3 ms·

> Almost like the wealthy who need therapy despite living materially comfortable lives, Americans are fighting with vitriolic rhetoric in seemingly unnecessary

> Almost like the wealthy who need therapy despite living materially comfortable lives, Americans are fighting with vitriolic rhetoric in seemingly unnecessary ways. The most accurate idea I’ve seen in years.

rconti 8y ago
It strikes me as the opposite of a good idea, unless he's using it to justify why the rhetoric, while "seemingly unnecessary" is actually, in fact, necessary. I really see no reason to believe the materially comfortable would suffer from mental issues at a lower rate than those who are not materially comfortable. And, if anything, they have the resources to afford it and the luxury of time to take advantage of it.
- guscost 8y ago
  I get your point, but you have to acknowledge that there is a gap between "suffering from mental issues" and "treatment is necessary" even in wealthy societies like America and free-healthcare societies like Britain. The best emergency room in the world has a "triage officer" whose job is to determine who needs treatment, and who is merely suffering, at any given time. People with easy access to mental health care often think that they need treatment for whatever ails them. Similarly, people with the opportunity to worry about Big Problems and argue for whatever they believe (without consequence) often think that they need to have nasty, dehumanizing duels over temporary political phenomena that will be forgotten in a few years. Nobody should be discouraged from finding help for their mental issues (or standing up for their beliefs), but at the same time they should understand that it may be a luxury and not a necessity.
  - rconti 8y ago
    Oh I see the point, yes this makes sense to me. Obviously it's not a black-and-white world of "crippling mental problems" versus "no mental problems", and to plenty of folks, engaging in mental health care is closer to life optimization and perhaps a luxury rather than a necessity.

rconti 8y ago

It strikes me as the opposite of a good idea, unless he's using it to justify why the rhetoric, while "seemingly unnecessary" is actually, in fact, necessary. I really see no reason to believe the materially comfortable would suffer from mental issues at a lower rate than those who are not materially comfortable. And, if anything, they have the resources to afford it and the luxury of time to take advantage of it.

guscost 8y ago
I get your point, but you have to acknowledge that there is a gap between "suffering from mental issues" and "treatment is necessary" even in wealthy societies like America and free-healthcare societies like Britain. The best emergency room in the world has a "triage officer" whose job is to determine who needs treatment, and who is merely suffering, at any given time. People with easy access to mental health care often think that they need treatment for whatever ails them. Similarly, people with the opportunity to worry about Big Problems and argue for whatever they believe (without consequence) often think that they need to have nasty, dehumanizing duels over temporary political phenomena that will be forgotten in a few years. Nobody should be discouraged from finding help for their mental issues (or standing up for their beliefs), but at the same time they should understand that it may be a luxury and not a necessity.
- rconti 8y ago
  Oh I see the point, yes this makes sense to me. Obviously it's not a black-and-white world of "crippling mental problems" versus "no mental problems", and to plenty of folks, engaging in mental health care is closer to life optimization and perhaps a luxury rather than a necessity.