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

A new documentary about the history of forced psychiatric treatment in Spain

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 201 posts

Re: A new documentary about the history of forced psychiatric treatment in Spain

#181

Post by rsynnott »

wahern wrote: post #171
rsynnott wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... I mean, on what are you basing this assumption? Mass psychiatric institutionalisation has been phased out pretty much everywhere at this point; if your thesis is correct, how do you explain differing rates of homelessness (and in particular unsheltered homelessness, where the US more or less leads the developed world) between the US and other developed countries? Like, it seems more likely to be some other factor…

The issue in the US isn't lack of institutionalization, per se, it's the lack of mandatory mental health treatment. That is, it's very difficult and rare to require the mentally ill in the US to take medicine, even after repeatedly demonstrating an inability to control their conditions or even to take basic care of themselves. For one thing, there was an overcorrection in civil rights law that makes it difficult to e…

> While most countries have deinstitutionalized, they still make it much easier to force treatment on an out-patient basis.

Where are you getting that? Which countries? Certainly in Ireland and the UK, I'm pretty certain that it is all but impossible to force outpatient treatment, and I think this is generally more or less the case in Western Europe as a whole. Involuntary admission to psychiatric hospitals is still, marginally, a thing, but very rare.

Re: A new documentary about the history of forced psychiatric treatment in Spain

#182

Post by rayiner »

diego_moita wrote: post #169
rayiner wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But what’s your non-religious basis for saying that those actions were bad? You pointed to empathy above. But empathy in humans is mainly directed to one’s own community. Animals and humans alike will happily take over the territory of rival clans. Which is why empathy didn’t prevent Europeans from colonizing the indigenous people of America. So what’s your basis for saying that, e.g., colonization was bad?

> empathy in humans is mainly directed to one’s own community. Speak for yourself. I won't confuse empathy with tribalism, as you do. I'll take humanism [1], the notion that every person is equal in rights. This is my moral basis. > humans alike will happily take over the territory of rival clans. Tribalism, again. You don't get past that, do you? > Which is why empathy didn’t prevent Europeans from colonizing the in…

> I won't confuse empathy with tribalism, as you do.

I’m just following your logic. You pointed to empathy as something even animals have. Empathy is a real thing in nature, you can see those feelings in brain scans. But so is tribalism or pack behavior. Why do you privilege one type of feeling or instinct over another? What’s the basis for that distinction?

> I'll take humanism [1], the notion that every person is equal in rights.

What is the nature of this assertion? Is it a falsifiable scientific fact?

Re: A new documentary about the history of forced psychiatric treatment in Spain

#183

Post by rayiner »

wtfwhateven wrote: post #173
diego_moita wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> empathy in humans is mainly directed to one’s own community. Speak for yourself. I won't confuse empathy with tribalism, as you do. I'll take humanism [1], the notion that every person is equal in rights. This is my moral basis. > humans alike will happily take over the territory of rival clans. Tribalism, again. You don't get past that, do you? > Which is why empathy didn’t prevent Europeans from colonizing the in…

They seem to be one of those individuals who cannot possibly comprehend the idea that many people simply find murder and rape to be horrible, awful acts that shouldn't be inflicted on others and hold that belief without needing to have the fear of god or an ancient collection of texts constantly reminding them to not rape and murder people. The very idea of a person believing murder and rape to be horrible without a…

> They seem to be one of those individuals who cannot possibly comprehend the idea that many people simply find murder and rape to be horrible, awful acts that shouldn't be inflicted on others

I’m not denying that some people feel that way. Feelings are real, they’re chemical signals in your brain in response to stimuli. But we agree it’s not more than a feeling, right? And nothing makes the chemical signals in your brain more legitimate than the ones in someone else’s brain? Say we gather up our tribe, clan, nation, whatever. We take a vote based on people’s feelings. And 40% feel like you do, and 60% feel rage at the neighboring tribe/clan/nation and want to violently conquer them and take their resources. We tallied up two sets of chemical signals, and we should pick the more numerous feeling, correct?

Re: A new documentary about the history of forced psychiatric treatment in Spain

#184

Post by LexiMax »

usefulcat wrote: post #172
LexiMax wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When are we going to actually look at these issues dispassionately and realize that religion itself is the problem? Because it's not. I've been interrogating this sort of question for most of my life. I am a queer agnostic who grew up in a religious part of the South and saw shades of this kind of abuse firsthand, mostly around queerness. At first, I did blame religion, but with the benefit of hindsight, I realized…

Agreed. I've long thought that it's much more the case that a person's religion is a function of their values, not the other way around. Or, put another way, if a person's religion conflicts with their values (including prejudices), which one is more likely to give first?

You don't have to wonder. I have been hearing about several recent church schisms over certain folks thinking the church had become too accepting.

This is literally an example of individuals choosing their religion based on their own values. Folks on one side of the schism might criticize folks on the other side of the schism for not being true Christians, but it's ultimately a dispute over "Thou shalt not lie with another man," versus "Love thy neighbor."

Re: A new documentary about the history of forced psychiatric treatment in Spain

#185

Post by diego_moita »

rayiner wrote: post #182
diego_moita wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> empathy in humans is mainly directed to one’s own community. Speak for yourself. I won't confuse empathy with tribalism, as you do. I'll take humanism [1], the notion that every person is equal in rights. This is my moral basis. > humans alike will happily take over the territory of rival clans. Tribalism, again. You don't get past that, do you? > Which is why empathy didn’t prevent Europeans from colonizing the in…

> I won't confuse empathy with tribalism, as you do. I’m just following your logic. You pointed to empathy as something even animals have. Empathy is a real thing in nature, you can see those feelings in brain scans. But so is tribalism or pack behavior. Why do you privilege one type of feeling or instinct over another? What’s the basis for that distinction? > I'll take humanism [1], the notion that every person is e…

> Why do you privilege one type of feeling or instinct over another? What’s the basis for that distinction?

The basis is the context, is globalization. In prehistoric times a tribe where the people you'd physically meet. In a globalized world the tribe is much bigger, because of communication, commerce and transportation technologies broke the limitations of physical connections.

> Is it a falsifiable scientific fact?

No, it isn't. But it is something that mostly works. Life just feels better when you treat others the way you want to be treated by them, when you and them share the same rights. You see, Karl Popper (the "falsiable" guy) wasn't 100% correct. We actually have a lot of stuff in science that is just a convention and isn't "falsiable". E.g. how cold you possible demonstrate to be false the basic geometric elements: a point, a line, a plane. They don't really exist physically, they're just abstractions.

The general rule is that, in general, cooperation is better than war. War is too destructive and is even more destructive when it targets a complex society (because there is more to destroy). With cooperation, in general, you avoid the destruction of war.

Re: A new documentary about the history of forced psychiatric treatment in Spain

#186

Post by vacuity »

rayiner wrote: post #167
diego_moita wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They're constantly telling people to put aside their emotions in favor of supposed universal principles Yeah, sure! Those evil "putatively secular people" that burned tens of thousands of women during the witch hunt in Europe, killed hundreds of thousands of other people during the Crusades and the European religious wars of the 17th and 18th century, that condoned with the fascist and authoritarian regimes in Arge…

But what’s your non-religious basis for saying that those actions were bad? You pointed to empathy above. But empathy in humans is mainly directed to one’s own community. Animals and humans alike will happily take over the territory of rival clans. Which is why empathy didn’t prevent Europeans from colonizing the indigenous people of America. So what’s your basis for saying that, e.g., colonization was bad?

Why are you favoring religious beliefs? What is your basis in doing so?

Re: A new documentary about the history of forced psychiatric treatment in Spain

#187

Post by vacuity »

rayiner wrote: post #183
wtfwhateven wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They seem to be one of those individuals who cannot possibly comprehend the idea that many people simply find murder and rape to be horrible, awful acts that shouldn't be inflicted on others and hold that belief without needing to have the fear of god or an ancient collection of texts constantly reminding them to not rape and murder people. The very idea of a person believing murder and rape to be horrible without a…

> They seem to be one of those individuals who cannot possibly comprehend the idea that many people simply find murder and rape to be horrible, awful acts that shouldn't be inflicted on others I’m not denying that some people feel that way. Feelings are real, they’re chemical signals in your brain in response to stimuli. But we agree it’s not more than a feeling, right? And nothing makes the chemical signals in your…

What makes religious beliefs more legitimate than secular beliefs?

Re: A new documentary about the history of forced psychiatric treatment in Spain

#188

Post by vacuity »

rayiner wrote: post #167
diego_moita wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They're constantly telling people to put aside their emotions in favor of supposed universal principles Yeah, sure! Those evil "putatively secular people" that burned tens of thousands of women during the witch hunt in Europe, killed hundreds of thousands of other people during the Crusades and the European religious wars of the 17th and 18th century, that condoned with the fascist and authoritarian regimes in Arge…

But what’s your non-religious basis for saying that those actions were bad? You pointed to empathy above. But empathy in humans is mainly directed to one’s own community. Animals and humans alike will happily take over the territory of rival clans. Which is why empathy didn’t prevent Europeans from colonizing the indigenous people of America. So what’s your basis for saying that, e.g., colonization was bad?

I have no problem with housecats hunting, but playing with their prey seems unnecessary (as in gratuitous harm). Still, I won't try housecats in a criminal court, because my understanding of them is too alien to make me confident in my judgement.

I have no problem with humans hunting, or defending themselves, or whatnot. I accept that some degree of violence is necessary, and a lot more can be plausibly justified. However, I draw the line at, say, humans killing each other for bad reason. If it is to be believed that I and these other humans are of the same species, of the same kind, and whatnot, I feel secure in judging them as I would judge myself, and those more familiar to me. Killing indigenous people on the basis of merely not converting to Christianity, and even burning them, is entirely unnecessary. A modern-day analogue would be roundly condemned, or so I should hope.

Re: A new documentary about the history of forced psychiatric treatment in Spain

#189

Post by vacuity »

rayiner wrote: post #182
diego_moita wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> empathy in humans is mainly directed to one’s own community. Speak for yourself. I won't confuse empathy with tribalism, as you do. I'll take humanism [1], the notion that every person is equal in rights. This is my moral basis. > humans alike will happily take over the territory of rival clans. Tribalism, again. You don't get past that, do you? > Which is why empathy didn’t prevent Europeans from colonizing the in…

> I won't confuse empathy with tribalism, as you do. I’m just following your logic. You pointed to empathy as something even animals have. Empathy is a real thing in nature, you can see those feelings in brain scans. But so is tribalism or pack behavior. Why do you privilege one type of feeling or instinct over another? What’s the basis for that distinction? > I'll take humanism [1], the notion that every person is e…

> I’m just following your logic. You pointed to empathy as something even animals have. Empathy is a real thing in nature, you can see those feelings in brain scans. But so is tribalism or pack behavior. Why do you privilege one type of feeling or instinct over another? What’s the basis for that distinction?

Please be transparent on your own beliefs too, if you demand this of others. On what basis do you stake your beliefs? Are you being empathetic? Are you being tribal?

> What is the nature of this assertion? Is it a falsifiable scientific fact?

Science alone is insufficient to answer all questions. Do not overextend its powers. None of us in this thread are mainly relying on science, for good reason. If someone poses the question "should humans do [thing]?" as a scientific one, they are a charlatan and a fraud.

Post reply on HN