|
Again, we see the IMO dumb argument that correcting a mental condition makes someone a "different person". As I mentioned in the other thread, this is the kind of stuff that kept me from going to mental health experts when I was younger. It is some seriously disordered thinking and needs to be combated at every level. There is no authentic you, different you, or whatever. Messing with your brain still has you be the same person the same way that you'd still be the same person after getting a heart operation or having an amputation. I'd as soon fix someone with autism as fix someone with Downs. It's not something that's currently possible, but looking at it in this way is a surefire way to ensure that we never make any progress. Could you imagine if we had similar BS going around when anti-psychotics were first invented? I know to some extent D&D is anti-psych (or at least has a good number of anti-psych boosters who post on said topics) but you need to understand that it's an inherently anti-science and backward position to come from, where you leave a bunch of people to fail to cope with life-- but at least they are the "same person" or some garbage which is important for reasons.
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2014 22:13
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 05:22 |
|
|
ThirdPartyView posted:Pretty certain the Birchers were (and Scientology keeps the tradition going). Of course Birchers would be. With some decent anti-paranoia medication, they'd lose most of their membership.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2014 22:29
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:But how oddly specific we are in our definition of "disorder." Which is more debilitating, to flap your arms and hop in place while playing video games or to lack all capacity for analysis or introspection and fail to recognize the danger in Rick Santorum's eyes? To have a detailed interest in trains or to fear people based on their race? You can't teach someone out of being autistic. You can teach people out of being gullible or racist. See the difference? Also, why are we discussing the mild end of the spectrum? Lots of autistic people are much more disabled, and can't have anything resembling a normal life. quote:Don't backtrack to this, you've already admitted that you think it would be beneficial for all persons who fit your definition of having a "mental condition" to be "cured" by not existing. Incorrect version of my position. I'd prefer a cure, but I see nothing wrong with a mother choosing abortion if the fetus has congential issues, or for any other reason. But thanks for bringing back up your anti-choice garbage points. Their abortions are the only immoral abortions, I guess.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2014 22:37
|
|
|
E-Tank posted:http://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/different-person-personality-change-often-brain-injurys-hidden-toll-f8C11152322 Phineas Gage was the same person before and after the accident. He acted differently, but he was still a continuation of the same individual. People tend to act differently after traumatic experience (or really any kind of experience), regardless of brain damage. Does that make them different people? If so, you're literally a different person every second of every day. How do you determine which time period is the "real" you worth protecting? Seriously, the idea is incredibly disordered. Misfiring neurons can have a structural underpinning in the brain. Fixing them requires doing stuff to brain chemicals, which is every bit as much reworking as whatever theoretical thing we'd have to do to fix autism. Reworking a brain for that it functions properly is a good thing, not a bad one that robs people of "identity", whatever that means. quote:You're right, the feelings, opinions, and experiences of people who actually have the disorders are irrelevant because you say so. I mean gently caress what they have to say about their own issues and experiences, right? You know more than them on this regard. They've just lived it, you've heard about it which clearly gives you much better insight. It gives them some insight into the internal condition, but nothing that's really useful in fixing it. If there was special insight given into these conditions foudn by having them, they would have been solved long ago. Psychology is so weird in D&D, because it's where the anti-science crankery comes out and gets support. You can be anti-psych here and get lots of praise you'd never get for being anti-vaxx or a climate change denialist.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2014 22:51
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Do you know how autism therapy works? Yeah they don't stop being autistic, but in many cases they learn to live with it. You're literally agreeing with me, dumbass. You can't teach someone out of being autistic, you can teach them out of being gullible or racist. Those were the two examples you gave as being "disorders" that weren't diagnosed as such. That's why autism is a disorder, while racism and gullibility are just being a shithead.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2014 22:56
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:No, "messing with your brain" as you put it can absolutely make you a different person. That has been extensively scientifically documented for well over a hundred years. Dualism is crap, who you are is a function of neurology (since even the things you have experienced are stored tangibly), and altering neurology alters you. I'm not agruing dualism at all-- exactly the opposite in fact. Your brain is an organ exactly the same as every other organ in your body. Is someone a different person because they have heart surgery? Also, is someone a different person after having brain sugery to remove a tumor? I hate dualism because at its heart it treats your mental condition as something special and inherently different from the rest of reality. My argument is this "authentic you"/different person idea is flawed from the start. It's an idea that gets hung out there when there is reality to base it on. So we're better off ignoring it, or conversely acting "you" is infinitely fungible for the same body.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2014 23:11
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Can you teach those people though? People come to realizations on their own, but if they are not ready your efforts will only harden their resolve. Coming to a realization is teaching, just not by an individual. It's all external stimulus, which is my point. To my knowledge, there's no set of stimuli that make an autistic person not autistic. If there was we'd have people lined up around the block for that therapy.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2014 23:16
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Who should decide how each person gets to be? My argument is that identity, at least the way it's postulated for the mental question, is something that doesn't exist and we would be better to just ignoring it out of hand.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:Except you are arguing that the mental condition is something special and inherently different, you are arguing that altering the brain will not alter the end state of the brain in action. And that's complete crap. We know for a confirmed, repeated, scientific fact that making alterations to a persons neurology can alter the person, including fundamental aspects of them. No, I'm arguing that your mental facilities are not the essential part of your identity. My argument that "identity" is like "meaning" (as in, what's the meaning of this life?). It's not something real, so there's nothing to hang the idea on, and it rapidly falls apart if you start poking at it. For instance, you said that Gage was a different person after his accident, but some people who had brain surgery were the same person (some were not, however) Can you draw a red line around what is essential for a person's identity? Is this extensible across all people and also objective? Otherwise, it seems like the whole things is the a little vs. a lot argument. Which tells me that the definitions weren't well defined or real to being with.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2014 23:59
|
|
|
splifyphus posted:He really wasn't the same person. Identity is just your brain constructing a narrative between memories, all cells and chemical reactions everchanging. It's possible to forget who you are just by drinking too much alcohol, let alone serious brain trauma. When the neurons that were busy doing "Phineas Gage" all get crushed or re-purposed for other poo poo, the only Phineas Gage that exists is in the expectations of his fellow workers (whose brains have also built an identity for him based on their memories of his behavior). Again, draw me the red line to differentiate the things that are essential to a person's identity, or the actual brain structure, or well any objective and extensible criteria. I don't think you can. That tells me the idea isn't based in reality. My argument never was that brain structures and experiences (in that they alter the brain's structure) weren't the entirety of where our personality comes from. My argument is that your personality isn't the essential part of you, because nothing is the essential part of you.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 00:30
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:If you are "high-functioning," I guess you are just supposed to be quiet and let others continue to advocate that your ilk be removed from the earth. I think it's pretty telling when the two biggest MUH RITES leftists we have here both team up to poo poo on a woman's right to choose. Again, guess you stopped reading the bill of rights somewhere between the 3rd and 8th ammendments, correct? Because telling a woman she doesn't have the right to an arbotion for whatever reason she wants means that you just poo poo on the 9th ammendment.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 00:36
|
|
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:That was literally a thing someone either here or back in the vaxx thread said, curing is inherently 'killing' because they'd be a new person, it was a literal thing either Tank or one of his supporters said RE curing autism, at least one person ITT holds it, probably more. It's right in the OP. quote:Some deaf people consider deafness part of their identity, such that being "cured" would make them a fundamentally different person. A "cure" for Autism, if it existed, wouldn't be a matter of debate that it made someone a fundamentally different person -- autism is based on fundamentally different neural wiring from allistic people. In a very real sense, a cure, if it existed, would by its very nature effectively kill the autistic person in favor of having someone entirely different inhabit the body. Note this is from E-Tank's (IMO ignorant) friend, not Autism Speaks. I think there's also this confusion with "wired" in brains. They have very powerful feedback mechanisms-- that's why learning works so well. Your experiences do to some extent change how your brain operates. For common examples, you don't need to look any further than PTSD that doesn't have an mTBI accompanying it. Your brain starts looking at things differently, and develops responses that are very detrimental to your regular life. One of the reasons CBT works is because of this feedback system.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 00:44
|
|
|
E-Tank posted:My friend is autistic, very nice, very sweet, and honestly I trust her over you. Do you suffer from autism? Do you have the experiences she has had? If not then maybe you should not dismiss her so easily. She can be sweet, but her position on the "different person" stuff is ill-informed. Note this has zero to do with her autism, because myself and many other people I've known have said the exact same thing about other mental treatments.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 00:49
|
|
|
Blue Star posted:Y'all need Buddhism. Came up with the same thing from the same place, same as Ogmius. I didn't think that would be a common take-away from a religion with a central point of "Be the best you possible, and the best you is infinitely compassionate", but I guess it is.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 00:52
|
|
|
E-Tank posted:No? I wasn't? That was LeJackal's and SedanChair's points, IIRC.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 00:53
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:The subject of prenatal condition screening and abortion is actually pretty contentious in bioethics, by my understanding. There are concerns that it represents a sort of decentralized eugenic impulse- that said, it's not usually invoked in the context of autism, since afaik there aren't meaningful prenatal autism screening tests. The ethical imperative is generally asserted collectively, not individually, anyways. I don't know of any bioethicists advocating for jail terms for the practice who aren't also anti-abortion- although that's started to shift as other, less health-related abortion screening practices start to become more common, and the need for some form of societal response becomes stronger. The real stress is over sex selection. It's all childish hand-wringing unless we actively start saying that women shouldn't get either bodily integrity or informed consent on birth issues. Either say that these aren't real rights (good loving luck with that-- you're a textbook misogynist then) or allow for these things to happen. The stress over sex selection is yet again anti-choice zealots trying to pry their way into people's wombs.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 00:57
|
|
|
SALT CURES HAM posted:I'm genuinely not convinced that your friend exists. Why? I disagree with her position and find it not to fit with reality, but it's the kind of thing that's commonly held. I see it as a nature cancerous outgrowth of the whole free will/neo-fatalism idea, but that's such a bag of cats to deal with that it's better to not discuss-- even normally rational people become nuts when you confront them with the idea that they aren't sole awesome controllers of their will.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 01:01
|
|
|
cheese posted:Also, since anecdotes are apparently an important and valuable source of information on this topic, my uncle's best friend is married with a severely autistic son. They gave up on a number of dreams after their first born had autism, including having more children (didn't think they could handle their son PLUS other children), having grandchildren, ever being able to retire by themselves, career aspirations, trips and a whole host of activities that they will never be able to do with their child (sports, shopping, just loving going to lunch, etc). They love their son but a few years back he had a drunken breakdown at a party we held when my cousin passed the California bar and he admitted he wished they had never had kids and he would have had an abortion if he knew what it would all meant Yup. I know a lot of people want to poo poo on the caregivers who would rater not be in the situation, but drat if this doesn't show how one bad break can destroy an entire family's chance for anything resembling success. I've got a buddy a few years older than me who's in a similar situation-- he has a younger brother with Downs Syndrome. His parents were older when they had this brother, and now is father has just suddenly died. He's going to be taking care of his brother, since it's too much for just his mother to do. That's deep sixing the chances for his own kids to have normal lives. The realities of aborting fetuses that have developmental problems are that it's done out of survival as much as anything else. gently caress people who are making GBS threads on folks for making the rational decision.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 02:21
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Holy canoli git over yourselves. Quit it with the hair-trigger sensitivity to suggestions that the ethics of abortion might, in some cases, be complicated. Every mother, in every single instance, has the right to an abortion, and no one else on earth has the right to interfere. OK? A woman has an absolute right to choose, so she gets to come up with whatever reason she wants to not have an abortion. And the rest of us get to shut the gently caress up about it and let her do whatever she chooses. I say this as a bi man, which I guess would be enough of a group to be the ones selected for abortion in your story. I wouldn't know any different since I'd never exist and thus would never have thought a thing, and my potentialness wouldn't override the rights of actual existing people. Any position other than this (especially tired liberal pearl-clutching) is starting to put up barriers around a woman's right to choose, which we all know culminates in dead women in allies and lives ruined through unplanned children.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 03:04
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Do we normally base our ethical judgment in specific matters on whether or not we can do anything about them? Yes. When we start saying things aren't ethical, normal people usually look for ways to stop them.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 03:07
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:We already agreed that she has that right. But would it be appropriate to attempt to educate people that it's possible to live as a fulfilled and worthwhile homosexual or transgender human being? Yes. But she either is going to believe them or she isn't. Plus as we both know "education" around abortion really means trying to scare or bully women into having the baby. The only moral decision as the person not having the abortion is to shut the gently caress up and honor the woman's wishes. I don't get any more mad about losing these potential people than I do about losing potential siblings if my dad decided not to have sex with my mom one night where conception would be possible. As a society, we have a huge problem about making life for the living, instead of the not yet living or the dead. This fear of yours is yet another manifestation of it.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 03:13
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:A lot of the talk here seems to refer to this hypothetically, or as a phenomenon relegated to China, but is there anything right now that prevents a woman in any country which allows abortion to do it sex-selectively? Yes. We've past laws in this country in several states, though it's just really standard abortion restrictions in drag.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 03:17
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:
You discriminate against women from Indian or South-east Asian backgrounds.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 03:38
|
|
How do you even enforce this?! Do you have a woman sign a declaration that she is aborting for a legitimate reason? This loving country.
|
Discendo Vox posted:They, um, really aren't. The last place I heard from on this set of issues was from my University's fairly prominent women's studies department, a favorably received job talk from a female applicant who received the position. This is a difficult set of issues, and reducing them to a binary, with one side consisting entirely of "textbook misogynists" and "anti-choice zealots" doesn't actually remove that complexity- although it does frustrate the discourse. At least as far as the US is concerned, think again: http://jezebel.com/new-study-shows-that-sex-selective-abortion-bans-are-to-1585545601 This is some special intersectional bigotry. Also, LOL at the idea that this ban isn't being done as backdoor way to restrict basic rights, since most good (i.e. white) people won't care since it's restricting right to "those people" (i.e. Indians, Muslims, and East Asians) Taking anything coming out of the Anti-Choice Right at face value regarding abortion is a mistake. They are by far the most disengenuous and outright evil human beings I've had the misfortune of dealing with.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 03:58
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:How does it work? Is a doctor basically obligated to prove to a jury that the abortion they performed was for legitimate reasons? And then there's a chilling effect due to that, just like in States where the father is required to be informed? Ding ding ding. Got it in one. I expect we'd get idiots like Santorum trying to force women to carry autistic kids the same way he wanted to force women to carry kids with Downs or Edwards syndrome. restrict the test, create legal hurdles, and above all be a giant sweater-vested douchebag. rkajdi fucked around with this message at 04:14 on Jun 29, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 04:07
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:I appreciate that the Right abuses regulation to shut down abortion clinics, it doesn't follow from this that sex selective abortion laws are categorically illegitimate or that the practice doesn't occur. Why are you assuming good faith from literal devils? Next thing I know you're going to assume that literacy tests are about reading. Just like we passed survillence laws and programs under the old wink and nod pre-text they be used against Muslims (and then used them against everyone), this is the same thing against the dirty othered women from Asia. No chance it'll be used against honest white people-- that's just crazy talk. And seriously, why is it a big deal in the first place? We're not talking infanticide. Fetuses are not people. Keep saying it in your head until you actually comprehend it.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 04:14
|
|
|
Sharkie posted:This is all true, of course. Any reason to restrict abortion access is going to be grabbed and run with by the anti-choice crowd, and if you care about access to reproductive health and abortion in this country, you absolutely are going to fight tooth and nail for abortion as an absolute right, because with the situation as it stands you can't afford to give an inch. Seriously, this post is golden. Ever inch given is more broken people, more dead women in alleys, more ruined lives. You don't give one because doing so is the literal death of actual breathing people. Sorry I'm so dogmatic on this, but I've had to help out a few people in my life get abortions. Nothing annoys me more than the idiot pearl-clutchers who aren't brave enough to actually do something to help someone in need instead of just being a silent coward with "values".
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 04:32
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 05:22 |
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:That's stupid. There are other reasons why Alzheimer's is bad than an appeal to dumb essentialism. The change that occurs in Alzheimer's patients in indisputably a bad change. This logic does prove that " but he'll be a different person!" alone is a bad argument, but it doesn't follow that we shouldn't teat Alzheimers or be upset when people get it. Seriously. It's like the number of people who don't understand that it's a disease of progressive brain damage (that eventually does kill you) versus just screwing with your memory. The fact that it changes your personality is secondary and I'd argue unimportant compared to the actual loss of your brain from it.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2014 13:15
|
|