People casually using and over using mental illness term

seesaw, yes I understand exactly what you are saying! I agree totally. And, yes to the second half as well.

I was on a friend's post on FB and they were discussing the right to bear arms, the day after the Las Vegas shooting. And, throughout this long discussion, "crazy" and "mentally ill" were used over and over. I had reached my limit...I posted something along these lines: Well I suffer from several mental health issues, own quite a few guns, even have a concealed weapons permit, and I live in WY where everybody carries. So, by everything you have all said - you should be very, very afraid of ME! The discussion pretty much stopped. I got two responses, both were from women who also suffer from mental health issues. One said she thinks that when you apply for a gun permit, you should come forth and admit you have mental health issues. And, because you admit that, you then should be prepared for "home visits" before your permit is granted. WHAT?? I'm not adopting a child!! A person could remove or add anything to their home to pass. I was shocked. Anyway I agree with you. Thanks

ReptileInYourHead, I am not going to really be able to answer you as I am a Christian. But, the only obvious thing I can say he he was the most bad you can get!! It means the badness was "infused" deep inside him. I guess that is the best I can do.

Yes, I find the whole people with mental health disorders shouldn't be able to own guns to be quite discriminatory. I'm fine if everyone who wanted to own a gun had to pass a mental health exam, but you can't just take those of us who are seeking help and have a diagnosis and discriminate against us. You either have to require it for everyone or no one.

Seesaw

Defining evil -- Natural or moral? -- and determining its source -- Natural or divine? -- are separate questions...and here are the differing definitions from Webster:

Therefore, murder can be called evil without bringing the matter of morality into the picture.

I agree. I think it is slander against the mentally ill to attribute evil behavior to being mentally ill. Some mentally ill people are bad people, just like some non-mentally ill people are bad.

You are right, my statement was too broad and I didn't think about it enough in hindsight. I didn't want to sound like I was making mental illness the primary cause of violent crime. There can be so many other causes like substance abuse or other intoxication, indoctrination in case of terrorists, and so on.
When I wrote my response however, I had specifically cases like the Vegas shooter in mind, someone where there's no apparent cause or removal of mental inhibitions through intoxication. In such cases I think mental illness plays a large role, because the usual moral or emotional inhibitions I think most people have don't hinder the perpetrators in these cases from committing these crimes. Again, I didn't think about it enough. Maybe a very bad upbringing can also lead to the absence of such self-restrictions. But then again, violent/abusive childhoods often are a cause of mental problems themselves.
What I completely failed to convey was that my claims were limited to these very specific cases.

What you can see here and what I realised as well: I'm not an expert myself, even as a person who has mental issues myself. I don't really think it's a problem if news media bring up the possibility of a perpetrator having mental illness. It's a problem that because of many people not being informed enough about it, the media has to discuss it in very broad terms. I don't really think it's the media's job to educate though.

Overall, I think it's typical to jump to conclusions like I did or the media often does. If such a horrific crime is committed, it's easier to blame mental problems for the absence of moral and emotional inhibitions that hinder most people from killing each other than actually question your image of humanity. Maybe my positive image of most people not wanting to hurt each other clouded my judgement a bit.

I think the definition of evil changes over time and with different cultures. I don't really know if there can be a universal definition of evil. After all, social progress happens because the societal outlook on moral issues and thus, the definition of "good" and "evil" changes over time. In this sense, "good" and "evil" are mostly labels.

I think a universal definition would look something like:
"A person who is perceived by others as being intentionally harmful to other individuals or groups of such individuals is seen as an evil person."
This is extremely broad though and kind of dodges the whole "depends on the time and place you're in"-dilemma: After all, this definition relies on an action being harmful, which changes meaning over time as well.

Personally, I think everyone has a slightly different definition of "evil", depending on their morals. My own definition would sound like this: "Anyone who aggressively tries to impose their will on another, be it their opinions, world views or agenda ("aggressively" meaning by force, e.g. with violence, intimidation, shaming,...) should be considered evil."

(Prisons, police and the military are a "necessary evil" in my view)

That's the problem though - it shouldn't be "easy to blame mental illness". It's that way bc it's what we've been taught to believe.

People commit horrific crimes for many reasons not involving illness.

Jealousy.
Being paid.
Covering something else up.
Greed.

Those are a few...

That's not really what I meant. I meant that I think it's natural to deflect when hearing such horrific news. If something seriously questions your belief in the goodness of humanity, it's easier to blame whatever. Violent video games, movies, societal atmosphere or yes, mental illness. Looking at such incidents from all angles takes a long time, and the initial reaction only seconds.

I deplore this tendency to call every monstrously awful deed an obvious sign of mental illness. But I have to ask if we consumers of mental health services don't bear part of the responsibility for that.

If there is one thing that mental healthcare consumers are passionate about, it's this: "It's not my fault. I have a disorder." If it's true that evil people aren't always mentally ill, then maybe it's also true that the mentally ill aren't always good.

Maybe those of us who have psychiatric disorders could start entertaining the notion that, once in awhile, we behave badly and it is our fault.

But what I am saying is mental illness should not be a cop out period - none of those things should honestly. The person should be held accountable for his or her own actions. Nothing else. Do we let our kids blame someone or something else n get away with things? Why then should we accept it from society or encourage it or participate in it?

It's a double standard we have been taught is "acceptable" - but is it really? I don't think so.

I agree - which is why I agree with the concept of accountability in mental health care. Mental illness is a scape goat - on both sides, as you well pointed out. It needs to stop. As I stated just now to Grath, we do not allow our kids to get away with blaming someone or something else when they do something wrong - why then is it ok for us to do so? Again the answer is the same - because we have been taught it is an acceptable double standard.

But - I agree, it is not.
❤

mental illness is a broad spectrum, maybe when they report crimes that actually are mental health related they could be more specific as to the diagnosis of that particular person. Until then they should not label it as MI. That I understand.
On a parallel thought, is it fair to call someone who commits a terrible crime evil? Since evil is so loosely defined. An ambiguous cop out term if you ask me.
It’s not mental illness, he was evil...I am unable, to any certain degree, separate the two within the scope of a non religious belief.
Evil, or behaviour that intentionally hurts others could very well be a misguided process within the brain/psyche. Scrambled neurons...I don’t know but “evil” must have an origin, nothing “just is”, not if you approach it from a scientific perspective.

Actually, Reptile, "evil" is not "loosely defined."

There is broad agreement about what acts are evil.

I haven't read every reply. Sorry.
But wanted to state that I do like to hear the younger generation toss around the word "triggered." I really don't think they understand what it means or use it correctly.

I've had to tell my own DD that it's a term regarding MH & ptsd. Not just something that upset her.

That has been a misconception amongst many for a few years now - n yes it is in reference to MH & PTSD only (when used properly), but as you stated many misuse it.

I agree that this term has come to be totally misused. Every instance of someone being upset or offended is not necessarily an episode of being "triggered."

This is similar to how the term "acting out" has come to be misused and over used. Not every instance of a child misbehaving is a case of the child "acting out."

People throw both these terms around without the slightest understanding of what they originally meant.

It's part of what I would call a victim mentality. People will say they were "triggered" as a way of claiming that someone deliberately exacerbated their psychic pain.

Rose, it’s not the acts I’m questioning but the root of the evil that causes these acts.
Not everyone commits evil acts, so whats the difference between those who do and those who don’t?

The difference is the ideas a person believes in. Ideas matter.

The German NAZI regime perpetrated a great deal of evil. At least, that's the broad consensus of modern human beings who either witnessed it, or know about it. That evil was not the result of the government of Germany being taken over by a bunch of mentally ill people. The NAZIs weren't basically mentally ill. They adhered to ideas that humanity in general finds evil. At least, most people in the world have judged those ideas to be evil. There are a minority of people who think the NAZIs were right. They belong to organizations that promote NAZI ideology. These aren't gatherings of mentally ill people. These are adherents to a way of thinking, based on a system of ideas. Most people find those ideas abhorrent.

Serial killers and mass murderers justify what they do through the ideas they hold. Ex: "If I'm unhappy, then other people should be unhappy. I want other people to feel a great deal of pain. I have a right to do that." Those are ideas.

The difference is in the ideas that people hold.

And where do ideas come from?

As already shared:

Human logic comes up with ways to try to resolve differences or to try to solve problems...such as by harming others to "even the score" or to "pay them back" or to "teach them a lesson" or whatever.

Everyone on this thread has excellent points.

What's even more interesting is this:

If an American man decides to massacre 50 people, he is considered mentally ill or evil.

If a deeply religious person (in certain countries) decides to end the lives of dozens of people, there were just being faithful.

Which shows that the definition of being mentally ill varies by culture, religion, and country.

Yes all is revealed, mentally ill, evil, wrong, right are all just labels.
Rose, we all solve problems, why do some of us resort to violence to resolve them while some of us find other means?
Ideas are constructs of the mind, and the character of the idea itself reflects the health of the mind, could it not be so?

from the mind.

Notice, I didn't say "from the brain."

It is the brain that generates the mind, based on experience. But the mind and the brain are not one and the same.

People used to believe that the earth was flat. That was a wrong idea. That wrong idea wasn't held because people were mentally ill. It seemed like the right thing to believe at one time. But it was not true.

Some ideas vanish because people find them to be false.

Then there are ideas that are not a matter of truth or falsehood. At one time, lots of Americans thought it was okay to own slaves. That got bumped off by a newer idea that no human should be enslaved. Ideas matter.