Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Anti-Authoritarians are Diagnosed as Mentally Ill (2012)

madinamerica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 211 posts

Re: Why Anti-Authoritarians are Diagnosed as Mentally Ill (2012)

#171

Post by brazzy »

JacksonGariety wrote: post #163
jmillikin wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sure, sure. But would be ever prescribe prescription > drugs for this? If there was a drug shown to improve self-esteem in children, it would likely become one of the most profitable drugs of all time. > Everything you're describing is characterized as a > personality trait, whereas the OP (who I hardly fully > agree with) is claiming that anti-authoritarian > sentiments are labeled a disease. ADHD and ODD aren't d…

> If there was a drug shown to improve self-esteem in children, it would likely become one of the most profitable drugs of all time. If the drug worked it wouldn't be very popular as children would start dropping out of school to join Y Combinator and the drug would be recalled for having horrible defects. The baby boomers idea of self-esteem is disgusting.

> The baby boomers idea of self-esteem is disgusting.

It seems to be the same as yours: "If people had more self esteem they would want to be more like me"

Re: Why Anti-Authoritarians are Diagnosed as Mentally Ill (2012)

#172

Post by dkuntz2 »

chris_mahan wrote: post #151
purplelobster wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So in your mind, it would be better then if a hundred thousand armed Japanese would have started fighting back on mainland US? How about, instead of permanently distrusting the government, try to make it more democratic. There shouldn't have to be rebellions in a democratic country, then you talk it out and try to convince everybody else. If you can't, then touch luck, you're in the minority. That doesn't mean you ha…

Read the second paragraph of the U.S. Declaration of Independence. ( http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transc... ) It seems indeed that he has the right, nay, the duty, to do exactly that. I quote from the above: "But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to thr…

While the Declaration states that they (Jefferson et al.) see it as their civic duty to fight an oppressive government (a fairly Lockean view, pretty much lifted from the Second Treatise), again, it was mostly an inflammatory document, written not for the benefit of Parliament and the King, but for other nations who might consider joining the fight.

Analogically using the Declaration today doesn't really work, there aren't any of the great political thinkers of yore around, and we don't have any comparatively great thinkers (in the same sense). We're too founded on our two party system at the present to move anywhere.

Plus, today's government would refuse to accept any rebellion, regardless of what historical document they cite. Technically, politically, the Union never recognized the Confederate States of America as a sovereign nation, but a rebellion. That's the largest and longest instance of such a 'rebellion'. It's likely going to remain such.

Of course, that's due to the fact that there really wasn't any way for the Confederacy to win. They couldn't have taken and held the north. If they did, they would have assimilated the culture they were fighting against, and would be in the same situation as before they rebelled.

That actually leads me to a slight tangent, but my favorite fact about the Emancipation Proclamation is that it didn't technically free the slaves. It freed the slaves only in rebelling states. Northern slave-holding states could remain as-is.

Moving back on topic: the Declaration of Independence continually cites 'Him' and 'He' in reference to George III. George III had no power. Okay, he had a little power, but he wasn't really calling the shots any more (he never was, his reign started almost a century after the fall of the Commonwealth and slightly less after the Glorious Revolution, which cemented Great Britain as a constitutional monarchy). One could argue the use of He and Him are due to George's refusal to intervene with Parliament (something he really couldn't do).

Again, it goes back to they saw an opportunity to start something new, even though if they worked slightly harder at getting representation, they could have.

Re: Why Anti-Authoritarians are Diagnosed as Mentally Ill (2012)

#173

Post by brazzy »

thecoffman wrote: post #77
alan_cx wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Many people want to keep firearms to keep the power of the government in check," Really? Are you sure its not just a case of guns being ingrained in American culture and make the owners feel all macho and strong, and that any old excuse is good enough to argue that they should be allowed to keep huge pointless arsenals of weaponry? I mean, from what I can tell, such people are generally on the right of politics, and…

It is sad that the sort of bigoted opinions you're espousing here are what us firearms enthusiasts have to endure. It has nothing to do with machismo, nothing to do with Obama, and nothing to do with birther garbage. The right to bear arms is a right of last resort. Its the right that protects all others and, as such, it is the _most_ essential right. As for naming incidents in the last 100 years where armed resistan…

Just a little reality check: the entire rest of the world thinks that Americans are utterly, raving insane on this issue.

Re: Why Anti-Authoritarians are Diagnosed as Mentally Ill (2012)

#174

Post by jacalata »

LekkoscPiwa wrote: post #136
madaxe wrote: post #27

The trick is largely to learn when to shut your gob, or say one thing and do another. I was repeatedly diagnosed with ADHD and ODD in my year of school in the states - flushed the pills, got expelled (well, forced to leave, as they didn't want an expulsion on their squeaky clean record). Back to school in England... "Engaged", "curious", "incisive questions". Partially down to cultural differences in terms of views o…

Yeah, and probably an American kid in the UK - and for sure in Eastern Europe where I currently reside - would be diagnosed with autism ;-) Too quiet, has no views or opinion of his own, sits still all day. ;-) I love it. I remember my first days at the office in the US. I was like - am I in a mental institution with a band of cranky autistic adults now? And for them I was waaay too crazy. Asked too many questions, t…

I happen to know quite a few American kids who moved to countries around the world and unsurprisingly, none of them were diagnosed with anything. I have also known Poles who moved to America and other countries and have never considered them more intense than other people. Maybe your experience says more about you than the world in general.

Re: Why Anti-Authoritarians are Diagnosed as Mentally Ill (2012)

#175

Post by snowman41 »

Stratoscope wrote: post #164
csense wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This "poem" is depressing. Off topic: It's never made sense to me why people call things that don't rhyme "poems." As far as I'm concerned, this is an essay, not a poem.

Poetics aside, I have to agree with you about how the poem is a very sad story. My explorations in free verse elsewhere in the thread may be a way to cover up my tears. My daughter is very bright, but when she was in grade school she'd sometimes have trouble with a homework problem because the textbook didn't explain a concept clearly. So I'd tell her how I've always found it helpful to read multiple sources on a top…

That is depressing.

Re: Why Anti-Authoritarians are Diagnosed as Mentally Ill (2012)

#176

Post by msandford »

ceejayoz wrote: post #101
betterunix wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about a child who is not violent, but who would rather spend their time reading advanced math textbooks, hacking, or otherwise learning? What about a child who will stand up to their teachers and say, "This is worthless homework, so I spent my time learning next year's material instead?" The point of the article is that an awful lot of mental disorder diagnoses are being given to children who calmly reject certa…

Do you have any evidence that kids calmly saying "I'd rather learn useful things" are getting widely diagnosed as ODD? Anecdotally, that's exactly what I did in the late 1990s with my biology teacher. No diagnosis.

I don't think many of the kids that are ADD/ADHD/ODD are old enough to be aware enough of what's going on. The system is in no way tailored to them. Instead of those running the system reflecting on it's shortcomings and trying to remedy them, they instead suppose that it's the children who are the problem, not them.

It would be hilarious if it wasn't so tragic.

Re: Why Anti-Authoritarians are Diagnosed as Mentally Ill (2012)

#177

Post by snowman41 »

Allower wrote: post #148

If anti-authoritarian means "question[ing] whether an authority is a legitimate one before taking that authority seriously. Evaluating the legitimacy of authorities includes assessing whether or not authorities actually know what they are talking about, are honest, and care about those people who are respecting their authority." than the rest of humanity really are ignorant fucking sheep.

I personally feel that "Cogito ergo sum" means that taking assertions on faith is simply foolhardy, because the only opinion that one can truly trust is your own. Not that you should take my word for it.

Re: Why Anti-Authoritarians are Diagnosed as Mentally Ill (2012)

#179

Post by krichman »

bjhoops1 wrote: post #83
codezero wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am actually really curious, in what ways is it rewarding outside of loving anyone else?

I can't say it's more rewarding on the whole, but I didn't want people to think that it is less rewarding. However, there is also a bit of an effect where someone you care about is not particularly thoughtful, so when they do go out of their way to be kind or help you out, it feels especially good and shows that they really do care about you. If that makes sense..

Sounds like a lesser version of Stockholm syndrome :(

I can't say I personally get it, but I respect you and your family for their empathy and compassion.

Re: Why Anti-Authoritarians are Diagnosed as Mentally Ill (2012)

#180

Post by pm »

brazzy wrote: post #173
thecoffman wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is sad that the sort of bigoted opinions you're espousing here are what us firearms enthusiasts have to endure. It has nothing to do with machismo, nothing to do with Obama, and nothing to do with birther garbage. The right to bear arms is a right of last resort. Its the right that protects all others and, as such, it is the _most_ essential right. As for naming incidents in the last 100 years where armed resistan…

Just a little reality check: the entire rest of the world thinks that Americans are utterly, raving insane on this issue.

I agree, but will also add, access to guns is not the only issue. The US has a culture of gun fetishism you just don't see anywhere else in the first world. That's not something that will change with legislation.
Post reply on HN