![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 14 to 38 of 40. Go back in thread:
Posted by zazenducke on April 23, 2012, at 8:57:43
In reply to Re: Occupy the APA, posted by SLS on April 23, 2012, at 6:35:36
> > > http://www.mindfreedom.org/campaign/boycott-normal/occupy-apa
> >
> > What sort of "normality" is being referred to here that the APA actively promotes as part of their mission statement? What is the official APA definition of the word "normal" such that it should garner such disdain by the boycott promoters? I don't think we can go very far examining this idea without first describing how the word "normal" is conceptualized by the boycotters, and demonstrating that the APA uses this definition in its official or occult operations.
>
>
> Is anyone going to attempt to answer these questions?
>
>
> - ScottGoogle is your friend Scott And a little common sense. The APA is defining a wide range of common human emotions and conditions as abnormal in the DSM. Normal would be the absence of any of these conditions.
You believe the APA is indulging in occult operations? Do they know you know?
3.
Psychology .
a.
approximately average in any psychological trait, as intelligence, personality, or emotional adjustment.
b.
free from any mental disorder; sane.
4.
Biology, Medicine/Medical .
a.
free from any infection or other form of disease or malformation, or from experimental therapy or manipulation.
b.
of natural occurrence.
Posted by Phillipa on April 23, 2012, at 9:50:43
In reply to Re: Occupy the APA, posted by zazenducke on April 23, 2012, at 8:57:43
Hey I don't visit this board just did and what I see is a discussion the DSM axis for filing for insurance claims. I begining primary diagnosis. 2 being personality disorder, 3 being any medical condition. And there is four and five. I know I only fit into l & 3 never two so I guess I'm normal in personality which is certainly up for debate by those that know me in real life. Lets face it seems most have there own personalities with tweeks here and there some that bother others some that are endearing to others. So for this there couldn't be a normal? Phillipa
Posted by ron1953 on April 23, 2012, at 10:10:52
In reply to Re: Occupy the APA » ron1953, posted by SLS on April 23, 2012, at 6:34:26
> > Interesting.....Breggin and other radical shrinks ESCHEW the cold, technological approach that it appears you embrace.
>
> Can you give me some examples?
>
>
> - Scott
>
>
http://brucelevine.net/I cordially invite you to read Levine's "Commonsense Rebellion"
Posted by SLS on April 23, 2012, at 12:32:00
In reply to Re: Occupy the APA, posted by zazenducke on April 23, 2012, at 8:57:43
> > > > http://www.mindfreedom.org/campaign/boycott-normal/occupy-apa
> > >
> > > What sort of "normality" is being referred to here that the APA actively promotes as part of their mission statement? What is the official APA definition of the word "normal" such that it should garner such disdain by the boycott promoters? I don't think we can go very far examining this idea without first describing how the word "normal" is conceptualized by the boycotters, and demonstrating that the APA uses this definition in its official or occult operations.
> >
> >
> > Is anyone going to attempt to answer these questions?
> >> Google is your friend Scott And a little common sense. The APA is defining a wide range of common human emotions and conditions as abnormal in the DSM. Normal would be the absence of any of these conditions.
I will accept your not answering the questons that I asked. Your producing definitions of the word "normal" on behalf of the APA does not address them.
- Scott
Posted by SLS on April 23, 2012, at 12:39:52
In reply to Re: Occupy the APA, posted by ron1953 on April 23, 2012, at 10:10:52
> > > Interesting.....Breggin and other radical shrinks ESCHEW the cold, technological approach that it appears you embrace.
> > Can you give me some examples?
> I cordially invite you to read Levine's "Commonsense Rebellion"
There nothing about your invitation that I find cordial.You avoid answering the question I asked as a response to your description of me. I cordially invite you to produce an example of my writing that is consistent with "the cold, technological approach" that you say I embrace.
- Scott
Posted by ron1953 on April 23, 2012, at 12:53:47
In reply to Re: Occupy the APA » ron1953, posted by SLS on April 23, 2012, at 12:39:52
> > > > Interesting.....Breggin and other radical shrinks ESCHEW the cold, technological approach that it appears you embrace.
>
> > > Can you give me some examples?
>
> > I cordially invite you to read Levine's "Commonsense Rebellion"
>
>
> There nothing about your invitation that I find cordial.
>
> You avoid answering the question I asked as a response to your description of me. I cordially invite you to produce an example of my writing that is consistent with "the cold, technological approach" that you say I embrace.
>
>
> - Scott
Pretty much all of it, except for the ones like this one that challenge the poster to support their views. In most cases, either one or the other. I do believe you enjoy trying to put people on the spot, but it appears you get frustrated when they're smart enough not to take the bait.
Posted by ron1953 on April 23, 2012, at 13:04:38
In reply to Re: Occupy the APA, posted by ron1953 on April 23, 2012, at 12:53:47
It's interesting that some members who can deal with cognitive dissonance find such things as the "Occupy Normal" phenomenon interesting and informative, whereas others find them so threatening as to reject them out of hand. As some obviously are aware, there's a LOT of grey between the black and the white; some can't deal with it.
Posted by SLS on April 23, 2012, at 13:14:38
In reply to Re: Occupy the APA, posted by ron1953 on April 23, 2012, at 13:04:38
You always seem to make things personal when it comes to me.
I'm flattered.
- Scott
Posted by ron1953 on April 23, 2012, at 13:44:51
In reply to Re: Occupy the APA » ron1953, posted by SLS on April 23, 2012, at 13:14:38
> You always seem to make things personal when it comes to me.
>
> I'm flattered.
>
>
> - ScottAre you not a person?
Posted by Phillipa on April 23, 2012, at 20:32:37
In reply to Re: Occupy the APA » SLS, posted by ron1953 on April 23, 2012, at 13:44:51
Old DSM from 94 Phillipa
Posted by SLS on April 23, 2012, at 21:24:44
In reply to Re: Occupy the APA, posted by Phillipa on April 23, 2012, at 20:32:37
Hi Phillipa.
> Old DSM from 94 Phillipa
>
> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11022513
This is an interesting analysis.What did you think of it?
Did it help you come to any conclusions?
- Scott
Posted by Phillipa on April 24, 2012, at 0:11:05
In reply to Re: Occupy the APA » Phillipa, posted by SLS on April 23, 2012, at 21:24:44
Not really just makes it easier to get payments for treatment rendered.
Posted by SLS on April 24, 2012, at 4:07:37
In reply to Re: Occupy the APA » SLS, posted by Phillipa on April 24, 2012, at 0:11:05
> > > Old DSM from 94 Phillipa
> > >
> > > http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11022513> > This is an interesting analysis.
> >
> > What did you think of it?> >Did it help you come to any conclusions?
> Not really just makes it easier to get payments for treatment rendered.
How so?
- Scott
Posted by zazenducke on April 24, 2012, at 8:45:11
In reply to Re: Occupy the APA » zazenducke, posted by SLS on April 23, 2012, at 12:32:00
> > > > > http://www.mindfreedom.org/campaign/boycott-normal/occupy-apa
> > > >
> > > > What sort of "normality" is being referred to here that the APA actively promotes as part of their mission statement? What is the official APA definition of the word "normal" such that it should garner such disdain by the boycott promoters? I don't think we can go very far examining this idea without first describing how the word "normal" is conceptualized by the boycotters, and demonstrating that the APA uses this definition in its official or occult operations.
> > >
> > >
> > > Is anyone going to attempt to answer these questions?
> > >
>
> > Google is your friend Scott And a little common sense. The APA is defining a wide range of common human emotions and conditions as abnormal in the DSM. Normal would be the absence of any of these conditions.
>
>
> I will accept your not answering the questons that I asked. Your producing definitions of the word "normal" on behalf of the APA does not address them.
>
>
> - Scott
>
>Scott you not liking my answer is not the same as my not answering.
But you didn't answer my questions either?!In fact they seems to have been edited out of the quote you included in your reply?!
I am thoughtfully restoring them here and await your reply.
!?!?!?!?!?!? Google is your friend Scott And a little common sense. The APA is defining a wide range of common human emotions and conditions as abnormal in the DSM. Normal would be the absence of any of these conditions.You believe the APA is indulging in occult operations? Do they know you know? !?!!?!?!?!?
Posted by zazenducke on April 24, 2012, at 8:54:11
In reply to Re: Occupy the APA » SLS, posted by Phillipa on April 24, 2012, at 0:11:05
> Not really just makes it easier to get payments for treatment rendered.
An analysis both brilliant and concise. Just makes it easier to get payments!
Posted by SLS on April 24, 2012, at 8:56:05
In reply to INTERROBANG » SLS, posted by zazenducke on April 24, 2012, at 8:45:11
Why did you write the following?
"Google is your friend Scott And a little common sense."
I feel bullied by you. Do you feel bullied by me?
- Scott
Posted by zazenducke on April 24, 2012, at 9:14:20
In reply to Re: INTERROBANG » zazenducke, posted by SLS on April 24, 2012, at 8:56:05
> Why did you write the following?
>
> "Google is your friend Scott And a little common sense."
>
> I feel bullied by you. Do you feel bullied by me?
>
>
> - ScottNo I don't feel bullied by you and it certainly was not my intention to bully you. I just meant that you could get that information from Googling.
And analyze it with common sense which is what I did. I posted a link to you above with a more scholarly analysis of the DSM revisions and you didn't reply to it either.Do you believe the APA is engaging in occult activities? If so why?
Posted by SLS on April 24, 2012, at 9:31:22
In reply to Re: Occupy the APA » Phillipa, posted by zazenducke on April 24, 2012, at 8:54:11
> > Not really just makes it easier to get payments for treatment rendered.
I am genuinely clueless.
> An analysis both brilliant and concise.
I disagree with you. Boy, that was easy to say.
We are only reading an abstract, of course. But since you find the abstract brilliant, perhaps I should include at least one point of disagreement.
This "critical analysis" is nothing more than a "discourse". It is an unsubstantiated rhetorical commentary on sociology, and proves nothing. It does not address how the DSM came to be and the statistical nature of how diagnoses were arrived at. I believe you defined the word "normal" as being the lack of a DSM diagnosis. I would use the word "healthy" instead. "Normal" is a statistical term, after all. Still, I would like to know where in the DSM the word "normal" is used in context.
What is "normal" anyway?
Everyone is unique. I would not wish upon anyone conformity to a psychosocial prescription. However, I do wish for everyone good health.
- Scott
Posted by SLS on April 24, 2012, at 9:44:25
In reply to Re: INTERROBANG » SLS, posted by zazenducke on April 24, 2012, at 9:14:20
> Do you believe the APA is engaging in occult activities? If so why?
I added the term "occult" to mean hidden or surreptitious. I included it to be thorough. Is the process of developing a new edition of the DSM completely transparent? I am not certain. You can find plenty of opinions that assert otherwise, though.
- Scott
Posted by ron1953 on April 24, 2012, at 9:47:32
In reply to Re: Occupy the APA » zazenducke, posted by SLS on April 24, 2012, at 9:31:22
> > > Not really just makes it easier to get payments for treatment rendered.
>
> I am genuinely clueless.
>
> > An analysis both brilliant and concise.
>
> I disagree with you. Boy, that was easy to say.
>
> We are only reading an abstract, of course. But since you find the abstract brilliant, perhaps I should include at least one point of disagreement.
>
> This "critical analysis" is nothing more than a "discourse". It is an unsubstantiated rhetorical commentary on sociology, and proves nothing. It does not address how the DSM came to be and the statistical nature of how diagnoses were arrived at. I believe you defined the word "normal" as being the lack of a DSM diagnosis. I would use the word "healthy" instead. "Normal" is a statistical term, after all. Still, I would like to know where in the DSM the word "normal" is used in context.
>
> What is "normal" anyway?
>
> Everyone is unique. I would not wish upon anyone conformity to a psychosocial prescription. However, I do wish for everyone good health.
>
>
> - ScottNow, what was it that I was saying about the cold, technological approach......?
Posted by SLS on April 24, 2012, at 9:50:11
In reply to Re: Occupy the APA, posted by ron1953 on April 24, 2012, at 9:47:32
> Now, what was it that I was saying about the cold, technological approach......?
You wish you were me.
- Scott
Posted by ron1953 on April 24, 2012, at 9:59:00
In reply to Re: Occupy the APA » ron1953, posted by SLS on April 24, 2012, at 9:50:11
> > Now, what was it that I was saying about the cold, technological approach......?
>
> You wish you were me.
>
>
> - ScottYes, I'm missing out on so much. Wait - maybe I could get a lobotomy......
Posted by ron1953 on April 24, 2012, at 10:19:38
In reply to Occupy the APA, posted by zazenducke on April 18, 2012, at 11:47:10
I think it's great that there are such things as Occopy APA, and radical shrinks like Breggin and Levine offering refreshing new challenges to the medical/psychiatric and social status quo, as there are many who have doubts and reservations about it, and need resources to help them make some sense of it all. For those mired in the standard paradigm, these alternatives make no sense, and they might even seem threatening.
Posted by zazenducke on April 24, 2012, at 10:51:03
In reply to Re: Occupy the APA » zazenducke, posted by SLS on April 24, 2012, at 9:31:22
Scott I was referring to Phillipa's comment not the article.
> > > Not really just makes it easier to get payments for treatment rendered.
>
> I am genuinely clueless.
>
> > An analysis both brilliant and concise.
>
> I disagree with you. Boy, that was easy to say.
>
> We are only reading an abstract, of course. But since you find the abstract brilliant, perhaps I should include at least one point of disagreement.
>
> This "critical analysis" is nothing more than a "discourse". It is an unsubstantiated rhetorical commentary on sociology, and proves nothing. It does not address how the DSM came to be and the statistical nature of how diagnoses were arrived at. I believe you defined the word "normal" as being the lack of a DSM diagnosis. I would use the word "healthy" instead. "Normal" is a statistical term, after all. Still, I would like to know where in the DSM the word "normal" is used in context.
>
> What is "normal" anyway?
>
> Everyone is unique. I would not wish upon anyone conformity to a psychosocial prescription. However, I do wish for everyone good health.
>
>
> - Scott
Posted by Phillipa on April 24, 2012, at 18:50:03
In reply to Re: Occupy the APA » SLS, posted by zazenducke on April 24, 2012, at 10:51:03
Normal just one opinion. Mental normal that is. Phillipa
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Politics | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.