7 ms·

>No it doesn't: it depends on whether it's dysfunctional or not. Even if the people involved don't see the dysfunction. “It’s dysfunctional because it’s dysfun

>No it doesn't: it depends on whether it's dysfunctional or not. Even if the people involved don't see the dysfunction. “It’s dysfunctional because it’s dysfunctional.” I hope I don’t have to explain why this is, again, begging the question. What is “dysfunctional”? That’s largely culturally determined, because what’s “functional” is relative to the environmental you’re in. You seem to conflating morality or human rights with mental dysfunction. I suspect you are doing this because it’s easier than addressing the comment thread I was replying to regarding “open” vs “closed” cultures. What is the objectively correct “functional” mode of human interaction?

WalterSear 8y ago
Good thing we have a thoroughly cross-cultural construct for developing an understanding of exactly that: clinical psychology. So, yes, we do know what dysfunction looks like, to an extent.
- lostmsu 8y ago
  Psychology has a poor track of reproducibility, so it is not good at understanding yet.
  - dorchadas 8y ago
    Not to mention that results can also vary depending on, you guessed it, culture.
    - WalterSear 8y ago
      Cultural psychology is the field that investigates this. By investigating phenomenon in multiple cultures, you get a better idea of what the actual phenomenon you are investigating is, and what is a byproduct of culture. It's not a perfect, obviously, since we are all as much a product of our culture as anything else. In any case, just because we the tools we have are still in their infancy, that doesn't somehow implies that A) they are utterly useless for anything at all, or B) that every culture everywhere is a perfect realization of a human conception of life, each one exactly equal of any other and none of them at all with any growing up to do. It's just silly all around.
- Sangermaine 8y ago
  Your response demonstrates your ignorance of psychology if you’re not even aware of how results often vary across cultures. One area to start educating yourself in is looking into the discussion in the last decade or so of how psychological research has been skewed by over-reliance on “WEIRD” (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Democratic) test subjects, and that studies with subjects from places without these attributes often produce different results. You don’t seem to understand what you’re talking about in the slightest.
  - WalterSear 8y ago
    I have an MS in research psychology.
  - dang 8y ago
    We warned you before about attacking other users like this. If you do it again, we will ban your account. Please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and follow the rules when posting here.
JadeNB 8y ago
> > No it doesn't: it depends on whether it's dysfunctional or not. Even if the people involved don't see the dysfunction. > “It’s dysfunctional because it’s dysfunctional.” > I hope I don’t have to explain why this is, again, begging the question. I think your response also begs the question, assuming an empiricism that should at least be argued. That is, it seems to me that you conflate a non-definition ("there is an absolute notion of dysfunction, although I don't know how to define it") with a circular definition ("dysfunction is the state of being dysfunctional"). These may be equally useful in the present, but the first, which seems to me to be what WalterSear is saying, can be imagined as a spur to useful future discussion (either arguing that there is no such absolute notion, or seeking out the correct absolute notion); whereas the latter is clearly useless and is, I think, an incorrect summary of WalterSear's position. (Can you really pin down any concept—like morality or human rights, which you mention later—to the degree of specificity that you are requiring of the definition of 'dysfunction'? I know I can't.)
- WalterSear 8y ago
  > "there is an absolute notion of dysfunction, although I don't know how to define it" Don't put words in my mouth and expect me to debate you.
- WalterSear 8y ago
  Mea culpa, I mistook your complex discussion for another round of reactive meandering.

WalterSear 8y ago

Good thing we have a thoroughly cross-cultural construct for developing an understanding of exactly that: clinical psychology. So, yes, we do know what dysfunction looks like, to an extent.

lostmsu 8y ago
Psychology has a poor track of reproducibility, so it is not good at understanding yet.
- dorchadas 8y ago
  Not to mention that results can also vary depending on, you guessed it, culture.
  - WalterSear 8y ago
    Cultural psychology is the field that investigates this. By investigating phenomenon in multiple cultures, you get a better idea of what the actual phenomenon you are investigating is, and what is a byproduct of culture. It's not a perfect, obviously, since we are all as much a product of our culture as anything else. In any case, just because we the tools we have are still in their infancy, that doesn't somehow implies that A) they are utterly useless for anything at all, or B) that every culture everywhere is a perfect realization of a human conception of life, each one exactly equal of any other and none of them at all with any growing up to do. It's just silly all around.
Sangermaine 8y ago
Your response demonstrates your ignorance of psychology if you’re not even aware of how results often vary across cultures. One area to start educating yourself in is looking into the discussion in the last decade or so of how psychological research has been skewed by over-reliance on “WEIRD” (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Democratic) test subjects, and that studies with subjects from places without these attributes often produce different results. You don’t seem to understand what you’re talking about in the slightest.
- WalterSear 8y ago
  I have an MS in research psychology.
- dang 8y ago
  We warned you before about attacking other users like this. If you do it again, we will ban your account. Please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and follow the rules when posting here.

JadeNB 8y ago

> > No it doesn't: it depends on whether it's dysfunctional or not. Even if the people involved don't see the dysfunction. > “It’s dysfunctional because it’s dysfunctional.” > I hope I don’t have to explain why this is, again, begging the question. I think your response also begs the question, assuming an empiricism that should at least be argued. That is, it seems to me that you conflate a non-definition ("there is an absolute notion of dysfunction, although I don't know how to define it") with a circular definition ("dysfunction is the state of being dysfunctional"). These may be equally useful in the present, but the first, which seems to me to be what WalterSear is saying, can be imagined as a spur to useful future discussion (either arguing that there is no such absolute notion, or seeking out the correct absolute notion); whereas the latter is clearly useless and is, I think, an incorrect summary of WalterSear's position. (Can you really pin down any concept—like morality or human rights, which you mention later—to the degree of specificity that you are requiring of the definition of 'dysfunction'? I know I can't.)

WalterSear 8y ago
> "there is an absolute notion of dysfunction, although I don't know how to define it" Don't put words in my mouth and expect me to debate you.
WalterSear 8y ago
Mea culpa, I mistook your complex discussion for another round of reactive meandering.