3 ms·

> there is nothing in the way in which delusional beliefs are developed, maintained, or defended that can be legitimately described as a dysfunctional process

> there is nothing in the way in which delusional beliefs are developed, maintained, or defended that can be legitimately described as a dysfunctional process Seriously? Delusional thinking is a dysfunctional process almost by definition, since it produces invalid conclusions. > these cognitive biases are a common feature of human cognition and not a dysfunction giving rise to a pathology That’s like saying that cancer is OK because it arises commonly in many humans.

odyssey7 3y ago
To err is human
roenxi 3y ago
You can't describe any process outside of pure mathematics that only produces valid conclusions. Every other process sometimes produces output that is just wrong. And even then mathematical proofs sometimes have errors.
- munchler 3y ago
  The error rate for delusional thinking is way higher than the error rate for normal human thinking. That’s why we call it delusional.
  - roenxi 3y ago
    Well sure, but if it is probabilistic then you have to admit sometimes the delusional thinker will draw valid conclusions and normal human thinking will be invalid. Like a delusional individual in ancient Greece who might think that thunderbolts are caused by something other than the gods.
Frummy 3y ago
Devils advocate: Invalid conclusions, but potentially fruitful behavior, for them.
- munchler 3y ago
  That’s true. Look at organized religion: it may provide a survival advantage, even when it’s based on false beliefs. However, murder can also be fruitful for some people, but I think we’d still call it dysfunctional.
empath-nirvana 3y ago
> Delusional thinking is a dysfunctional process almost by definition, since it produces invalid conclusions. His point is that delusional thinking is _normal_ and almost all people have deeply held delusions of one kind or another. There is nothing about _any particular delusion_ which implies some kind of disorder, which implies the person lacks agency or any ability to be talked out of them. I think that is different that saying that there is no disorder which can give rise to delusions, only that having some particular delusional belief does not imply that you have such a disorder, necessarily.
- munchler 3y ago
  Delusional thinking is _common_, not normal. Just like cancer is common, but not normal.
  - empath-nirvana 3y ago
    I can assure you that you have many deeply held delusional beliefs. Of course it's impossible to convince you of that.
    - munchler 3y ago
      No doubt. I also probably have a number of cancer cells in my body. They’re still abnormal cells, though. So, it may be normal to have some delusional thoughts, but delusional thoughts are not normal thoughts.
haswell 3y ago
> Delusional thinking is a dysfunctional process almost by definition, since it produces invalid conclusions It does not automatically follow that invalid conclusions are the result of a dysfunctional process. Another way to frame this is that a process that is stressed beyond its design parameters and fed inputs outside bounds of what is considered “normal” will result in invalid conclusions, where “valid” is based on a relatively new (in terms of the existence of human brains) understanding of science and ability to rigorously define validity. In other words, you and I may not be able to understand the delusions of those around us, but had we been subject to the same environmental factors, they might make perfect sense to us. I think the general point is that thinking that appears delusional doesn’t automatically indicate some inherent defect in the brain, and likely has causes that make sense if we could trace the history of inputs to the brain. The conclusion that we should be more open to engaging with delusional people and less quick to discard them outright seems like a reasonable one. Anecdotally, I have family who gravitate to certain conspiracy theories, and based on what I know of their traumatic past (war vet, physically abused), I understand why they have deeply embedded mistrust of government and other people that causes them to accept beliefs that help them make sense of their lived reality. They’re still otherwise very intelligent. Expert in their chosen craft, and capable of nuanced understanding of deeply technical subjects. But their human brains are also shaped by events that would likely have a similar impact on anyone else who went though the same set if life experiences. > That’s like saying that cancer is OK because it arises commonly in many humans I don’t think this analogy works. Cancer invades the body. Our cognition is something we all share, and the way it operates is not inherently dysfunctional, even while it is always susceptible to trauma and conditioning. And even in trauma, what appears “dysfunctional” externally is most likely helping the person survive.
maxerickson 3y ago
The problem is that the article is trying to collapse poorly arrived at beliefs into a single category with literal false beliefs. When my mom's dementia had her worried about a puddle of gasoline on the floor or her grandchildren turning into squirrels, the problem wasn't me not listening or failing to respect her views on reality. There's a little more room to listen when someone has gotten to some strange conclusion about the weather or whatever.

odyssey7 3y ago

To err is human

roenxi 3y ago

You can't describe any process outside of pure mathematics that only produces valid conclusions. Every other process sometimes produces output that is just wrong. And even then mathematical proofs sometimes have errors.

munchler 3y ago
The error rate for delusional thinking is way higher than the error rate for normal human thinking. That’s why we call it delusional.
- roenxi 3y ago
  Well sure, but if it is probabilistic then you have to admit sometimes the delusional thinker will draw valid conclusions and normal human thinking will be invalid. Like a delusional individual in ancient Greece who might think that thunderbolts are caused by something other than the gods.

Frummy 3y ago

Devils advocate: Invalid conclusions, but potentially fruitful behavior, for them.

munchler 3y ago
That’s true. Look at organized religion: it may provide a survival advantage, even when it’s based on false beliefs. However, murder can also be fruitful for some people, but I think we’d still call it dysfunctional.

empath-nirvana 3y ago

> Delusional thinking is a dysfunctional process almost by definition, since it produces invalid conclusions. His point is that delusional thinking is _normal_ and almost all people have deeply held delusions of one kind or another. There is nothing about _any particular delusion_ which implies some kind of disorder, which implies the person lacks agency or any ability to be talked out of them. I think that is different that saying that there is no disorder which can give rise to delusions, only that having some particular delusional belief does not imply that you have such a disorder, necessarily.

munchler 3y ago
Delusional thinking is _common_, not normal. Just like cancer is common, but not normal.
- empath-nirvana 3y ago
  I can assure you that you have many deeply held delusional beliefs. Of course it's impossible to convince you of that.
  - munchler 3y ago
    No doubt. I also probably have a number of cancer cells in my body. They’re still abnormal cells, though. So, it may be normal to have some delusional thoughts, but delusional thoughts are not normal thoughts.

haswell 3y ago

> Delusional thinking is a dysfunctional process almost by definition, since it produces invalid conclusions It does not automatically follow that invalid conclusions are the result of a dysfunctional process. Another way to frame this is that a process that is stressed beyond its design parameters and fed inputs outside bounds of what is considered “normal” will result in invalid conclusions, where “valid” is based on a relatively new (in terms of the existence of human brains) understanding of science and ability to rigorously define validity. In other words, you and I may not be able to understand the delusions of those around us, but had we been subject to the same environmental factors, they might make perfect sense to us. I think the general point is that thinking that appears delusional doesn’t automatically indicate some inherent defect in the brain, and likely has causes that make sense if we could trace the history of inputs to the brain. The conclusion that we should be more open to engaging with delusional people and less quick to discard them outright seems like a reasonable one. Anecdotally, I have family who gravitate to certain conspiracy theories, and based on what I know of their traumatic past (war vet, physically abused), I understand why they have deeply embedded mistrust of government and other people that causes them to accept beliefs that help them make sense of their lived reality. They’re still otherwise very intelligent. Expert in their chosen craft, and capable of nuanced understanding of deeply technical subjects. But their human brains are also shaped by events that would likely have a similar impact on anyone else who went though the same set if life experiences. > That’s like saying that cancer is OK because it arises commonly in many humans I don’t think this analogy works. Cancer invades the body. Our cognition is something we all share, and the way it operates is not inherently dysfunctional, even while it is always susceptible to trauma and conditioning. And even in trauma, what appears “dysfunctional” externally is most likely helping the person survive.

maxerickson 3y ago

The problem is that the article is trying to collapse poorly arrived at beliefs into a single category with literal false beliefs. When my mom's dementia had her worried about a puddle of gasoline on the floor or her grandchildren turning into squirrels, the problem wasn't me not listening or failing to respect her views on reality. There's a little more room to listen when someone has gotten to some strange conclusion about the weather or whatever.