Schizophrenia (The Philosophers Disorder)

The schizophrenic disorders are characterized in general by fundamental and characteristic distortions of thinking and perception, and by inappropriate or blunted affect. Clear consciousness and intellectual capacity are usually maintained, although certain cognitive deficits may evolve in the course of time. The disturbance involves the most basic functions that give the normal person a feeling of individuality, uniqueness, and self-direction. The most intimate thoughts, feelings, and acts are often felt to be known to or shared by others, and explanatory delusions may develop, to the effect that natural or supernatural forces are at work to influence the afflicted individual’s thoughts and actions in ways that are often bizarre. The individual may see himself or herself as the pivot of all that happens. Hallucinations, especially auditory, are common and may comment on the individual’s behaviour or thoughts. Perception is frequently disturbed in other ways: colours or sounds may seem unduly vivid or altered in quality, and irrelevant features of ordinary things may appear more important than the whole object or situation. Perplexity is also common early on and frequently leads to a belief that everyday situations possess a special, usually sinister, meaning intended uniquely for the individual. In the characteristic schizophrenic disturbance of thinking, peripheral and irrelevant features of a total concept, which are inhibited in normal directed mental activity, are brought to the fore and utilized in place of those that are relevant and appropriate to the situation. Thus thinking becomes vague, elleptical, and obscure, and its expression in speech sometimes incomprehensible. Breaks and interpolations in the train of thought are frequent, and thoughts may seem to be withdrawn by some outside agency. Mood is characteristically shallow, capricious, or incongruous. Ambivalence and disturbance of volition may appear as inertia, negativism, or stupor. Catatonia may be present. The onset may be acute, with seriously disturbed behaviour, or insidious, with a gradual development of odd ideas and conduct. The course of the disorder shows equally great variation and is by no means inevitably chronic or deteriorating (the course is specified by five-character categories). In a proportion of cases, which may vary in different cultures and populations, the outcome is complete, or nearly complete, recovery. The sexes are approximately equally affected by the onset tends to be later in women.

Although no strictly pathognomonic symptoms can be identified, for practical purposes it is useful to divide the above symptoms into groups that have special importance for the diagnosis and often occur together, such as:

  1. thought echo, thought insertion or withdrawal, and thought broadcasting;
  2. delusions of control, influence, or passivity, clearly referred to body or limb movements or specific thoughts, actions, or sensations; delusional perception;
  3. hallucinatory voices giving a running commentary on the patient’s behaviour, or discussing the patient among themselves, or other types of hallucinatory voices coming from some part of the body;
  4. persistent delusions of other kinds that are culturally inappropriate and completely impossible, such as religious or political identity, or superhuman powers and abilities (e.g. being able to control the weather, or being in communication with aliens from another world);
  5. persistent hallucinations in any modality, when accompanied either by fleeting or half-formed delusions without clear affective content, or by persistent over-valued ideas, or when occurring every day for weeks or months on end;
  6. breaks or interpolations in the train of thought, resulting in incoherence or irrelevant speech, or neologisms;
  7. catatonic behaviour, such as excitement, posturing, or waxy flexibility, negativism, mutism, and stupor;
  8. “negative” symptoms such as marked apathy, paucity of speech, and blunting or incongruity of emotional responses, usually resulting in social withdrawal and lowering of social performance; it must be clear that these are not due to depression or to neuroleptic medication;
  9. a significant and consistent change in the overall quality of some aspects of personal behaviour, manifest as loss of interest, aimlessness, idleness, a self-absorbed attitude, and social withdrawal.

[b]auditory hallucinations(who criticizes thier thoughts and behavious more than the philosopher)

effect feeling of self(ive been told that there is no individual in philosophy)

Intimate thoughts and feeling shared by others( do philosophers not try to find what they call human nature out for all of us?)

frequently leads to a belief that everyday situations possess a special, usually sinister, meaning intended uniquely for the individual.( the question whats the meaning of life? comes to mind)

Thus thinking becomes vague, elleptical, and obscure, and its expression in speech sometimes incomprehensible(explains the "profoundity of the philosophers thoughts lol)

Mood is characteristically shallow, capricious, or incongruous. Ambivalence and disturbance of volition may appear as inertia, negativism, or stupor. Catatonia may be present. The onset may be acute, with seriously disturbed behaviour, or insidious, with a gradual development of odd ideas and conduct. (all but catatonia appear evident in the average philosopher)

The course of the disorder shows equally great variation and is by no means inevitably chronic or deteriorating (the course is specified by five-character categories). In a proportion of cases, which may vary in different cultures and populations, the outcome is complete, or nearly complete, recovery. The sexes are approximately equally affected by the onset tends to be later in women.( seems to fit with the prior conception of the philosopher)

points 1-9 all seem attributable to the philosopher(maybe the philosopher just has more fun with thier disorder than others)

[/b]

Absurd.

certainly not meant to be taken seriously

The idea that mental disorders are the result of thinking is an old one.

It is often used to discredit or dissuade scepticism and curiosity and to promote superstitious dogmas which claim to know a truth.

Undoubtedly one cannot discount the connection between awareness and mental instability because the increase in exposure places strains on a mind evolved to simply promote life.
The more one knows or perceives the more one is burdened with and one has to reconcile with.
Ignorance, sometimes comes across as courage or confidence when it is simply blindness in the face of odds or dangers.

The coping powers of each individual mind as it comes into contact with the fruits of its awareness are dictated by each individual’s mental and psychological strengths and weaknesses just as his awareness is dictated by each individual’s experiences and acuity.

A sensitive eye is not always a fragile one but it is forced to deal with much more information (light).

Nevertheless the only alternative is to protect one’s mind’s eye by blinding it or by wearing glasses or by never opening it.
Religion is a very good protective lens, chosen by billions who do not dare or fear peering into the light.

As a side note one should keep in mind that self-consciousness is one part of the mind separating itself and observing the other.

Schizophrenia is an inherit part in self-awareness.
I suspect it becomes a diagnosable “illness” when one identifies with both separately and the cohesion is lost.

For this reason I see schizophrenia, and all mental disorders, as a consequence of self-consciousness and the dilemma civilization posses to the mind evolved for different environments.

Stress/burdon only exists within the realm of application.
Knowledge alone is hardly stressful for a mind.
Once people care, then it begins to hurt [more accurately, they hurt themselves by wanting to change the world.]

Trevor you wrote:

I ask why not? I got bogged down in your preamble so I went to my dictionary. There I found, schizophrenia: “a mental disease marked by a breakdown in the relation between thoughts, feelings and actions.” For as long as I can remember my thoughts and feelings have been dwelling in my vision of what could be while I have been living what is. I have often considered the split an affliction. I have wondered why I can not be ‘normal’ and live life without constantly asking “why?”

I have so far resisted trying to cure the ‘disease’ with alcohol and drugs or by keeping so blasted busy I don’t have time to think. I sense that being able to ‘talk’ to you and my other friends at ILP might be helping me to reconcile the two halves of my being. So again I tell you I appreciate your willingness to consider my thread. I’ll talk to you later.