26 de março de 2018

Notes on “The Course in Positive Philosophy”.

Filed under: Livros — Tags:, , — Yurinho @ 14:56

“The Course in Positive Philosophy” was written by Auguste Comte. Below are some thoughts found in his text.

  1. There are three kinds of philosophy, if we define philosophy as the pursuit for truth: theology, metaphysics and science.
  2. We can’t explain the universe using a single law.
  3. While theology and metaphysics try to seek the final causes of a phenomenon, science isn’t interested in final causes, but just particular causes in order to control that phenomenon and make use of it (“how” over “why”).
  4. The highest form of theology is monotheism, but science is always progressing, not having it’s goal in achieving a complete understanding of everything, as if it was possible to say “nothing needs explanation anymore”.
  5. Science, if it wants to work freely, must not mix with theology.
  6. As science works by validating or debunking a premise, it couldn’t have been born before theology or metaphysics, which provided premises.
  7. Observation (looking for something) isn’t the same as looking at something.
  8. Trial and error is unavoidable.
  9. Metaphysics is intermediate between theology and science.
  10. The author doesn’t care about the origins of a phenomenon nor what is it’s purpose: his goal is to understand how a phenomenon works and, unless the origin and role in nature are needed to understand it, that information is not important.
  11. Knowing how gravity works is more important than knowing what gravity is.
  12. We don’t need unsolveable questions like “where did we come from, what do we are and where are we going?” in order to find our path in life.
  13. When we start making science of an object, that does not mean that we can no longer make philosophy of that object.
  14. The shift from metaphysics to positive philosophy began with Descartes, Bacon and Galileo.
  15. Social studies need to become a science too (“social physics”, later renamed as “sociology”).
  16. Theology and metaphysics can not explain social phenomena.
  17. Our knowledge is separated in fields nowadays, but it wasn’t always like that.
  18. By separating knowledge in fields, we can study a field in depth.
  19. If different people work in different fields, science progresses faster.
  20. But we should not pull new fields from thin air.
  21. If you are good at many things, you likely only have a superficial knowledge on those things.
  22. The division of science in fields isn’t natural, because, in nature, biology isn’t separated from chemistry, for example.
  23. Scientists must work together and different fields must be able to have a dialogue.
  24. There should be a special class of scientists whose work is to organize the knowledge found in each field into an unified system.
  25. If a science is old, controversial and fruitless, what’s the point of persisting in it?
  26. A logical procedure is better explained by it’s application.
  27. A new field can be formed by the combination of different fields.
  28. A same object, when analyzed by different fields, can be much better explained.
  29. The disagreement between scientists may have social implications.
  30. Science is supposed to guide politics.
  31. Philosophy disagrees with itself due to methods that differ from thinker to thinker.
  32. If theology, metaphysics and science continue to try to kill each other, human thought won’t evolve.
  33. It’s impossible to come up with a single system that grasps and explains all human production.
  34. Science won’t be able to explain everything.
  35. If a single system is capable of explaining everything, that wouldn’t make much difference for us, as explaining each phenomenon through it’s particular laws works very well already, not to mention it’s much easier to do.
  36. You shouldn’t drop a task because you know you won’t be able to complete it within your lifespan, as the next generations can still continue from where you left.
  37. There’s a lot of useful lies.
  38. The division of science in fields isn’t natural, but rather a human need.
  39. If you fail several times at attaining a goal, that doesn’t mean that the goal is impossible to achieve.
  40. The essential difference between scientific fields is the objects that are studied.
  41. The goal in science is to understand and control a phenomenon of interest.
  42. Nothing wrong, however, in studying a phenomenon just for fun.
  43. The technical application of a science requires the usage of other sciences.
  44. When a science is too old and has gathered too much information, making a chronological exposition for students becomes nearly impossible.
  45. However, studying a science without studying it’s history is also incomplete.
  46. Science and technique improve each other.
  47. The sciences that have aspirations of universality are the strangest, because they bear little resemblance to our daily life.
  48. A “pure” phenomenon must be studied first, before we can study it’s modifications.
  49. A complete understanding of chemistry requires a basic understanding of physics, as chemical phenomena are conditioned by heat, electricity, movement and other physical phenomena.
  50. That doesn’t mean that chemistry is a branch of physics.
  51. Sociology (“social physics”) is submitted to the laws of all other sciences, but the “laws of sociology” do not affect the laws of nature.
  52. Some philosophies are still very theological or metaphysical, while others are completely scientific (reminder: the author considers theology, metaphysics and science different methods to philosophize).
  53. You can be accurate and still feel uncertain.
  54. Mathematics is present in every science, as a tool for validation.

17 de março de 2018

What if Brazil followed that trend?

Filed under: Notícias e política — Tags:, — Yurinho @ 11:40

So, as you kids have read, the author of Rurouni Kenshin was caught with child porn recently, but possession of child porn is punished with a fine in Japan. So, he is still free, but had to pay around 2000 dollars to the police. I talked to others about that issue and it seems like, in Japan, you are only arrested for violent crimes. That made me think of Brazilian prison population. Imagine if Brazil followed that trend. While the Brazilian government wastes money keeping people in jail, often for small offenses, the Japanese government earns money by fining those who commit the same offenses. What would be the practical consequences of that, if it was adopted in Brazil?

First, organized crime would lose numbers. There are people who are forced to join the Red Command or the First Capital Command while they are serving time in jail. Less dangerous offenders are given the choice of joining them to die horribly later or dying immediately in criminal hands if they refuse both. Reducing the prison population, that wouldn’t happen, specially considering that both factions are in open war against each other. With less people in jail, their operations would be harder, those guys would be easier to monitor, rebellions and massacres would be less bloody and they would end up destroying each other in the long run anyway.

Second, taxes would be softer on the law-abiding citizen. If all those people who were arrested for non-violent crimes became extra tax payers? I don’t know if Brazil is as broke as they say it is, but fining those guys rather than arresting them would be a great way to earn tax revenue. Of course, we are speaking about non-violent crimes, not murder or rape (and I mean “real rape”, in the sense of forced penetration, not whatever else people call “rape” nowadays).

And that culminates in the main point: we wouldn’t only alleviate state expenses, but also rise tax revenue with that. But how to implement that?

My idea is that fines are paid in wage percentages. In the case of child porn, for example, the mere possession of the file could be punished by taking 12% of a person’s wage for, say, four years (of course, that’s just an example, I don’t think possession of child porn is such a big deal to be punished so harshly, as possession of murder footage isn’t a criminal offense, despite murder being a much more serious crime, compared to nudes that kids share with each other). Wage percentages are useful because, that way, people who earn more would pay more, while poor people wouldn’t be required to pay amounts that they do not have. Plus, a rich person supposedly has less needs and better education, so it’s unlikely that they committed the offense because they “needed” it, unlike a poor person who steals food to not starve (in that case, I think it’s state’s fault, so the person isn’t supposed to be punished if state fails to provide basic survival conditions). A person who can not pay the amount goes to jail and serves there for X – Y years, where X is how long he was supposed to pay the wage percentage and Y is how long he has managed to pay (if I had to pay for four years and managed to pay only two, then I’m arrested for two years, which is 4 – 2). Plus, if the wage percentage exceeds 50%, I can apply to be willingly arrested. After all, in jail, I won’t starve and maybe I would even be safer, if the prison population goes under control. In times of economic crisis, the crisis could be softened by adjusting the wage percentages in the penal code (which wouldn’t affect time and percentages of those who were convicted before the adjustment), reducing the need of imposing more taxes on law-abiding citizens.

What do you think? Would be a good idea, in the end? I’m pretty bad at politics, so maybe I said something stupid. If I did, correct me, please.

16 de março de 2018

Kant’s “Critique of Judgment”.

Filed under: Livros, Passatempos — Tags:, , — Yurinho @ 11:52

“Critique of Judgment” was written by Kant. Below are some paraphrased thoughts found in his text.

  1. Something can be a waste of money and resources and still be nice to look at.
  2. My aesthetic taste doesn’t rely solely on beauty.
  3. Your taste for art, for example, only matters in society.
  4. “Pleasant” is subjective.
  5. Beauty can be universally recognized, but not universally liked (some people find pleasure in things deemed “ugly”, while not everyone enjoys looking at something even after admitting it’s beautiful).
  6. Whenever you say “that’s beautiful”, you are speaking for everyone.
  7. When you find something beautiful, you may want to appreciate it without adding something to it (a beautiful woman, for example, needs no makeup).
  8. If something is simple, it’s easier to be beautiful.
  9. If you use accessories to enhance your beauty, you may as well try, but enhancing beauty isn’t the same as increasing it’s level (your beauty remains the same, it’s just put in more evidence).
  10. Beauty must be judged in itself, disregarding accessories.
  11. A philosopher and a layman may use the same principles to reason about something, but a philosopher knows those principles more clearly.
  12. Beauty has nothing to do with usefulness.
  13. Music needs no lyrics.
  14. There’s no objective rule to determinate what is beautiful and what is not.
  15. There are beautiful things, but not beautiful models (beautiful things don’t often follow patterns).
  16. “Cartoon” is a work of art that exaggerates the characteristics of a model in the author’s mind.
  17. When you say that something is beautiful, you are implying that everyone else would think so (reminder: beauty is not taste, as I can find something beautiful and still not like it).
  18. Imagination isn’t “free” if it’s bound to any law.
  19. If imagination is bound to laws, then it’s a source of morals, not art, as it’s goal becomes “good”, rather than “pleasant”.
  20. Restricting imagination with rules may also make judgments based on taste impossible.
  21. If something wasn’t made with imagination and doesn’t seem to represent anything, it will be boring to look at.
  22. A work of art is good when you always go back to it.
  23. “Sublime” (which causes pleasure due to it’s strength) is different from “beautiful” (which causes pleasure due to it’s harmony).
  24. Sublime objects (volcanoes, hurricanes, detonations and other violent events) can be dangerous.
  25. While beauty can be enhanced with accessories, sublime objects can not be enhanced that way.
  26. Sublime is violent.
  27. There are two kinds of sublime: mathematical and dynamic.
  28. For something to be sublime, it needs to give an impression of being incomparable.
  29. Sublime isn’t a characteristic of the object, but a feeling that we have when looking at it, meaning that it resides in us.
  30. The sublime makes us realize how small we are in comparison with nature or universe.
  31. Something is “abnormally big” when it’s size works against it’s nature.
  32. There’s no reason to believe that the universe is finite.
  33. Sublime, as sensation, may be felt when around things that usually cause fear.
  34. Aesthetics should be used as a pedagogical tool.
  35. Enthusiasm differs from frenzy because frenzy is embarrassing.
  36. Seeking isolation in order to improve oneself is different from seeking isolation out of shyness or hate.
  37. Some people seek isolation to avoid hating their own species.
  38. Pain and delight don’t always originate from the body.
  39. You shouldn’t pretend to like something just because everyone else likes it.
  40. It’s impossible to force someone to like something.
  41. A work of art will never please everyone.
  42. Whenever you judge a sensation, you use subjective, unique criteria, that can not be used by anyone else.
  43. If I can’t force a person to feel pleasure, it’s pointless to say that someone has a “bad taste” for art or food or music or whatever else.
  44. Because of that, there is no objective criteria to judge something as “pleasant”.
  45. Art gives no concepts, but gives examples.
  46. It’s silly to say “it’s bad because I don’t like it”.
  47. You can’t please everyone.
  48. Prejudice is harmful.
  49. Prejudice is the elevation of a provisory judgment to the degree of principle.
  50. If aesthetic taste is a social attribute and humans are social animals, then all humans have aesthetic taste.
  51. We only feel the need to express our aesthetic taste if there’s people around: what’s the point of a drawing that no one is going to see?
  52. An inclination can only be admired if it becomes socially acceptable.
  53. It’s a virtue to be sensitive to beauty.
  54. A person who is fooled into thinking that a plastic flower is a real flower may still feel mesmerized by how well-executed that imitation is upon noticing it’s fake.
  55. Kant’s rainbow: sublime red, audacious orange, honest yellow, lovely green, modest blue, constant indigo, tender violet.
  56. Innocent white.
  57. “Art” is any technique that produces something that nature can not produce on it’s own.
  58. Art is free.
  59. While art is technique, rather than concept, it’s not science, even though art borrows from science.
  60. If you produce something in exchange of money, that’s your job.
  61. We can’t make a science of art.
  62. Science without art is fruitless (as it wouldn’t have concrete result, if we admit that art is any technique to produce something that is not found in nature).
  63. The foundation of art as aesthetic experience is pleasure: a drawing, a story or a song ia a good product of aesthetic art if it’s capable of causing pleasure.
  64. Some songs only serve the purpose of not letting the party fall silent.
  65. A genius doesn’t follow rules, because he makes his own.
  66. Geniuses are teachers, everyone else is a student.
  67. The genius is a force of nature.
  68. To be considered a genius, the person must be original.
  69. Learning to draw, to write or to compose music won’t make you an artist, if you lack originality.
  70. Inspiration can not be taught.
  71. Every art has a goal, even if it’s just “causing pleasure”.
  72. You don’t need to break all rules in order to be original.
  73. Art can be appreaciated by anyone.
  74. Art can give a pleasant portrait of things that are disgusting in nature.
  75. Art can portray an abstract thing (such as war) as a material thing (a red angel with a sword).
  76. Expressing concepts in a original way is part of art.
  77. An artist learns from nature and from other artists.
  78. An artist uses it’s geniality as well as it’s taste, to balance originality and pleasure.
  79. Something can be ugly and enjoyable.
  80. It’s possible to produce something pleasant without being original.
  81. Good art affects a person’s emotional state.
  82. A genius creates a style that will likely be copied.
  83. But someone who copies that style must take care to not copy it’s flaws as well.
  84. Working with fine arts requires imagination, understanding, spirit and taste.
  85. Different people will look at the same painting and draw different conclusions from it.
  86. Speaking beautifully isn’t the same as speaking truthfully.
  87. Rethoric enables us to take advantage of others, if they are ignorant.
  88. Even when well-intentioned, rethoric is still a dirty trick.
  89. Appealing to emotion makes a person more prone to accepting a point of view, because emotions keep a person from reasoning correctly.
  90. In music, the role of mathematics is to make melody, pulse and harmony agree with each other.
  91. To flee from a painting, you just have to look away, but it’s so much harder to flee from a song.
  92. Even harder is to flee from a perfume.
  93. Some pains do feel good.
  94. A good joke must be absurd.
  95. A joke can be even funnier if told in a serious tone.
  96. Sleep, hope and laughter are three things that make life tolerable.
  97. We can’t make science of our preferences.
  98. Description and demonstration are different things.
  99. Understanding, reason and judgment can arrive at different conclusions.
  100. There’s no science of beauty.
  101. Intellectuals need to communicate with laymen.
  102. “Sentimentalism” is the tendency to feel emotional more frequently or more intensely than average people, even in the absence of objective stimulation.
  103. Difference between religion and superstition is that, in religion, there’s both fear and admiration, while there’s only fear in superstition.
  104. To know if something is good, you need it’s definition, but the definition isn’t enough if you want to know if something is beautiful.
  105. “Pleasant” and “good” not always converge.
  106. To like everything is to like nothing.
  107. If you are truly hungry, you will eat whatever is in the dish.
  108. So, you can only have taste (preference) when you are not facing need.
  109. You can not willingly act without interest (if you want, you are interested).

15 de março de 2018

E se pegasse no Brasil?

Filed under: Notícias e política, Organizações — Tags:, , , — Yurinho @ 11:38

Então, como você já deve ter lido, o autor de Samurai X foi pego com pornô infantil esses dias, mas posse de pornô infantil é punida com multa no Japão. Então, ele continua livre, apesar de ter pago uns quatro mil paus pra polícia. Eu conversei com outros sobre o assunto e parece que, no Japão, você só vai pra cadeia por crimes violentos. Isso me fez pensar na população carcerária brasileira. Imagine se essa moda pegasse aqui. Enquanto o governo brasileiro gasta dinheiro mantendo os presos na cadeia, às vezes por crimes pequenos, o governo japonês ganha dinheiro multando os que cometem os mesmo crimes em seu território. Quais as consequências práticas disso, se isso fosse adotado no Brasil?

Primeiramente, o crime organizado perderia contingente. Existem pessoas que são forçadas a se filiar ao Comando Vermelho ou ao Primeiro Comando da Capital enquanto estão presas. Pequenos criminosos têm a escolha de se filiar a um deles e morrer depois ou morrer imediamente se recusarem ambos. Diminuindo a população carcerária, isso não aconteceria e o crime organizado perderia números, especialmente porque diferentes facções estão em combate umas com as outras. Quanto menos gente na cadeia, mais difícil fica pra esse pessoal operar, eles se tornam mais facilmente monitoráveis, rebeliões seriam menos sangrentas e eles acabariam eliminando uns aos outros a longo prazo de qualquer forma.

Segundo, a carga tributária sobre o cidadão poderia diminuir. Se todos os caras que foram presos por crimes não violentos fossem transformados em pagadores de impostos? Eu não sei o país está mesmo quebrado como dizem que está, mas multá-los em troca de liberdade seria um bom jeito de obter arrecadação. Claro, estamos falando de crimes não violentos, não de assassinato ou estupro.

E isso culmina no ponto principal: não apenas aliviamos as contas do estado, como também arrecadamos mais com isso. Mas como isso seria implantado?

Minha ideia é que as multas sejam pagas em porcentagens de salário por um período de tempo determinado. No caso da pornografia infantil, por exemplo. A mera posse do arquivo poderia ser punida com o pagamento de 12% do salário por, digamos, quatro anos. Porcentagens de salário são úteis porque, dessa forma, ricos que cometem crimes pagam mais do que pobres que cometem crimes. Isso porque o rico, se realmente tem uma boa vida e talvez boa educação, provavelmente não está cometendo o crime por necessidade ou falta de instrução. Além disso, isso impede que o pobre tenha que saldar somas que não possa pagar. Atenuantes de pena afetariam a porcentagem paga e o tempo de pena. Se o indivíduo não pagasse, iria pra cadeia pelo tempo restante da pena (se eu só pude pagar por dois anos e preciso pagar mais dois, seria preso por dois anos, que é o tempo restante). Em adição, se a porcentagem de salário exceder 50%, o indivíduo tem a opção de ir preso voluntariamente. Afinal, na cadeia, ele não morrerá de fome e talvez até fique mais seguro, se esse método reduzir mesmo a população carcerária. Múltiplos crimes aumentam a porcentagem e o tempo de pagamento. Em tempos de crise, ela poderia ser atenuada alterando as porcentagens de pena, o que diminui a necessidade de aumentar impostos. Só resta saber se os políticos não vão passar a criminalizar um monte de coisas só pra terem mais arrecadação, o que poderia, acidentalmente, piorar a corrupção.

O que você acha? Seria uma boa ideia, afinal? Pelo menos assim, a arrecadação do estado, bem como seus gastos com a população carcerária exorbitante, seriam problemas parcialmente resolvidos.

4 de março de 2018

Defending controversial causes online.

I see some people defending controversial causes in the Internet and doing so in a absolutely fruitless way. I don’t know if they are kidding or not. I never defended anything with my nails and teeth, like they claim to be doing, but, if I were to, I would try something like this strategy I’m about to tell you about.

In the book Paedophilia: The Radical Case, O’Carroll tells us how radical homosexuals fought discrimination back in the seventies and eighties. It was something like this: when one of them suffered discrimination, he would speak to others, who would also speak to more people and, when they had enough people interested in counter-attacking, they would crossdress, go to that place where the discrimination happened and camp at the place. So, if you saw fifty drags camping around someone’s house or around a pub, someone in that area was certainly a homophobe. As the protest was peaceful, the police couldn’t do much. On the other hand, if someone tried to attack them aggressively, the drags would call the police on that guy. It was a very effective attempt to force people to accept that homosexuality happens and that the number of homosexuals is huge, that they are sticking together.

That radical drag strategy can be summarized in four points. Some of them are being neglected by my friends with heretical ideas. They are responsive action, coordinated action, secret planning, peaceful action. Online, a protest of that sort would be done to a much less effective extent, but could be done much more frequently.

Responsive action (“do not attack, unless attacked first”).

A responsive action happens after a first action and in response to it. When your point of view is attacked by someone, you should counter-attack, both as means of self-defense and as a way to destroy the opposition. My friends have both scientific evidence and philosophical technique, but that are used offensively. They start the fight. When you start the fight, you may very well end up ignored. But, when you reply to someone’s position, that person can not ignore you without looking like they have no counter-argument. Plus, if the action is coordinated, the opponent may even feel ashamed of the position they hold and silence about it in the future, thus reducing opposition.

Plus, when replying to someone’s message, you are posting something. If it happens in public, then extra kudos for you. Others will see the post exchange and judge which side is the correct one. If you are ignored, that effect doesn’t happen, because people tend to believe more in a person who, in a debate, destroys the opposing point of view. Without an opposing point of view to destroy, your position won’t be magnified.

Coordinated action (“don’t do this alone”).

When several people attack at same time, the blows happen quicker, each person is encouraged to attack with all that they have (due to feeling protected) and it’s hard to point out who is the “head”, the “responsible” for the attack. If several people attack a certain point of view and the proponents of that view don’t have enough arguments to defend themselves, those who are watching the debate and secretely hold a heretical opinion may feel tempted to participate, despite not being “formally” in the ops.

If you are attacking alone, specially if you are the one starting the debate, you are behaving in a suicidal manner: the establishment will consume you. On the other hand, if you are in group and is attacked, depending on what is done, you can appeal to the authorities of the platform where the offense happened. So, both for defense purposes and reporting purposes, it’s important to know the rules that are valid in the site you are using.

Secret planning (“don’t talk about /b/”).

It’s important to plan the action in secret, so that the proponents of the establishment are caught unprepared. If we are talking about Internet, that can be done with a forum approach. Create a board or forum in which the participants can post links, for example, to news that defend the establishment. There, other readers can examine the news, identify weak points, select material to be used against (scientific evidence, rethorics, jokes, news from other sites and so on) and comment, en masse. If four people go, that’s already pretty good, considering the amount of views that garbage news get every day and the amount of evidence available on our side. The same can be done with social media posts, such as Facebook and Twitter. A forum user reports the behavior, others will see the post and evaluate what can be done, then they go and attack. That way, it’s also possible to inflate the number of positive reactions to a post (such as “likes”), which sometimes make people shy to disagree.

Besides the forum approach, Discord servers and Skype groups can also be used, depending on the cause that is defended, as well as the number of partipants. Sometimes even the comment box in a blog works, for the purposes of reporting and organizing.

Peaceful action (“convert, don’t alienate”).

Whenever you write something online, in public, you must also think of those who are reading, not only the person who is the direct receiver of the message. Make your opponent say something stupid and put his position in danger. If he gets mad at you, don’t actively try to make him more enraged, keep going with the plan, don’t let yourself be dragged by emotion, be at your best behavior. If the opponent makes a mistake, acts with emotion or attacks you (rather than you argument), let him do so, without descending to his level. Those who are reading, upon seeing that your behavior is decent, while the opponent is behaving erratically, would be less inclined to associate with a position defended by a lunatic, specially if you speak in clear, easy-to-understand terms. Ask questions, make your opponent feel like he has to prove that he isn’t an idiot, confront him with the contradictions of his position, but always reponsively and never alone.

If you are arguing online, it’s important to shield yourself from personal attacks, so you must stay within the boundaries of the law and must refrain from breaking community guidelines that are valid in that site. That way, if your opponent does something against you, then you have the right and authority to report them. If you get banned for no reason, maybe you will take your opponent with you.

Jumping to reality.

Another advantage of the forum approach is that you are able to track the number of active people in those communities. When the number of individuals is big enough in comparison to a place’s demographics, maybe it’s time to do something in real life, rather than sticking solely with online debates. Maybe that would be a good time to act, in group, and print leaflets or do whatever real life protest you think is suitable, keeping in mind the number of supporters and the conditions surrounding the act. Depending on the cause, online meetings may be the only way for those people to gather around the idea and plan real life protests, that would be similar in structure, even if not in content, to the radical drag thing. We need more people in order to do something like that and a lot of communities are being formed thanks to the Internet. Use it intelligently.

Defendendo causas controversas online.

Filed under: Computadores e Internet, Organizações — Tags:, , — Yurinho @ 01:09

Eu vejo algumas pessoas defendendo causas controversas na Internet e fazendo isso de forma terminantemente infrutífera. Eu não sei se estão brincando ou não. Eu nunca fiz essa defesa de forma incisiva, mas, se eu tivesse que fazer, eu faria mais ou menos da forma abaixo.

No livro Paedophilia: The Radical Case, O’Carroll diz que os grupos homossexuais radicais lutavam em bandos contra o preconceito. Eles faziam o seguinte: quando um deles sofria discriminação, ele falava com os outros, os quais, por sua vez, falavam com ainda outros e, quando tinham contingente suficiente, se “montavam” (travestiam) e iam ao local onde seu colega havia sofrido discriminação. Lá, eles acampavam. Como era um protesto pacífico, a polícia não podia fazer muita coisa. Por outro lado, se alguém partisse pra violência contra eles, ocorreriam denúncias. Era uma tentativa, muito efetiva, de forçar os preconceituosos a aceitarem que homossexualidade acontece e que o número de homossexuais é grande, que eles estão unidos.

Essa estratégia (chamada radical drag) se resume em quatro pontos que estão sendo negligenciados, em maior ou menor grau, pelos meus colegas com ideias heréticas: ação responsiva, ação coordenada, planejamento secreto, ação pacífica. Na Internet, um protesto desses pode ser feito menos efetivamente, mas com muito mais frequência.

Ação responsiva (“não ataque, apenas contra-ataque”).

Uma ação responsiva é aquela que ocorre após uma outra ação, em resposta a esta. Quando seu ponto de vista é atacado por alguém, você deve atacar de volta, como meio tanto de defesa como de destruição do ponto de vista do outro. Meus colegas têm evidência científica e argumentação filosófica, mas eles as usam de maneira ofensiva. Eles começam a briga. Quando você começa a briga, você pode ser ignorado sem problemas. Mas, quando você responde à declaração de alguém, o outro não pode ignorar você sem parecer que é incapaz de argumentar de volta. Além do mais, se a ação também for coordenada, ele pode se sentir envergonhado do ponto de vista que defende e calar sobre ele, diminuindo, portanto, a oposição.

Em adição, ao responder a mensagem de alguém que critica seu ponto de vista, você está postando algo publicamente. Outros virão e verão a troca de mensagens públicas e julgarão qual lado tem razão. Por outro lado, se você ataca e é ignorado, esse efeito não acontece, porque uma pessoa tende mais a acreditar numa pessoa que, num debate, destrói o ponto de vista do opositor. Se você é ignorado, não há opositor, não há pessoa com a qual comparar sua opinião, logo ela não é magnificada.

Ação coordenada (“se for contra-atacar, não o faça sozinho”).

Quando muitos atacam ao mesmo tempo, os ataques ocorrem mais rapidamente, cada um é encorajado a atacar com mais intensidade (por se sentir protegido) e é mais difícil apontar o “cabeça”, o “responsável”. Os defensores do estabelecido já têm seus exércitos, mas, se sua argumentação for boa, é como atacar um grande exército com uma arma de destruição em massa. Se várias pessoas atacam um ponto de vista e os proponentes desse ponto de vista não têm argumentação suficiente pra defender esse ponto, quem assiste ao debate e se interessa pela posição divergente se sente tentado a participar, mesmo que não esteja “formalmente” no movimento.

Se você ataca sozinho, principalmente se você for o que começa a briga, está se comportando de maneira suicida, porque o estabelecido consumirá você. Por outro lado, se você for em grupo e for atacado, todos denunciam o que atacou você às autoridades do site onde o ataque ocorreu. Tanto para razões de defesa como de represália, é importante que todos estejam a par das regras do site onde a argumentação está ocorrendo.

Planejamento secreto (“não fale do /b/”).

É importante que o planejamento não seja feito em público, para que os proponentes do estabelecido não se preparem para o que poderia vir de ti. Quando se fala de Internet, isso pode ser feito pela abordagem do fórum. Crie um fórum no qual os participantes podem colocar links para reportagens que defendem o estabelecido. Lá, os outros leitores lêem a reportagem, examinam seus pontos fracos, seleccionam o material que usarão (evidência científica, retórica, humor, outras reportagens, entre outros) e vão comentar na reportagem, em massa. Se quatro forem, já é um bom número, para a quantidade de cliques que uma reportagem recebe por dia. O mesmo pode ser feito para postagens em mídias sociais, como o Facebook ou o Twitter. Um usuário do fórum denuncia o comportamento, os outros verificam o que pode ser feito, vão lá e atacam. Dessa forma, também é possível inflar a quantidade de reações positivas (“curtidas” ou likes) a uma postagem, tornando-a popular e mais fácil de ser encontrada.

Além do fórum, servidores no Discord ou grupos de Skype também poderiam ser usados, dependendo da causa defendida e do número de integrantes. Às vezes até um blog no qual interessados e dono possam discutir nos comentários serve.

Ação pacífica (“ganhe proponentes, não os perca”).

Sempre que você escreve algo pra outra pessoa, na Internet, em público, você deve pensar nas outras pessoas que lerão o que você escreveu, não somente no receptor direto da mensagem. Leve o outro a falar besteira e a colocar sua posição em perigo. Se ele se irritar, não o irrite de propósito, mantenha-se magnânimo, não se deixe levar pelas suas emoções, comporte-se. Se o oponente se atrapalhar, agir emotivamente, atacar você (em vez de seu argumento), deixe-o fazer sem descer ao seu nível. Os outros que estiverem lendo, ao verem que você está se comportando bem, enquanto que o proponente do estabelecido está se comportando de maneira errática, tenderão a não se associar à posição defendida por um lunático, especialmente se sua posição tiver fundação sólida e for simples de compreender. Faça perguntas, leve o oponente a uma situação em que ele tenha que provar que não é um idiota, confronte-o com as contradições de sua posição. Mas sempre faça isso responsivamente e sempre faça isso em grupo.

Se você estiver argumentando, é importante também que o seu oponente não possa fazer nada contra sua pessoa, então nada do que você fizer pode ser ilegal, nem quebrar as diretrizes da comunidade onde o impasse está ocorrendo. Dessa forma, se o oponente fizer algo contra você, dependendo do que é, você terá todo o direito e autoridade de denunciar seu comportamento às autoridades do site. Assim, mesmo que você seja banido sem razão, pelo menos levará o estabelecido junto.

Salto para a realidade.

Outra vantagem da abordagem do fórum ou do grupo oculto é a avaliação do número de indivíduos ativos nessas comunidades. Quando o número de indivíduos ativos for grande o suficiente para a demográfica de um determinado lugar, talvez seja hora de fazer protestos no mundo físico, além de manter os protestos no mundo virtual. Talvez seja o momento de começar a fazer pelo menos os cartazes pra grudar por aí, divulgando a ideia e os links relevantes. Dependendo da causa, reuniões online talvez sejam o único meio possível de juntar essas pessoas, as quais poderão sair em bando depois a fim de fazer protestos iguais em estrutura, mesmo que não em conteúdo, ao radical drag. É preciso construir contingente antes e muitas comunidades hoje estão se formando graças a Internet. Use-a inteligentemente.

1 de março de 2018

Anotações sobre “Diagnostic and Statistical Manual”.

Filed under: Livros, Organizações, Saúde e bem-estar — Tags:, — Yurinho @ 22:58

“Diagnostic and Statistical Manual: Mental Disorders” foi escrito pela American Psychiatric Association. Abaixo, algumas afirmações parafraseadas feitas nesse texto.

  1. Havia um tempo em que cada instituição tinha seu próprio manual (um catálogo de doenças, com seus nomes e sintomas, usado para facilitar o diagnóstico), o que dificultava o diálogo entre instituições de saúde, tanto em termos de nomenclatura, quanto em termos de estatística.
  2. A primeira tentativa de escrever um manual unificado que fosse reconhecido em todo o território estadunidense foi o Standard Classified Nomenclature of Diseases, de 1932.
  3. Nomenclatura e estatísticas para desordens mentais estava mais fácil de fazer, então elas ganharam seu próprio manual (com nomenclatura e estatísticas próprias), com seu próprio passo de atualização.
  4. No entanto, quando a segunda guerra mundial estourou, o uso da nomenclatura e diagnóstico padrão desse manual foi praticamente inútil, porque somente dez por cento dos casos de desordem mental apresentados por soldados tinha diagnóstico padrão.
  5. “Personalidade psicopata” era um termo genérico utilizado para descrever todos os traços de personalidade que só se tornavam relevantes em guerra, mas que não posavam problema na vida normal.
  6. A marinha americana e, posteriormente, as outras forças armadas americanas ajudaram na revisão do sistema.
  7. Depois de diferentes revisões com diferentes propósitos, três manuais estavam em uso: o padrão, o das forças armadas e o da administração dos veteranos.
  8. Uma nova revisão era necessária e havia pressão para que ela fosse publicada como a versão “oficial” da Associação Americana de Psiquiatria.
  9. Só então nasceu o DSM-I.
  10. A coleta de estatísticas sobre desordens mentais é de interesse do governo.
  11. Essas estatísticas não poderiam ser colectadas sem o esforço coletivo da Associação Americana de Psiquiatria e o Comitê Nacional de Higiene Mental.
  12. Cada desordem mental pode vir acompanhada de um modificador em sua nomenclatura, atribuído pelo médico, para que outro médico tenha acesso a um diagnóstico mais específico quando o paciente passar para outras mãos.
  13. Esses modificadores são “com reação psicótica”, “com reação neurótica” e “com reação comportamental”.
  14. O DSM também lista desordens mentais de origem biológica (como doenças que começam depois de dano cerebral).
  15. Se um problema cerebral começa devido a uma infecção, o doutor deve escrever o nome da infecção no diagnóstico.
  16. Especificação também é necessária quando o problema tem origem química (a substância, como álcool ou drogas, deve ser especificada).
  17. Especificação também é necessária quando o problema tem origem pessoal (uma experiência traumática, de forma que o doutor deve descrever qual evento desencadeou o problema, que pode ter sido a guerra, a perda de um filho ou violência).
  18. Especificação também é necessária quando o problema tem origem desconhecida (nesse caso, o doutor deve dizer que a causa é desconhecida).
  19. DSM-I usava o termo “mongolismo”.
  20. Substâncias podem causar dano cerebral permanente.
  21. Especificação também é necessária quando o problema tem origem médica (ocorreu em decorrência de uma operação no cérebro, por exemplo).
  22. Problemas cerebrais podem ter origem em choque elétrico.
  23. O mesmo vale pra radiação.
  24. DSM-I usava o termo “desordem maníaca-depressiva” (para o que hoje é “transtorno bipolar”).
  25. Tipos de desordem esquizofrênica:
    1. Simples.
    2. Hebefrênica.
    3. Catatônica.
    4. Paranoide.
    5. Não-diferenciada (que pode ser aguda ou crônica).
    6. Esquizo-afetiva.
    7. Infantil.
    8. Residual.
  26. Um problema mental pode refletir no corpo (somatização).
  27. Ansiedade, depressão, dissociação, conversão, fobia e transtorno obsessivo-compulsivo podem ter origem completamente psicológica, se bem que nem sempre podemos apontar qual é a causa.
  28. Comportamento passivo-agressivo, se for um traço de personalidade, pode ser considerado doença.
  29. Desvio sexual e vício são classificados como desordens de personalidade sociopática.
  30. As revisões de nomenclatura seguem as descobertas científicas da época.
  31. Mesmo que uma desordem mental tenha relação com problemas biológicos, como dano cerebral, o problema biológico deve ser diagnosticado separadamente, ou seja, não cabe ao psicólogo ou psiquiatra diagnosticar um problema biológico.
  32. Nem todos os problemas psicológicos se originam de um cérebro danificado, o que significa que uma pessoa pode ter um problema como depressão apesar de ter um cérebro perfeitamente saudável.
  33. A seção dois introduz um quarto modificador, “com deficiência mental”, que, por sua vez, tem três modificadores menores: leve, mediano e severo.
  34. Deficiência mental pode ser um sintoma de um problema maior.
  35. O DSM-I faz uma ressalva ao dizer que “deficiência mental” é um termo legal, clinicamente vago, mas que usam porque não acharam termo melhor.
  36. “Com deficiência mental” não pode ser diagnóstico primário.
  37. Os três tipos de desordem psicótica: afetiva, esquizofrênica, paranóide.
  38. Uma causa possível é dificuldade de adaptação da mente ao ambiente (tensões interiores e exteriores).
  39. Modificadores psicóticos só podem ser aplicados em casos sintomáticos.
  40. Modificadores neuróticos só podem ser aplicados em casos onde a ansiedade é a sensação prevalente, a qual pode ser sentida ou contida por meio de mecanismos de defesa ou rituais.
  41. Sintomas neuróticos também podem aparecer devido a problemas de adaptação entre mente e ambiente.
  42. Um homossexual pode sentir ansiedade ao sentir desejo e ser proibido de satisfazê-lo.
  43. “Aguda” é uma situação reversível, enquanto que “crônica” é pra sempre.
  44. Não confunda sintoma e doença.
  45. Um problema cerebral crônico pode tanto amenizar quanto pode piorar.
  46. Quando usar o modificador de deficiência mental, certifique-se de incluir o QI do paciente no diagnóstico.
  47. Monóxido de carbono pode causar dano cerebral permanente.
  48. Consumo de álcool também pode causar esse dano.
  49. Diagnóstico diferencial pode ser um desafio.
  50. Por exemplo, nem sempre é possível apontar a diferença entre desordem cerebral crônica associada à arteriosclerose e desordem cerebral crônica associada à senilidade.
  51. Agravado pelo fato de que uma pessoa pode ter os dois problemas.
  52. Convulsões podem ser sinal de sífilis, intoxicação, traumatismo, arteriosclerose ou neoplasma cerebral.
  53. Em “emoções infantis”, a palavra “infantis” está entre aspas…
  54. Algumas doenças cerebrais evoluem a ponto de transformar a pessoa num ser vegetativo.
  55. Transtorno bipolar existe em três sabores: predominantemente maníaco (alegre, saltitante, irritável), predominantemente depressivo (apático, cansado, triste) e “outro tipo” (mista ou circular).
  56. Hipocondria é um tipo de esquizofrenia paranóide.
  57. Sintomas esquizofrênicos podem desaparecer semanas após terem começado, mas frequentemente voltam.
  58. Paranóia se desenvolve devagar, sendo logicamente fundada em uma interpretação errada de algo que realmente aconteceu.
  59. Fora isso, porém, o paranóico é normal.
  60. Paranóia é diferente de “estado paranóide”, porque a paranóia é lógica, embora fundada numa interpretação errada de um fato, enquanto que o estado paranóide tem pouca ou nenhuma lógica.
  61. Uma reação psicofisiológica ocorre quando a mente exagera ou cria estados corporais (por exemplo: os enjôos falsos sentidos por pessoas com emetofobia, as quais, de tão preocupadas que estão em não vomitar, acabam sentindo enjoo sem razão).
  62. É o caso de pessoas que sentem coceira quando assustadas.
  63. Também dos que sentem dor de cabeça quando sentem raiva…
  64. Se a reação é repetida, o corpo sofrerá de verdade (é o caso dos que têm úlcera por estresse).
  65. Ansiedade é um sinal de perigo percebido pela consciência.
  66. O perigo sinalizado vem de dentro.
  67. Uma pessoa pode ou não ter um problema dependendo de como ela lida com a ansiedade.
  68. Ansiedade “comum” é um estado de “expectativa” não associado a nenhum objeto específico, aparentemente, diferente das fobias.
  69. O impulso reprimido que causa a ansiedade pode causar dissociação.
  70. Uma compulsão pode ser vista como mórbida pelo próprio paciente, mas ele não pode evitar e precisa satisfazer a compulsão.
  71. Exemplos: tocar madeira, lavar as mãos, fazer o sinal da cruz várias vezes ao dia, performar tarefas em determinada ordem (é meu caso, admito), entre outros.
  72. Depressão também libera tensão de ansiedade, de forma que a ansiedade pode estar por trás de reações depressivas.
  73. Depressão frequentemente, mas nem sempre, está associada a culpa.
  74. A intensidade da depressão, quando reativa e relacionada a uma perda, dependendo do valor do elemento perdido e das circunstâncias em que a perda ocorreu.
  75. O nome clínico para baixo controle das emoções é “personalidade emocionalmente instável”.
  76. “Passivo-dependente” é a pessoa que desenvolve um apego emocional a uma pessoa que é mais forte ou mais experiente, porque tem a necessidade de uma figura “paterna” que lhe guie.
  77. Viver num ambiente “moralmente anormal” pode levar a pessoa a “patologicamente” questionar valores morais da sociedade que não é “anormal” como aquela em que ele viveu.
  78. O DSM-I lista a homossexualidade, o travestismo, a pedofilia, o fetiche sexual e o sadismo sexual como doenças (lembrando: esse livro foi escrito nos anos cinquenta).
  79. Vício em drogas é um sintoma, não o problema, o que explica porque uma pessoa que se recupera do vício recai ou se vicia em outras coisas.
  80. Bebês podem ter problemas psicológicos relacionados a falta de pessoas que lhe apoiem em sua fraqueza (como os pais).
  81. O grau de sucesso em uma tarefa depende de estabilidade emocional, intelecto, condição física, atitude, motivação, treinamento, mas também de suas desvantagens psiquiátricas (os defeitos limitam as qualidades).
  82. Isso quer dizer que uma pessoa com um problema psiquiátrico moderado, mas que teve bom treinamento e tem bom autocontrole, pode se sair melhor em uma tarefa do que uma pessoa normal, mas mal treinada.
  83. Tem um diagnóstico chamado “personalidade inadequada”.
  84. Tem um diagnóstico chamado “personalidade antissocial” e outro chamado “personalidade associal”.
  85. Algumas condições antes tidas por doenças foram reclassificadas como sintomas.
  86. É possível delirar de cansaço.
  87. “Saudável” também é diagnóstico, indicando que o paciente não precisa ser tratado.
  88. “Crueldade” é um termo suplementar para diagnóstico.
  89. Tal como “desobediência”.

Notes on “Diagnostic and Statistical Manual”.

Filed under: Organizações, Saúde e bem-estar — Tags:, , — Yurinho @ 22:57

“Diagnostic and Statistical Manual: Mental Disorders” was written by American Psychiatric Association. Below are some paraphrased statements made in that book.

  1. There was a time when every health institution had it’s own manual, which made the dialog between professionals harder, both in terms of nomenclature and in terms of statistics.
  2. The first attempt at writing a standard manual (a disease catalog, with their names and symptoms, in order to make diagnosing easier) was the Standard Classified Nomenclature of Diseases, published in 1932.
  3. The nomenclature and statistics for mental disorders, however, was easier to do, because it was more homogenous, which enabled them to get their own manual with their own update pace.
  4. When the second world war exploded, that manual was next to useless, as only 10% of the disorders that soldiers developed in war had an official name and diagnosis.
  5. “Psychopathic personality” was a blanket term for all minor personality traits that only became relevant in a war setting.
  6. The american navy and, afterwards, all american armed forces ended up helping to revise the system.
  7. After so many revisions for different purposes, three manuals were in use: Standard, the armed forces nomenclature and the Veteran’s Administration nomenclature.
  8. A new revision was needed and there was pressure for the publishing of a definitive version backed by American Psychiatric Association.
  9. Only then the DSM-I was born.
  10. The collection of statistics on mental disorders produces interesting data for the federal government.
  11. Those statistics couldn’t be collected without colletive effort between the American Psychiatric Association and the National Comittee on Mental Hygiene.
  12. So, unless it’s redundant, each mental disorder may come with a modifier, attributed by the doctor, in it’s diagnostic, so that another doctor who receives the patient can have access to more specific data on that patient.
  13. The modifiers are “with psychotic reaction”, “with neurotic reaction” and “with behavioral reaction”.
  14. The DSM also lists disorders with biologic origin, such as a mental disorder that began after brain damage.
  15. If a brain problem starts because of an infection, the doctor is supposed to specify which infection caused it, to write a more complete diagnostic.
  16. Specification is also needed if the problem began after substance use (specify the substance).
  17. Specification is also needed if the problem began after a personal experience (such as a traumatic event).
  18. Specification is also needed if the problem began after an unknown trigger (in that case, the doctor must say that he doesn’t know the cause).
  19. DSM-I used the term “Mongolism”.
  20. Some subtances can cause permanent brain damage.
  21. Specification is also needed if the problem began after a medical procedure.
  22. Brain problems can spawn after electric shock.
  23. Same goes with radiation.
  24. DSM-I used the term “manic-depressive disorder” (for what is now called “bipolar disorder”).
  25. Types of schizophrenic disorder:
    1. Simple.
    2. Hebephrenic.
    3. Catatonic.
    4. Paranoid.
    5. Acute undifferentiated.
    6. Chronic undifferentiated.
    7. Schizo-affective.
    8. Childhood.
    9. Residual.
  26. A mental disorder may cause reactions in the body (somatization).
  27. Anxiety, depression, dissociation, convertion, phobia and obsessive-compulsive disorder may have completely psychological causes, but sometimes we can’t point the cause at all.
  28. Passive-aggressive behavior is, sometimes, an illness.
  29. Sexual deviance and addictions are classified as sociopathic personality disturbances.
  30. The revisions in the nomenclature follow the scientific discoveries of that time.
  31. Even if a mental disturbance is related to a biological element, such as brain damage, the biologic element must be diagnosed separately, that is, the psychologist or psyquiatrist has no authority to give a diagnosis on a biological problem.
  32. Not every psychologic disorder is rooted in brain problems, meaning that a person can have a mental disturbance despite having a perfectly healthy brain.
  33. Section two introduces a fourth modifier, “with mental deficiency”, which can be mild, moderate or severe.
  34. Mental deficiency may be a symptom of a bigger problem.
  35. The DSM-I makes a warning that “mental deficiency” is a vague legal term, but that is used because they found no better term.
  36. “With mental deficiency” can not be primary diagnosis.
  37. The three types of psychotic disorders: affective, schizophrenic, paranoid.
  38. They could spawn when the mind struggles to adapt to the ambient (internal and external pressure).
  39. Psychotic modifiers can only be applied in symptomatic cases.
  40. Neurotic modifiers can only be applies in cases where anxiety is the prevalent feeling, either directly felt and expressed, or automatically suppressed by defense mechanisms or rituals.
  41. Neurotic symptoms can also spawn from poor adaptation between mind and ambient.
  42. A homosexual may feel anxiety when they feel desire, while also being forbidden of satisfying it.
  43. “Acute” is a reversible situation, while “chronic” is forever.
  44. Do not mistake a symptom for a disorder.
  45. A chronic brain problem may become milder, but it doesn’t mean it can’t worsen.
  46. When using the “mental deficiency” modifier, make sure to include the patient’s IQ in the diagnosis.
  47. Carbon monoxide may cause permanent brain damage.
  48. Alcohol consumption also can cause such damage.
  49. Differential diagnosis can be a challenge.
  50. For example, it’s not always possible to tell the difference between chronic brain disorder associated with cerebral arteriosclerosis and chronic brain disorder associated with senile sclerosis.
  51. Aggravated by the fact a single person may have both conditions.
  52. Convulsions can be a sign of syphilis, intoxication, trauma, cerebral arteriosclerosis or intracranial neoplasm.
  53. In “childish emotionality”, the word “childish” is between quotes.
  54. Some brain diseases grow to the point of making the person live like a plant.
  55. Bipolar disorder (manic-depressive) exists in three types: predominantly manic, predominantly depressive and other.
  56. Hypochondria is a form of paranoid schizophrenia.
  57. Schizophrenic symptoms may disappear after some weeks, but they often come back.
  58. Paranoia develops slowly and is logically built upon an incorrect interpretation of something that indeed happened.
  59. Other than that, however, the paranoid is normal.
  60. Paranoia isn’t the same as “paranoid state”, because paranoia is logical, despite being grounded in an erroneous interpretation of a fact, while paranoid state has little to no logic.
  61. A psychophisiologic reaction is an exaggerated or completely made-up bodily state rooted in a mind (for example: people with emetophobia may feel so worried about throwing up that they may feel nausea for no reason).
  62. That’s the case of people who feel itchy when scared.
  63. Also the case of people who have headaches when angry…
  64. If the reaction is repeated, the damage may become a real physical problem.
  65. “Anxiety” is a signal of danger noticed by conscious mind.
  66. The signaled danger, however, comes from within, sometimes without external input.
  67. Depending on how the person handles the anxiety, they may or may not be ill.
  68. “Common” anxiety is a state of “expectation” that isn’t exactly associated with any specific thing, unlike phobias, which are triggered by a clear input.
  69. The repressed impulse that causes anxiety may start a dissociative process.
  70. A compulsion is often seen as unreasonable by the very patient, but he can’t help it, he has to do it.
  71. For example: touching wood, kissing a cross several times a day, washing hands, doing things in a certain order (my case, I admit)…
  72. Depression relieves some anxious tension through means of self-depreciation.
  73. Depression often, but not always, is associated with feelings of guilt.
  74. The intensity of the depression, when reactive and grounded on loss, depends on the importance of the lost element and the circunstances that surrounded the loss.
  75. The clinical name of low emotional control is “emotionally unstable personality”.
  76. “Passive-dependent” is a person who feels like they need support from a stronger or more experienced person, developing an emotional attachment to a “fatherly” figure.
  77. Living in a “morally abnormal” environment may lead a person to “pathologically” question the morals of a society that is “normal”.
  78. The DSM-I includes homosexuality, transvestism, pedophilia, fetichism and sexual sadism as illnesses (reminder: the book was written in the fifties).
  79. Substance addiction isn’t the illness, but a symptom, which could explain why people who recover from an addiction end up addicted again, to the same substance or to another substance.
  80. Babies also can develop psychological problems, specially when parents are absent.
  81. The degree of success in a given task depends on emotional stability, intellect, physical condition, attitudes, motivation, training, but also depends on their psychiatric ailments (the flaws limit the qualities).
  82. That means that someone who is better trained, but has a moderate psychiatric ailment, can still be more succesful that someone who has a no ailment, but is poorly trained.
  83. There’s a diagnosis called “inadequate personality”.
  84. There’s a diagnosis called “antisocial personality” and another called “asocial personality”.
  85. Some conditions previously seen as disorders were reclassified as symptoms.
  86. “Exhaustion delirium” is a thing.
  87. “Healthy” also is a diagnosis, indicating that the patient doesn’t need treatment.
  88. “Cruelty” is a supplementary term for diagnostic.
  89. As also is “disobedience”.

%d blogueiros gostam disto: