4 ms·

"Semantics" Ueah the meaning of words is important becUse of the consequences. What we care about with mental illness is suffering because its good to reduce it

"Semantics" Ueah the meaning of words is important becUse of the consequences. What we care about with mental illness is suffering because its good to reduce it. It's absolutely critical. > It is clear that healthy well adjusted people don't fixate on slaughtering children All the people who waged war and genocide throughout history have nothing to do with the suffering of the mentally ill due to their genetics , behavior and genrics. Don't be so dismissive. It's very disrespectful.

s1artibartfast 4y ago
I was the one offering alternative language here to not offend people with a specific definition of mental illness. If you just want to argue the point I'm offering to concede, I'm happy to steal man it. If you have you ever known someone that is mentally ill, you know that their illness does not preclude the ability to harm and make those around them suffer. Many School shooters are capable of suffering themselves, and in fact their suffering often plays a large role in their motivations. They can also suffer during a lifetime of incarceration or the anguish of being executed. They often have major mental disabilities, like the inability to feel empathy. There are a large number of neuropsychiatric disorders associated with persistent antisocial and criminal behavior, such as Psychopathy, Sadistic personality disorder, narcissism, depression, and paranoia. Are these not mental illnesses by your definition? Nobody is claiming that the mentally ill are dangerous. However, deadly mass shooters are often mentally ill. For example, studies have found some indication of autistic spectrum disorder in ~30% of of school shooters[1]. This is but one neuropsychiatric disorder. To ask the inverse question, Do you think that school shooters are mentally healthy?? If not, how would you fit their psychology and behavior into our scientific model of neuroscience? https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00223980.2016.1175998 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00223980.2016.1...

s1artibartfast 4y ago

I was the one offering alternative language here to not offend people with a specific definition of mental illness. If you just want to argue the point I'm offering to concede, I'm happy to steal man it. If you have you ever known someone that is mentally ill, you know that their illness does not preclude the ability to harm and make those around them suffer. Many School shooters are capable of suffering themselves, and in fact their suffering often plays a large role in their motivations. They can also suffer during a lifetime of incarceration or the anguish of being executed. They often have major mental disabilities, like the inability to feel empathy. There are a large number of neuropsychiatric disorders associated with persistent antisocial and criminal behavior, such as Psychopathy, Sadistic personality disorder, narcissism, depression, and paranoia. Are these not mental illnesses by your definition? Nobody is claiming that the mentally ill are dangerous. However, deadly mass shooters are often mentally ill. For example, studies have found some indication of autistic spectrum disorder in ~30% of of school shooters[1]. This is but one neuropsychiatric disorder. To ask the inverse question, Do you think that school shooters are mentally healthy?? If not, how would you fit their psychology and behavior into our scientific model of neuroscience? https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00223980.2016.1175998 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00223980.2016.1...