WAY TO TRAVEL AND LEARN?" The way you have describe it was more of a tramatic or even loathsome way to travel and learn and see the world around you. What is your own PERCEPTION of this experience?

I was being sarcastic. But in a way it is not rational. Why be uncomfortable in pursuit of adventures that can be potentionally dangerous?

My perception? It is a life style... lowbudget is a whole philosophy. I guess I am seeking adventure, running away a bit... I want to feel alive. I feel like that on the road.

I think that a better way of looking at it is that you were incredibly resourseful and you did do it, dam girl, good for you. Those others that have depression as a fad, I don't think they could do that do you? You are the better, but for some reason, you do not see that. So in effect you feel deprived in your learning, that should not be the case. What you did was venture and learn, you did not deprive yourself, your only percieving that, unknowingly, learned behavior. You have an anger for this, should not be there, you should be rewarding yourself, not with anger but with the fact that you did it, you were resourseful.

I don't feel deprived or ansty... again, I was being sarcastic...

but when you look at it... objectivelly... does my behavior make sense? Does the whole tourism industry make sense (I said this as *expert* as tourism is a thing I have licenced and educated in). Besides desire to learn and humans being bit of adrenaline junkies... can this be explained by science - which as pachy claimed - explains things philosophy does not?

Isn't desire to roam the planet a socially accepted form of madness? People go travel the world when disappointed in life or when on crossroads...


When Venus mentions that group that felt depression was something that was cool, a fad, acceptable excuse to refrain from actively persuing life. Perhaps that was learned too. Maybe by parents, maybe by others, society

They could be "depressed" as fad,because they could afford it and the society is in such place where it is accepted.



sorry if I ran off topic. I guess there is a label for it.. I can't just be random, can I?

In theory, Venus, not necessarily that we know it all now. Plenty of things to find out about, plenty of time to find out!

But why disregard all philosophy than when science is not much better to provide answers we somehow need? Maybe science cannot explain the miracle of life after all?

Ah Venus your last statement, is that off topic? LOL

The topic is What exactly is madness? Perhaps madness is not allowing one to just be random. Philosophy, and Science, is philosphy random? Is Science random in exploration for meanings of what exists?

One day Einstein had a random thought that lead to discovering major scientific equations.

And how is it supposed to be known that you were being sarcastic? Or is sarcasim just an escape from a real opinion that now may be changed or a way of not accepting another opinion or idea?

How is desire to roam the planet a social acceptance of madness? So, we are mad if we wish to explore our own planet, are we mad to wish to explore the galaxy or the moon or other planets? Is it mad to even have philosophy or science or are you again being sarcastic?

Is searching for wisdom and exploration and knowledge being an adrenaline junky?

If an artist is filled with adrenaline as he creates a masterpiece is that madness?
If someone is filled with emotion and states a quote, was he full of adrenaline by doing so? If we use that quote to represent how we may feel are we only sharing adrenaline?

Einstein had a random thought one day, and that thought gave to other thoughts which no doubt produced adrenaline to proceed with even more thoughts that led to proving and expanding on that original random thought. Oh, I think the madness would have come if he was denied that process.

You make it sound as though adrenaline is something bad and only fuels madness. I think not, I think that it can be misused, but it is not designed for that. Adrenaline is there within us to assist us for survival. It is within many animals, something that is there for that moment of pure survival. Or are you being sarcastic?

Are you sqeezing a nickle so tight so that the indian is riding the buffalo? Oh, that is not your coinage, I was being sarcastic. LOL

Elliemay, I have a question for you and I am NOT being sarcastic. You talked about the work in your recovery. What is the work against? I am trying to understand if you are working to stop punishing yourself for trying to blame yourself for something learned. I have been really wondering about this as I listen to people who really struggle, and they punish themselves for something. Is that punishment because they were not capable of performing or achieving a goal that someone else taught them they had to achieve? Where does that come from ellie? I also see this struggle in depression in our youth and even eating disorders. It is a self loathing and punishment and I am trying to understand why. When I listen to some of the background it always seems to somehow originate by somehow being denied something or a feeling of not conforming that begins to internalize in some sort of self punishment. It does puzzle me.

I even noticed it in Paulos recollection of his youth, tearing his own room apart and wanting to give up and hide in that Mental institution. But he was denied something, he does speak of this. He did over come it, but he did find courage to seek what was denied. And it does connect with the fact that while someone can perform a daily task, or job normally, they are deemed as not threatening to society, UNTIL, they walk the streets with a machine gun.

Oh yes that young pshychatrist did him a favor by telling him he was not mad and wrote him a perscription for tranquilizer and he had no other choice but to eventually conform to what was deemed the best way to be productive. But, instead of using a machine gun, he gave that up and wrote. What did he really escape? What did he really learn? What point is he really missing? He left it out. Ellie, when he began to write, that was when he did the real work. He is leaving a very significant process out. Whether it be in an institution or the institution of submissing to being productive within an acceptable state, is that not all one in the same? Did he not finally find the adrenaline to proceed with his original desire? And he did travel Venus, was he an adrenaline junky? Did he run or did he find?

Open Eyes

My sarcasm (that is the correct term) was pretty obvious, implying it is "disorder"... as reference to the whole previous discussion. I don't change my opinions that quickly.

And if you knew me (and you should since you replied to numerous post of mine and claimed to read my blog), you should know... it is my style and I am not changing it.

I never strived to normal. I embrace my quirks.

I do not know if I am going to be able to answer your questions to your satisfaction Open Eyes. They are quite loaded indeed.

I've never really felt as though I was punishing myself - maybe not giving myself enough credit for the amazing things that I am, but not actively punishing myself. I mean no one is perfect. Sometimes it's about forgiving. Make any sense?

My single biggest psychological struggle has been to free myself from fear. Fear for my own personal safety, fear for my emotional integrity, and fear of love. Yes love. There is a wholeness in me know. A courage. Perhaps like the author.

My single biggest physiological struggle has been with depression. I've gotten to the point now where I'm like "hello sadness" and just move with it instead of against it. Lean against it instead of try and push through it.

No life is not a bed of roses, but I'm okay. Content. I've gotten a lot of help, and been able to accept it.

Hope that's what you're looking for.

Thanks elliemay, It is not really about what I am looking for per say. I guess I just want to understand better. I was inspired by your strength and desire to do the work as you described. So I just wanted to understand you better. I know what you mean about fear and a need for feeling safe. I do like to learn about others and how they find strength. I was also curious if you knew the reasons for your own struggles, many times people don't really know. But it sounds like you are getting help and no, life is not always a bed of roses but finding our own personal strength is important that can bring safety in itself.

Venus I don't read you blogs just your about me page a while back. And yes I have posted to one or two of your threads I don't dislike you I think that some of your questions are valid and others have the same concerns. Sometimes I find your view of thinking of a statement as a sarcasim is not taken that way, and I am not the only one to feel that. Saying "disorder" the way you have put it, can be viewed as hurtful. Those that have PTSD, dont like it and it is very hard on them. I never get sarcastic about the issues others face. And I know they are trying and I have a great respect for that, and some of them are my friends here, I have grown attached to them even if we disagree.

People who suffer with issues often do not take well to sarcasim, and they don't even understand why someone would be sarcastic about it. I tried to convey that in my last post. And I even explain why sarcasim is used and even misused. I have been around long enough to see enough. I am more concerned with finding answers and also giving credit when I agree with anothers statements or thoughts. It is called support, or just saying yes I think that too.

You cant know it all at your age Venus, your going to turn around in 25 years and realize that. I certainly don't know it all, but I have shared many of my thoughts and I have been corrected, I am willing to learn and I am also willing to try to understand.
I have an open mind and I have to say I do enjoy the input of others, and have even found comfort in that input, even if it is different than mine. I have friends that have disagreed with me here but we still like each other, they have a right to thier opinions.

Sometimes it is threads like this that create a thought provoking process that is actually pretty healthy. One of my friends here found one topic thread very stimulating and exciting, that took the day and made it more interesting. And we agreed to disagree, and it was nice actually. We are still friends and it is nice that we can disagree and still support each other.

The one thing I don't like is to harm someone here that is struggling. I don't like that at all. I do know some here are really lost and I would rather reach out and support them than dismiss them and unworthy, that would be cruel in my book, and others here feel that way too. I do ask questions so I can understand others better, I may have some advice they haven't thought of yet, I have had many thank me for taking the time, and they needed someone to take that time.
I have had that need myself and came on line and there would be a supportive message, and it really helped me that day.

I don't know you Venus, I would like to think that we can debate and learn from each other.
But I dont know you, no, not very well at all. And I clearly don't see your sarcasim, I dont really use that alot myself.

Open Eyes

I know several people with PTSD... and i guess what? They dislike the term "disorder". I was not being sarcastic about this issue anyways... I was sarcastic about the subject of science and its validity... and my own escapism.

Did you read your last post Venus? The very first line? You just contradicted yourself. Ok, go and read you last post, the first line Venus. Yada yada yada?

I was being sarcastic. But in a way it is not rational. Why be uncomfortable in pursuit of adventures that can be potentionally dangerous?

So you never did travel and stay in sleezy hotels and do what you said you did? Now how on earth are we supposed to know that you were just being sarcastic.

And I complimented you for being resourseful. I guess I have to make sure you are not being sarcastic before I think to give a compliment.

And how does valuing good food (as in expensive with not so much real nutritional value...) or steamy sex contribute to survival? How can my love for low budget travelling be explained scientifically (besides me and my fellow lonely-planet trippers have some sort of disorder that makes us cruise planet manically, sleep a little, sleep on dock of ferries and in crummy hostels, blister around feet running around metropoles...)?

Oh, Venus so you didnt actually travel this way, this is all sarcasium. Just checking because it appears that you are saying that you did this.

Open Eyes

I wish to say that a set of quotations around a label should not automatically be construed as some sort of insult or disbelief in an individual's hardships. I use quotations around labels all the time, in particular, the labels of "schizophrenia, psychosis, bipolar disorder and schizoaffective disorder". I do so out of recognition that those labels themselves can frequently slide depending on individual experiences/presenting symptoms at that time. I further do so out of recognition that is it a label and while some people find comfort in them, others find them to be extremely limiting or degrading. There's also the fact that the determination of who should be applied what label is not always a fail-proof process.

I agree that any expectation we have as a culture -- that we can take a human being, throw them into a theater of war, and not expect them to be psychologically impacted by that -- is a flawed expectation. I find it somewhat insulting to call that human distress a form of mental illness. To me, any distress associated with the harsh realities of war is a rational response to a situation of trauma. When people are exposed to brutality I anticipate seeing people emerge from those experiences as brutalized people.

I further believe that calling it a form of mental illness is a means of distancing ourselves from the reality of war's horrors. Rather than acknowledging that reality I feel we "blame the victim" by implying they are biologically flawed as opposed to psychologically wounded by conditions of their environment that their society placed them in and doesn't want to accept responsibility for.

Meantime, I would also like to remind everyone that we are responsible for our own sensitivities and our own reactions. Everyone can get triggered but I've seen triggered people go off and engage in some brutalities of their own, fueled by the assumption that they are fully entitled to do so because they have "_________".

Everyone who is participating in this forum is presumably doing so because they are considered to have some form of "mental illness". Maybe it would help to focus on the ways we are the same as opposed to the ways we might be different.

The Dragon: That's some of the ideas that Paulo Coelho is getting at. The division between "madness" and "sanity" and the lines between normality, functionality, and simply being different.

This speaks directly to my habit of placing labels in quotes. In some cases, merely "being different" is enough to get you labelled as "mad". Much as "madness" is presented as being a disease like diabetes, there is no lab test that can be done to determine who is and who isn't. A diagnosis is based entirely on the interpretation of what are otherwise known as symptoms, but how those symptoms are interpreted can vary dramatically between clinicians, culture, setting, expectations, training, etc. This was equally well demonstrated by the doctor who pronounced Coehlo to be "un-mad".

I see this myself in numerous discussions over the years with those who have been given the label of "schizophrenic". While there is no doubt that many of them are undergoing extreme states of despair, confusion, loss of ego boundaries, etc. it's questionable as to whether all of them are truly schizophrenic. It's further highly questionable as to whether or not they will recover. Those who are told they won't are less likely to do so however, if those same individuals can shift their label from "mad" to "unmad", this may increase their odds of recovery.

Incidentally, there is a very high rate of trauma among those diagnosed as schizophrenic, much higher even than any genetic links that have been determined. In spite of this, we still present "schizophrenics" as people who have been biologically and genetically flawed from birth. We give them medications but rarely do we acknowledge the trauma that may well have contributed to their fragmented state.

shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. Sarcasm (spelled without the "i") was was about the "disorder that makes us..." part. Seriously, do I need to put warning where the sarcastic part starts?

I did travel the way... but i don't view it as a bad thing. I was just joking about describing it as more horrible than it is.

And I don't need compliments from you.

Thank you, Spiritual.... I always liked your posts, so I am delighted you decided to post here.

I wish to say that a set of quotations around a label should not automatically be construed as some sort of insult or disbelief in an individual's hardships. I use quotations around labels all the time, in particular, the labels of "schizophrenia, psychosis, bipolar disorder and schizoaffective disorder". I do so out of recognition that those labels themselves can frequently slide depending on individual experiences/presenting symptoms at that time. I further do so out of recognition that is it a label and while some people find comfort in them, others find them to be extremely limiting or degrading. There's also the fact that the determination of who should be applied what label is not always a fail-proof process.

I never liked labels. I often claim (warning! posting in slightly sarcastic tone follow. The facts I claim are true but the way I present them is not how I view them: I never had "fun" with my bipolar because I did about 5% of the things I wanted to do (and to be honest "let's spend 20 euro in outlet store!" is hardly disordered... i may be disordered that I spend too little, because people like me don't fuel capitalism enough...)... As I don't act on my impulses and am I able to more or less function... I don't fit the DSM really. But believe me at some days you would not want to live in my head....

I agree that any expectation we have as a culture -- that we can take a human being, throw them into a theater of war, and not expect them to be psychologically impacted by that -- is a flawed expectation. I find it somewhat insulting to call that human distress a form of mental illness. To me, any distress associated with the harsh realities of war is a rational response to a situation of trauma. When people are exposed to brutality I anticipate seeing people emerge from those experiences as brutalized people.

I think it goes along with the trend of glamorization of war in some parts of the world. Not just talking about the US (though we Europeans don't wage wars we just make humanitarian interventions). That war traumatizes people does not fit into the picture.....

But yes, it is incredibly insulting. I recognize that sometimes you have to fight... it is sad reality of this world. But please realize wars are not pretty.


I further believe that calling it a form of mental illness is a means of distancing ourselves from the reality of war's horrors. Rather than acknowledging that reality I feel we "blame the victim" by implying they are biologically flawed as opposed to psychologically wounded by conditions of their environment that their society placed them in and doesn't want to accept responsibility for.

I agree... it is writting off the consequences of our actions... As I said already, wars do happen, that is the reality... but to distance ourselves of results of our doings in this way... it's dangerous in a way.

Spiritual,

I think that society is trying to give more attention to the psychological wounds of war. But it still has to get a better handle on the treatment of these psychological wounds.

As well as the psycological wounds that are created in childhood abuse or even neglect. And I am sure that in the past people who suffer mental illness have been very misunderstood and even labeled inappropriately.

I found this thread to be very interesting Dragon, thank you for pointing it out.
It did bring some interesting thoughts to light.

Though I did finally understand what Paulo was trying to say, I still felt while he did see that some individuals escape through giving into one's mental condition and simply give up. I wanted to add that often that condition is because of some denial presented to these individuals which results in sometimes life long self denial. And that this state of mind can occur without an individual truely recoginizing the reason for their own self denial.

I myself try to think beyond labels and I try to understand more than just a label. As all people are unique I don't think that they all express the same exact reaction to life conditions. But I truely try to understand others as unique and as they express thier own condition, the actual degree of that condition will vary because they are unique.

When the Manual for the guidelines or traits of different psychological conditions was created for consideration, it was a beginning of recognizing that humans do suffer from different psycological conditions. So it is a mere guideline that groups certain common traits displayed by groups of individuals. It is a resourse for those who choose to try to treat or understand these various groups of individuals. I do not feel that it was meant to label groups of people, instead, it was ment to group these individuals together to see what can be done to help them. And as a manual or source of study, it does change as these groups are studied and more is understood about them. So, it is not about being labeled, it is about being regonized and studied and a willingness to understand WHY, HOW, AND HOW TO BEST TREAT.

As long as I can remember, I have been one to ask WHY. And I am not alone because there is a manual where others have asked the same question and will continue to do so. Some of the known conditions are still fairly new and there is much to be learned about these conditions and why they exist. It is an effort to try to bring a better understanding to what has been very misunderstood about human psychie. And it is only a beginning and should be continued to be a source of study.

Paulo has written some observations, but these observations are his individual opinion based on his own life experience. So we have something to consider and discuss. Did he see it all? Ofcourse he didn't see it all, he did however recognize some human behavioral tendencies, and he questioned them. And by his question we are drawn to observe more carefully and not only see what he has observed but to again ask WHY.

I am sure there will be continued debate on exactly what madness is as long as there are humans. And as long as we continue to observe it and question it and study it, we may gain in finding answers to resolve some of these troubling conditions within the human psychie.

Open Eyes

Hello Open Eyes,
I agree that if we are attempting to have a discussion about a basket of fruit it will be helpful if we are all working from a similar expectation of what an apple, orange or banana are. I understand this can be necessary with people as well. Nonetheless, when it comes to being labelled, not everyone embraces that. Some do. They find comfort and validation of their life experience in the label. As you note, it can be a means of understanding their own experience and a means of explaining the same to others. How the rest of the world responds to that label will vary however, depending on what the label is. There is probably no label with more stigma than that of "schizophrenia".

Though I did finally understand what Paulo was trying to say, I still felt while he did see that some escape through giving into one's mental condition, often that condition is because of some denial ending up in self denial.

The danger I see is that when people are given a label for their experience, they are also given a package of expectations and assumptions that ride side-car to that label. For example, people are told that they have "schizophrenia" and there is no cure. Further, people are told that it will be necessary to accept that label and its accompanying expectations and if they don't or won't, it's further indication of just how "crazy" they are. On the other side of the coin, there is a societal response as well. The label of "schizophrenic" is commonly linked with an expectation of unpredictable outbursts of violence, lack of intelligence, no hope of recovery, etc.

In turn, all these labels, expectations and assumptions drive treatment. In the case of those considered to be "schizophrenic" the most prevailing assumption has been that it is a disease of the brain that is best treated with medications. If that same individual also had a history of being in a war zone, or being raped by daddy, or ignored by mommy -- none of that is considered relevant. It is, in fact, shoved off the landscape and discounted entirely. As if people were nothing more than their brains. As if life experiences and the human response to them could not render one "mad".

When the Manual for the guidelines or traits of different psychological conditions was created for consideration, it was a beginning of recognizing that humans do suffer from different psycological conditions. So it is a mere guideline that groups certain common traits displayed by groups of individuals. It is a resourse for those who choose to try to treat or understand these various groups of individuals. I do not feel that it was meant to label groups of people, instead, it was ment to group these individuals together to see what can be done to help them.

The DSM is a whole other ball of wax, Open Eyes. Your assessment discounts the impact that the pharmaceutical industry has had on it; an industry that is motivated to turn a profit under the guise of helping people. Whether or not it does is blatantly obvious in some instances and highly questionable in others.

Meantime, to pick back up on Paulo's message -- what he seems to be sharing was the impact of a powerful shift in his own expectations, assumptions and beliefs he had formed regarding the label he had been given. This tells us about the power of our own assessment of our own condition. I have long insisted that no one recovers without first developing the belief that it can be done. By the same token, the belief that you can't get well can, for some people, serve to keep them in a helpless and powerless state. The same expectation, when held by treatment providers and caregivers can do the same.

The Dragon [quoting Paulo]: And madness? Madness is the inability to communicate.

I would go further than Paulo might have. I would say that one of the factors that creates and fuels "madness" is the inability to communicate our life experience and have it understood. As a result, not only is it related to a lack of authentic communication, it also creates a lack of authentic connection to other people.

I've looked at the issue of "schizophrenia" from a primarily psychological angle and from that perspective, I deem it to be a crisis of such overwhelming proportion, it produces a collapse of the ego (one's sense of self-identity). The only way to rebuild that ego is by, once more, connecting to other people and roles in the external world. However, this can be very difficult for an individual in a fragmented state to do -- all the more so if those people and larger society do not understand.

Oh boy, spiritual emergency we are on the same page, thank you. My intention by my last post was to present the fact that, first, as you say, a CHILDHOOD BACKGROUND MUST BE CONSIDERED WITHIN EACH PSYCHOLOGICAL ISSUE.

As far as the parmaceutical application to the various psychological issues, oh I can't agree with you more and I have stated this emphatically in another thread. I am deeply concerned about it and that it does really need more policing however I am not sure who would do that, would have to be a seperate group that has no political agenda, I know there is the FDA but as stated in another thread posted by the Byz, this is bypassed by the fact that these companies make so much money they can buy their way out. And they also fuel politicians by presenting various funding for some silence.

Oh I agree that there is still a great amount of misconception and misunderstanding by not only the field of psychiatry and psychology of the human psychie but the patients and society as well.

I am personally opposed to handing a patient a diagnosis with an understanding that it is not a curable condition. I do recognize that there are medications that have helped people function on a much better level. But I have trouble with the idea that there is a magic pill that will be a solution to the ailments of a troubled childhood or conditions in which patients have been exposed to certain tramas or neglect.

And I do agree that when a person is labeled it can attach a very narrow minded view of that person and as I had mentioned each person is unique in their own degree of how certain illnesses are effecting their ability to function. Not all patients are a danger or will exhibit dangerous behaviors towards others.

As I have mentioned, we are only just beginning to recognize various conditions and we are long way from answering the WHY and the best treatment for these conditions. I would have to say that if it were a book, perhaps we are only in the introduction part of the book and have many pages to consider yet.

Open Eyes

Open Eyes: I have trouble with the idea that there is a magic pill that will be a solution to the ailments of a troubled childhood or conditions in which patients have been exposed to certain tramas or neglect.

The only way I know of to deal with traumatic life experiences is to fully experience any of the accompanying emotions that were present and not able to be dealt with then: grief, horror, abandonment, terror. Then, there comes a time of acceptance, assimilation, digestion and slowly, slowly, slowly recognizing that in addition to any weaknesses and vulnerabilities that may have been exposed, there were also strengths.

Well, yes spiritual, that is a part of the therapy as you have stated in your post.

With PTSD a lot depends on what traumas were experienced, when, how long, how many events, how severe were the events. It is a very complicated diagnosis.
And I have noticed that many times patients that do have it are often misdiagnosed and misunderstood. I can clearly raise my hand on that one. I have to admit that I am pretty angry as I had raised all the red flags that should have been clearly recognized. But I am now moving pass that as I also recognize that it is still being studied and it has not been truely recognized for very long. So as I mentioned, perhaps we are still in the introduction phase of understanding it.

In my own struggle with it I have been trying to understand all of the demensions of it and there is a lot to it. It is not just a mind over matter resolve, though I am trying to do just that.

I would say that in my own personal case, I have had many traumas since early childhood. I did use mind over matter and I did get through many events. What I did not know is that the stress of these events and the effort to get through them and not always understanding the reasons for these events, there was some kind of change that took place in my brain. I was aware of having trouble with speach and anxiety from early childhood as a result of certain traumas. But I had not realized the true demensions of what was taking place in my brain. And I do know that changes do take place.

I also know that a trauma can take place that can somehow bring all the previous traumas together. I am not really sure why this happens. I am struggling with that.
I have been experiencing what is called triggers and flashbacks. And to be honest, I dont understand that if I am consciously addressing and understanding the issues as you have mentioned in your post, why do I still experience this? I do not want it and I am trying to figure out how to stop it or control it. And I have heard others describe the same concerns.

And I do know that it is very misunderstood by others who do not have it. That is also a very common complaint by others that have PTSD. But it does depend on the kind of traumas and how many are in ones past.

The one thing I do know is that it has made me more aware of others that also struggle with different psychological issues and I am much more understanding and respectful of others than ever before. And I have been one that is very compassionate and empathetic to begin with.

So, I continue to try. I do not want to deem myself disabled for the rest of my life, however I do realize that it has been a very disabling psychological issue. I have great hope and dedication towards recovering. I do believe that we are capable of overcoming many issues, our brains are extremely amazing and capable, more than we know.

Open Eyes