Topic: The root causes of mental illness (Read 4643 times)

I see what you're getting at. I think that's half of it, for true knowledge I believe is still useless without application.  First you need to know what is true and correct, and then you need to act with that knowledge.

I have boiled down the root causes of mental illness to 3 things; feedback and comments/challenges are encouraged.

1)  Desire (I'll go with the Buddha on this one)
2)  Attempting to control things that are beyond one's control (an offshoot of desire)
3)  Identification with a false concept of identity.

Brief explanations:

1)  Desire:  Whenever a person has any type of desire, it implies that they are dissatisfied with what currently 'is.'  Dissatisfaction implies discontent and a lack of happiness.  If you want something that you don't currently have, this is a problem.

2)  Attempting to control things that are beyond one's control:  This is one of the leading causes of anxiety, anger, etc.  How often do we define our own happiness according to the actions of other people, communities, governments, girlfriends/boyfriends, husbands/wives, etc.?  How often do we become frustrated when our attempts to change these people, communities, governments, etc. fail?

3)  Identification with a false concept of identity:  Who are you?  How did you reach that conclusion?  According to all 11 definitions of identity in Webster's Dictionary, identity implies stability over time.  Yet, how often do we identity/define ourselves conditionally?  For example, let's say that someone says, "I am a teacher."  Ok, great.  Now, if your job is in jeopardy, then your identity is also in jeopardy!  Now, in contrast, how many would have answered this question by saying "I am an observer"?  For, as long as we live, we observe.

Note:  I would expect one of the most common challenges to these assertions would be, "Well, what about chemical imbalances?  What about genetic predispositions?"  To this, I would remind everyone that environment vs. genes (i.e. nature vs. nurture) is a false dichotomy.  It is known scientifically that interactions with our environment has effects on the genome which are then passed down and inherited generation by generation.  Thus, I would assert that any 'genetic predispositions' for a mental illness are the results of the 3 root causes that I listed to begin with, but in previous generations.

Well perhaps they wouldn't give you money because you haven't "shown you could do it" which is legitimate when it comes to novel experiments. The problem is that many people considered capable actually aren't, instead CV's and publications are used as a heuristic.

I think Christopher Langan said it best about the peer-review system of meritocracy.  First off, unless you have at least a masters degree (and usually only a doctoral degree, depending on the field), nobody in academia really cares about what you have to say.  If I recall, Langan asserted that even those with advanced degrees can only make little "tentative moves" forward, but nobody is really able to do anything too radical to shake things up.

Case in point, I took an undergraduate research and design class for which we had to submit a research proposal to the APA board then then conduct a scientific experiment.  The APA board turned down my initial research proposal.  You know why it was rejected?  It wasn't because it was unethical or ridiculous...it was rejected because nobody had done it yet.

In other words, I was not allowed to conduct an experiment simply because I had nobody to cite.  What a load of bullshit.

I've become a complete convert to the bayesian way of thinking. I believe once there is a critical mass of researchers thinking in that manner it will go a long way towards improving the system. Second point is that researchers need to reduce their reliance on government funding in every way possible. The very basis of the funding is arguably unethical, on top of that it relies on a relatively easily corruptible, centralized authority to distribute funds for reasons other than merit. Science is very, very sick right now and I know I am not alone in this opinion. I don't have time now but once I have finished my current project I plan to spend some time developing a system to crowdsource funding of individual components of research proposals (to supplement government funding..for now) and crowdsource some of the tedious work when possible. I would encourage others to attempt the same in their free time.