What if you called difference in the expression or behaviour of human types an illness? Just imagine. Go on.
What if you justified the application of the pseudoscience by saying behavioural difference, which apparently is an illness, is an illness because of neurobiological differences.
What I mean is is the whole behavioural difference thing justified by studies looking into biological brain differences? That's why its an illness. Imagine at least that it is that crazy.
Imagine in this crazy fucking world that sciencey people kept finding a sciencey result. If you profile human types and study neurobiology then often you'll find associations between types and neurobiological difference. If you think the type is negative then the difference is negative. This is subjective. This is not science. This is pseudoscience.
What if it was as simple as identifying types can show an association with neurobiology. A study shows taxi drivers have a slightly different shaped brain on average. A study shows correlations between the d2 dopamine receptor and creative traits and multiple partners while other studies associate schizophrenia with artists and the promiscuous. The antipsychotic drugs work to inhibit transmission of the effect of d2 receptors if I remember right. And the d1. And the other ones too. The sort of d1 and d2 receptors. Basically. Really don't get that part.
I get this. People are different. Types can be found. Don't mean they're bad. Certainly don't meant they're ill. Mean they're human though.
But the science if it only looked at psychopatholgy and, say, genetics or neurobiology...or neurology perhaps but I think that's a bigger field...then it would repeatedly find the fact that types have biological differences. If it only looked at certain types and only looked at them in negativity then it could prove whatever because the basic fact is types can be identified fairly easily.
What happens to them, what they become and how they are treated in life. That's a whole different question and its a whole lot different to what psychiatry tries to do good things for.
Too much can be taken away with the paradigm of illness and the shield of compassion. Those psychiatrist who waterboarded psychiatric patients to treat their behavioural differences or their predecessors who electrocuted patients...they're all good doctors trying to do a good thing.
They're treating an illness. But what if human type is not an illness.
What if? Smoke some top skunk with me. Sit heavy on that thought. If human types who were different...sort of like a kid in the schoolyard who is uncool...did worse off in life and they worked out that types of people who are similar only by their difference in a way which temporarily (I mean in long timescales, I.e. if they'd been born in a different time in history or with a different social evolution then wouldn't be pathologised and shit but only because society was different. Biopsychosocial. Ingel. All that.
What if the uncool kid was suddenly a mentally ill? You knowm. A nutter. Doctors deal with them.
What if their was a shit load of science behind it too. But its all bollocks.
Fuck. That's pretty crazy right? I'm mean that's nuts. If social prejudcies are enforced using pseudoscience. If social disadvantaged was treated by painting black and brown people white....because its an illness...then that's pretty fucking crazy right?
Shit. What was I talking about? Oh yeah....I was going to explain this badly.
No comments:
Post a Comment