Nnotes

There is a system which is the modern arbiter of the human condition. It's method of change is pathologisation and homogenisation. It is called the psychiatric system or the mental health system.

Another facet is its existence as a system which compensates for the inequality pandemic created by a number of factors collected together as the industrial revolution and its standardisation principle.

The illness paradigm is false. Disadvantage, disability (The same thing?) And distress are very real for those indicted by psychiatric system and other disadvantaged groups. Particularly with so- called mental illnesses, the homogenization treatment model made things worse as did the period of the great psychiatric confinement where the mad disappeared en masse from the sight of mainstream industrial age society.

As the beginning of a new age was heralded came the social model of disability and the idea of integrity of disability. The former said society was the cause of the disadvanTage and inequality suffered by disabled people ( a property poorly quantified by psychiatric studies which define the prognosis associated with a psychiatric label.) And the latter says- for want of a better language- disabled people have a right to be disabled and represent a valuable part if the diversity of humanity. This is a fundamental statement of equality.

Later on came the explicit prioritization of equality for a variety of disadvantaged groups. The imperative for equality can be found in vision in certain points in history, for example after the American civil war or Russian revolution. Sadly those who came afterwards failed miserably to hold the vision close to their hearts.

There is a simple step which could bring a leap forward in the improvement in equality delivered through employment. I'm still working on it but the essentials are simple: measure and improve equality in the workplace. The project is called Equality First. It's a working title and a work in progress but the ambition is to make a giant leap in addressing the impact of disability and disadvantage using social model solutions.

- sent from my smartphone

Some mothers

Might not
Want their children
To ever leave them alone

- sent from my smartphone

More on the killing bloe

A person would be catered for no matter their disability. The guy with locked in syndrome could only communicate with his tongue and_eyes I guess. The suicide apparatus would be activated by these.

The poor bastard shouldn't have had to starve himself to death.

For whatever reason conscious, sentient beings should have the right to die. This is as unalienable as too many other basic and advanced rights. No wwonder so many want to die.

- sent from my smartphone

Fwd: The killing blow

- sent from my smartphone

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Arj Subanandan" <arj.name@googlemail.com>
Date: 24 Dec 2013 12:20
Subject: The killing blow
To: "arj. name. blog" <arj.name.blog@blogger.com>
Cc:

As usual I've been slow to figure out something obvious.

At the end of any assisted suicide pathway a person needn't be killed. Instead they are given the means to deliver the killing blow themselves.

Rather than being beheaded by an axeman I would be provided with a self-activated guillotine. I deliver my killing blow and there is no quandary about committing murder.

Fwd: Equalitism versus feminism.

- sent from my smartphone

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Arj Subanandan" <arj.name@googlemail.com>
Date: 30 Dec 2013 05:17
Subject: Equalitism versus feminism.
To: "arj. name. blog" <arj.name.blog@blogger.com>
Cc:

I don't know much about pure feminists so I may be wide of the mark.

I've met a lot of empowered women who seem to ignore the validity of the masculine way.

They abhor porn and the place it has in men's lives. They see it as an affront to their beliefs rather than respecting male values.

They abhor the word cunt but freely use cock, dick or knob. The c-word sounds much more like a true expletive than those other options. Cunt. Cunt. Cunt. Just wonderful.

Equality driven beliefs value difference and prevent disadvantage. Male and females have their own values but they're both value if they're true.

It's sort of the opposite of the ban on smoking in pubs and bars and anywhere else. Smokers views and rights were steam rollered by a dictatorial antismoker movement. Our rights were considered less or none at all which meant smokers weren't left with an option.

- sent from my smartphone

Tedy

- sent from my smartphone

To die

To die. Perchance to sleep forever more.

Escape. The noble dream of those who suffer too much.

Sent from my smartphone

Pragmatism

The devil's greatest trick.

Sent from my smartphone

Systems which control how much individual an individual is

This is, perhaps, not the best title for the concept I'm thinking about.

The mental health system is a system which dupes people into not being what they are. It dupes them because the system is fundamentally judgemental where there is no scientification justifcation for any judgement system. The expectation of solving personal distress is not backed up by the science because the science looks as syndromes defined by tally of symptoms which are on the list in the diagnostic definition. I shouldn't really acceed to using the term "diagnose" when the truth is "perjoratively/negatively label using the false paradigm of mind illness."

People are conditioned into believing mental illness is really real and a genuine illness so they accept the system and its conditioning methods which reduce individuality on blind faith. This pisses me off.

But mental health isn't the only controlling system which reduces individuality. Media and the creative arts also subtly but unassailably conditions people. Education too is almost designed to condition children into good, regimented worker bees as adults.

These systems may be necessary at different times in civilisation's progress, sadly. Though, perhaps, these controls may be a necessary evil they should not purport to being anything less than an evil when these systems seek to control, define and diminish individuality.

Sent from my smartphone

There is no torture quite like wanting to die but being unable to commit suicide

It is the final pain on top of all the rest. It is a misery so profound yet those who legislate are deaf to it.

To deny assisted suicide is to leave a person in intense pain, one for whom mental healthcare has failed, and consigns them to a living hell until they manage to kill themselves.

It is easier to see assisted suicide for people with degenerative, painful and terminal physical illnesses. This narrow definition is a small part of the spectrum of reasons someone might want to die. Many of the psychological reasons are the result of too much mental anquish, a pain harder to salve than physical pain.

When the limited mental health and social care options fail what's left is an individual who has an inalieanable right to an assisted suicide. It is important because no one should have to live through the torture that is wishing for death as escape from a shitty existence but continuing to live.

Sent from my smartphone

So god damn happy to die.

Sent from my smartphone

It feels so good to quit life

Sent from my smartphone

An issue about equality

It ain't cool. It ain't sexy. It ain't the thing of dreams for too many citizens.

I'm not sure it even gets my juices flowing even though I'm currently championing it as the first step to genuine human advancement.

I wouldn't, of course, champion what isn't important or good. For example, I don't champion psychiatry or sobrietry. I do champion personal freedom and that's a lot more sexy and saleable. It too is central to democracy as well as other fundamental priniciples of national ethos.

Freedom sounds a lot better than equality. Every time I promote I have a sense of being like Lisa Simpson in one episode where she goes on about "equalia" - a nation of equality desired by romantic idealists and little cartoon girls.

But freedom? The good batter the status quo time and again on this issue. It's to live for and die for (something I've tried before).

Sent from my smartphone

The post below is one way to express something which would sadden most people - to experience and hear someone else admit too

It's a way to elucidate one form of life path which leads someone to want to kill themselves. It's a life no one would want nor one many could survive.

I can recognise it and I feel calmly angered by it. But I recognise it as something real and worth leaving behind by killing myself. It's a healthy response to my present and previous circumstances. Giving up a losing battle is a sane response to the extensive misery.

My life has been scarred and marred. On so many levels. On so many days. At so many decisive moments. And so much of it wasn't by god. That's another pool of misery.

Sent from my smartphone

My life has times where I feel gifted and times where I've felt cursed, especially in retrospect

What's worse is the cursed times - this one included - have been too many, too long and at too high an intensity. There's been a dearth of times where I felt gifted or as though my life was gifted.

So there you go. A little bit about we.

Sent from my smartphone

Another reason I'm sure equality is a fundamental first goal for human civilisation

It often comes up as a theme in the ethos of some countries. France for example. And America. And undoubtably all good religions.

Also, by valuing people equally the aim is to achieve everyone's potential. At the moment I think - I guess - conditioning and opportunity would be far more influential than 'nature' or any pseudo-limitation of an individual.

It unites many causes too. Equality of opportunity is something good for humanity to have as an attribute. Acceptance and valuation of human diversity, individuality and....mental health? Something like that could be a good goal too. It's all built into equality but resonates with other ideologies and purposes. There's undoubtably more.

But does the will exist to take the leap? No...seriously. anyone out there have an answer to this question?

Sent from my smartphone

Permanent HDR CCD

One quantity which improves with each new digital SLR CCD - the digital photo sensor - is the dynamic range. This is the capability to record the lightest and darkest areas of a high contrast scene. It's a common reason why shots don't come out how the eye sees the scene.

I expect it won't be long before top end full sized sensor slrs can achieve high enough dynamic range to make hdr techniques unnecessary. In the meantime cameras offer built-in hdr but this hdr is limited to still scenes if hdr is done using 3 sequential shots at standard exposure, under and overexposed.

I was think initially that a special ccd would be need which had three pixels for every effective pixel so all 3 shots needed for the hdr process can be shot in the same instant but it is unnecessary. It can be done with a standard ccd for whatever camera and an option to turn it into an hdr ccd using simple hardware/software tweaks.

The limitations are the low resolution and potential high processing demands (I wonder if these could be overcome by having dedicated hdr hardware). The processing problem would reduce image recall and continuous shooting performance. That is, of course, if it is done incamera rather than once the images are downloaded to a computer.

Sent from my smartphone

What value is there to losing hope?

...

Sent from my smartphone

I only use one search engine

And I've been like that for a while.

When it works, the Google rank algorithm is better than anything I've used before and it usually works. Google scholar is unsurpassed but I've not really needed to look for anything else.

I've been using the internet since the mid nineties so it is a testament that I only use Google now. I also use a cheap but superbly designed android phone. It's a T Mobile G1 with a Cyanogen mod operating system. The mod means the phone can be a bit flaky but it offers a lot of other advantages over the stock operating system. I've also used this model phone for a few years as well.

There's a rumour that google has a "do no evil" policy. I'm not sure if this is true. I'd like to think so but i'd be verging on the delusional I guess.

Sent from my smartphone

Vice or medication

Illegal drugs like cannabis are a lot of fun and experience. This value is disregarded by legislators whose prejudiced decisions rob the people of the positive aspects of legalisation.

They are seen as a vice instead of being valued for their potential uses. Politicians seem only to see the potential harm but a large part of the present harm is caused by criminalisation.

Bizarrely, criminalisation doesn't extend to this class of drugs - drugs which affect the mind - when used for mental health reasons. Psychiatric research shows many illegal drug experiences can be used to better mental health.

...

Sent from my smartphone

The establishment of legalised assisted suicide is more important than the legalisation of all psychotropic drugs

Enforcement of social model ideals of diversity and equality demands achievement of libertarian aims. All human types and choices are allowed to exist because the masses have equal free will. Whenever this isn't true is when society isn't evolving properly.

The ruling elite own the power inhibiting the free will of individual human beings. This is a travesty and it happens in the East and West as societies 'develop'. They aren't really developing as they think they are till the elite rulers are mandated as part of some bill of rights or constitution to reach for developing a society for all which disadvantages none.

That's the dream and vision for a first step to...well...just....better.

Sent from my smartphone

The biopsychosocial model of mental health (reprise)

This is what is accepted by most UK mental health orgs. Mental health and illnesses are caused by biological, psychological and social factors.

This is right and wrong but mainly wrong. Mental health as a concept is ludacrous except for the prognosis. There is a wide spectrum of humanity and in a fucked up civilisation/society some types in this natural diversity are disadvantaged and/or unwanted. Based on this idea the only valid (ethical, humane, etc) treatments are social model solutions which aim to create an equal society and personal choice/empowerment. No one is ill; just different.

Sent from my smartphone

Those that died are justified (part 2)

The sense of mandate in the piece below is deliberate. I'm prescribing a way of thinking about suicide statistics as something which needs to changed at source, I.e. stop harming people through action or inaction such that it drives them to think of killing themselves.

The sense that suicidal feelings and action are okay isn't something I conveyed with the same alacrity as the sense of mandate.

I'm making an ultra-libertarian point. Denying legal assisted suicide is the height of dictatorial government which seeks to cover over the cracks in their failed mandate. If people can vote, drive or own a gun they should also be given the right to chose when and how they die. It is a more basic right than the others IMO.

Democracy has a fundamental pillar that people are free. This means when they choose to die they can choose when and how. I would choose today and by beheading.

It feels like people simply don't get what it feels like to want to die but be unable to die, for whatever reason. Cunts.

Sent from my smartphone

Those that died are justified

I've just been listening to Rage against the machine's tune Killing in the name of.

The title comes from the tune. It makes me think "those" are people who kill themselves.

They are justified in what they do. A conscious, sentient being driven to the point where they want to die is indicative that something is wrong and that conscious being is right in their decision to die. 6000 a year in the UK is a fucking alarm bell at full volume going, "what the fuck is wrong with you?!" I don't even know the statistic for how many attempts a year there are and my imagination can't create a suitable metaphor to communicate the severity, urgency, onus and all manner of other descriptors to describe what should be clear to anyone.

Those that kill themselves are driven to it. They shouldn't be but they are. This shouldn't happen to any conscious being. It is wrong.

Sent from my smartphone

I wish I was an albatross flying far, far away from the humans below.

Sent from my smartphone

A little on We

Back when "we" was the text of what I imagined the most ethical website it had one interpretation I'm thinking of now: unity. There are other interpretations but I'm thinking of now.

This is the future. Obviously. If humanity is to succeed through and after when lots of important resources are depleted. Unlike other supply crises this could be catastrophic.

Anyway, the other reason I'm thinking about we and unity is the unifying principle that most if not all human beings would want to work towards the nebulous concept "the greater good", creating the future or other quasi-altrustic, meaningful goal like the guarantee of basic and higher rights.

But the human capability for evil makes the basic tenet invalid and all which stems from the principle. The solution to the problem would be making people adhere to the principle or something else. An uber-religion or something beyond which unites humanity becauses it is something which will happen anyway. Or not.

Sent from my smartphone

My strongest belief for the legalisation of assisted suicide from unhappy people

No one should be forced to die alone, in secret, because of someone else's poor definition of morality.

Sent from my smartphone

I'm fed up. I've had enough.

Life is shit. I want to die.

Sent from my smartphone

The power of god

I may or may not have it. If I did, the point where I would abuse it is in vengance. Retribution is always ugly.

The campaign to drug psychiatrists and mental health workers

Simply, those working with the mentally ill need to feel what it is like to take the awful drugs that are prescribed by evil psychiatrists.

(It would be better if those with lived experience were aided to become part of a new wave of professionals who understand mental illness from book-learning and from living with it.)

No one can understand the dehabilitating effect of the drugs from a psychiatric research paper or textbook. But this is the current paradigm which fails patients, particularly those forced to take antipsychotics.

This needs to stop and the best way would be employing people with lived experience. In the absence of this great leap we should force the drugs on the prescribers as they force them on the patients they purport to treat.

Sent from my smartphone

Good (long) interview with Thomas Szasz

http://www.psychotherapy.net/interview/thomas-szasz

Sent from my smartphone