Dragaera

Damiano's Lute

Lydia Nickerson Lydy at demesne.com
Thu Nov 28 22:02:05 PST 2002

At 11:47 PM -0600 11/27/02, Matthew Hunter wrote:
>On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 11:52:02PM -0600, Lydia Nickerson 
><Lydy at demesne.com> wrote:
>>  I'm with DDB on the neurochemistry.  Having the last half of my life
>>  on various psych drugs, I'm fully convinced of the chemistry of my
>>  existence.  There have also been studies, some recent, which suggest
>>  that religious states, such as deep meditation or prayer or feeling
>>  like one is speaking directly to god are physical states, ones that
>>  some people's bodies are designed to accept.  A genetic
>>  predisposition toward God, like I have a genetic predisposition to
>>  manic depression. 
>
>This doesn't necessary deny the validity of that experience.

I never said it did.  Nor did I mean to imply it.  Love is 
neurochemistry, too.  It's damn powerful neurochemistry, and the 
experience is about as real as a kick in the teeth when it's intense, 
but it's chemical.  So is grief, so is joy.  All of your emotions, 
every one of them, is a biochemical cocktail.  Hormones and 
neurotransmitters, strange brew.  Heck, even memory may be chemical. 
But there's a big difference between valid and externally verifiable. 
At current time, I don't believe we have any way to measure whether 
or not you really love your wife (girlfriend, boyfriend, etc.).  It's 
something that's happening entirely inside your head.  The same is 
true of a religious experience.  The outward show, buying flowers and 
remembering anniversaries, going to church and tithing, are not 
proofs of anything.  Onlookers can make assumptiions about your 
brain-state by watching your behavior, but it's an inference, not 
certainty.

>
>So maybe we can scientifically explain the feelings, but that
>doesn't mean they aren't triggered by God.

What is God?  What I believe is that it is not possible to know the 
answer to that question.  The experiences which prove his existence 
to people are, by their nature, experiential and irrational, and 
therefore intransitive.  You cannot share faith or belief.  I can 
share a baseball with you, but I can only tell you about a vision.  I 
cannot share God with you (assuming I had him, which I don't) I can 
only tell you about my experiences with him.  If you also have 
experiences that are sufficiently similar, we can talk about him a 
lot.  But there's still that gap.

>
>>  In many ways, I think it's really really cool that
>>  we're finding out so much about how the world works, and being able
>>  to medicate people's brains in more and more precise ways.  I don't
>>  worry about losing my humanity very often.  Not yet.  The danger will
>>  come when people stop having the right to choose their own medical
>>  care.  In the mean time, Better Living Through Chemistry!
>
>In case you haven't noticed, that's already becoming the case. 
>Read up on ritalin and kids for a good example.

What I've read mostly makes me want to murder the people who write 
those articles.  Peter Breggin is on my shit list, very very high up. 
All drugs are misprescribed.  All diseases are misdiagnosed.  Those 
people I know of who actually have children who are hyperactive have 
not rushed into drug therapy, nor were they pushed into it by 
authority figures.  Moreover, there's a good body of knowledge, 
getting larger, on what Ritalin is and isn't good for.  The thing 
that I think is the greatest problem is that GPs are allowed to 
prescribe psych drugs without putting their patients under any sort 
of proper psychiatric care.  A large number of the anecdotal 
incidents reported as proving that Ritalin or Prozac or another one 
of the psych drugs are terribly dangerous all involve doctors who are 
not psychiatrists and who did not consult one.


>>Personally, I have severe concerns about any sort of compulsory (or 
>>even merely encouraged) regression to some defined "normality". 
>>Diversity of thought and opinion are worthwhile
>>things; creativity and art are social goods; the existing
>>structures need to be challenged rather than assumed.


Did you know that Allen Ginsberg became a poet on the advice of his 
shrink?  (If you don't know who Allen Ginsberg is, you should take a 
quick look around Google.  He was not, however, "normal" and he 
definitely challenged existing structures.)  There's good psychiatry 
and bad psychiatry, same as all other medicine.  However, I think 
that there are a lot more good shrinks out there than there are bad. 
How many surgeons have actually had the bad luck to amputate the 
wrong leg?  Not many, but we've all heard of at least one who has. 
My experience with the psych world has always been helpful.  I've 
worried a lot about the conformity thing, too.  I'm polyamorous, I've 
done illegal drugs, I'm kind of a syndacalist-anarchist when I'm not 
busy being a Democrat, I take a certain pride in not fitting in. 
When I was first prescribed Prozac, I was very very upset about 
taking a drug, and didn't know if I should, etc. etc.  You know the 
rant.  Someone who was then my friend (and this may be the only good 
turn he ever did me) said, "Lydia, you've taken LSD, and you're still 
you.  How can you be afraid of Prozac?"  I decided he had a point. 
People who've known me all along assure me that I continued to be 
myself after I went on anti-depressants.  What conservative 
tendencies I have largely seem to come from being 40, and not from 
submitting to a drug regimen.  What I've experienced is that 
psychiatrists and psychologist work to get their patient to 
"functional" rather than "normal."  Functional means things like 
being able to get out of bed in the morning, if you want, being able 
to eat, being able to get up off the couch, being able to talk to 
friends, being able to feel happy sometimes, being able to make 
decisions and cope.  I haven't ever had one of the multitudinous 
psych professionals rag on me about my love life, or my quite 
moderate drug use, or any of the other non-standard parts of my life.

Involuntary commitment does happen.  Bad abuses happen, and they are 
most likely in a situation where the patient has been committed 
involuntarily.  As yet, though, 99.9% of the psych patients in this 
country can choose what type of treatment they will accept.  Frankly, 
I think that far too many people refuse to take the meds prescribed 
to them for entirely dumb reasons.  I do know one woman who said that 
she couldn't take Prozac because she could not tell if her 
photographs were any good when she was taking Prozac.  It interfered 
with her creative processes that much.  I completely understand why 
she stopped taking it.  Most people, though, seem to be confused by 
the experience of not being miserable anymore.
-- 

Lydy Nickerson		lydy at demesne.com	lydy at lydy.com
Dulciculi Aliquorum