…and this is a 
The concern trolls are very concerned. They are responding to my posting of Sonia/Tanja/Rosa/Whoevera Jensen's crazy email — she's disabled! She's mentally ill! It's cruel to post her wacky screeds publicly where people will point and laugh! You're picking on her! <ChrisCrocker>LEAVE SONIA ALONE!!!</ChrisCrocker>
No.
Crazy people — and I don't mean clinically ill people who need medical/psychiatric help — are everywhere, and they are saying and doing stupid things, and they are sending their nonsense to me, and they are engaging in their foolishness in public places where they affect the normal, non-crazy, mostly sensible people. Announcing that they are mildly nuts is not a reasonable excuse to hold off on criticizing them. That logic would mean we'd have to restrain ourselves from mocking Glenn Beck or rebuking Michele Bachmann. They're no less crazy than Sonia Jensen, after all.
My mailbox would depress you. I think I am notified about just about every dufus who pops up and demands public respect for his delusions. Take the bus driver in Atlanta who decided he wouldn't let passengers off his bus if they wouldn't pray with him.
A MARTA bus driver is on suspension following allegations that he forced passengers to pray before allowing them to exit the bus.
Christopher James was one of those passengers. James said, initially, he thought something was wrong when he rang the bell to get off the bus and the door didn't open.
James said the bus driver asked him and three other passengers to join hands in prayer. James said the driver prayed with the group for about four minutes.
Suspend him or <ChrisCrocker>LEAVE THE BUS DRIVER ALONE!!!</ChrisCrocker>?
Or how about the schoolteacher who thinks the Book of Revelation has warned her about fingerprints?
A 22-year veteran kindergarten teacher in the Texas Bible Belt could lose her job for refusing, on religious grounds, to give fingerprints under a state law requiring them.
The evangelical Christian, Pam McLaurin, is fighting a looming suspension, claiming that fingerprinting amounts to the "Mark of the Beast," and hence is a violation of her First Amendment right to practice her religion. Her case is similar to a lawsuit by a group of Michigan farmers, some of them Amish, challenging rules requiring the tagging of livestock with RFID chips, saying the devices are also the devil's mark.
The latest case is the first in which a teacher is refusing fingerprinting on religious grounds, the woman's lawyer said. The U.S. Supreme Court has yet to decide whether the First Amendment is implicated in fingerprinting, especially at a time when states, local governments and civic organizations are increasingly making them mandatory for anyone wanting to drive a car or coach a youth basketball team.
McLaurin's lawsuit against the Texas Education Agency cites various passages of Revelation, the final book of The Bible:
He causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand and on their foreheads, and that no one may buy or sell except one who has the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.... Then a third angel followed them saying with a loud voice -- if anyone worships the beast and his image and receives his mark on his forehead or on his hand he himself shall also drink of the wine of the wrath of God.... He shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb.
Fire her or <ChrisCrocker>LEAVE THE SCHOOLTEACHER ALONE!!!</ChrisCrocker>?
I also get email from Tim Wildmon of the American Family Association. He's very excited; Christmas is victorious!
Governor gets message, big victory for Christmas!
Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear did not like a Christmas tree being called a Christmas tree. So he changed it. According to the Associated Press, Gov. Beshear recently decided the tree on the Capitol lawn in Frankfort, for 2009, should be called a "holiday" tree.
American Family Association immediately went to work against the forces of political correctness who wanted to remove the word "Christmas" from the Christmas season. Within hours, we sent an email alert into the Bluegrass State asking our 38,370 AFA Action Alert friends to call and e-mail Governor Beshear.
Point and laugh, and call the tree we atheists put up in our homes a Christmas tree too, or <ChrisCrocker>LEAVE AMERICAN FAMILY ASSOCIATION ALONE!!!</ChrisCrocker>?
Or how about this one? It turns out that Iraqi police are searching for bombs…with dowsing rods. A British company is making bank selling these useless gadgets to gullible — and now endangered — people with a risky job.
Despite major bombings that have rattled the nation, and fears of rising violence as American troops withdraw, Iraq's security forces have been relying on a device to detect bombs and weapons that the United States military and technical experts say is useless.
The sensor device, known as the ADE 651, from $16,500 to $60,000 each. Iraq has bought more than 1,500 of the devices. The small hand-held wand, with a telescopic antenna on a swivel, is being used at hundreds of checkpoints in Iraq. But the device works "on the same principle as a Ouija board" -- the power of suggestion -- said a retired United States Air Force officer, Lt. Col. Hal Bidlack, who described the wand as nothing more than an explosives divining rod.
…
Aqeel al-Turaihi, the inspector general for the Ministry of the Interior, reported that the ministry bought 800 of the devices from a company called ATSC (UK) Ltd. for $32 million in 2008, and an unspecified larger quantity for $53 million. Mr. Turaihi said Iraqi officials paid up to $60,000 apiece, when the wands could be purchased for as little as $18,500. He said he had begun an investigation into the no-bid contracts with ATSC.
Scream and yell that their stupidity is putting their lives on the line, prosecute the con artists selling these cheap and useless gadgets, or <ChrisCrocker>LEAVE THE BOMB DOWSERS ALONE!!!</ChrisCrocker>?
I guess I'm one of those people who will continue to say that stupidity, ignorance, and even mental illness do not demand that people stand silent when victims of those afflictions thrust themselves forward and demand respect for their views. Polite silence and encouraging words of reassurance is how we got to Idiot America in the first place.
Comments
Posted by: Sleeper | November 7, 2009 3:29 PM
LEAVE CHRISCROCKER ALONE!!!
Posted by: Sleeper | November 7, 2009 3:32 PM
Stupid HTML filter.
There should be CrisCrocker tags and everything. Blah.
Posted by: 500sheetsofpaper | November 7, 2009 3:34 PM
What PZ said.
Really, I think me leaving a comment to this is redundant.
Posted by: SEF | November 7, 2009 3:36 PM
It would be possible to have a custom ChrisCrocker style (perhaps a criss-cross crocaduck motif) in HTML. But XML would allow a ChrisCrocker tag to exist.
Posted by: Glen Davidson
|
November 7, 2009 3:37 PM
Of course it's required. Morons laugh at the intelligent all of the time in order to belittle what they do, indeed, that's pretty much what ID and the DI are all about.
To keep things in perspective, the truly ridiculous deserves to be laughted at. If the concern trolls had their way, only intelligence would be ridiculed, and we'd never laugh at the truly stupid ideas, because the people holding them are so ignorant that we refrain from laughing at such ideas.
It's accommodation at its worst, accommodating flat-out idiocy.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p
Posted by: Zeno
|
November 7, 2009 3:37 PM
Idiot America has a news network (Fox), a presidential candidate (Sarah Palin), a vapid cheerleader (Bachmann), a political movement (teabagging), a gaggle of pundits (Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, etc., etc.), a philosophy (ignorance is bliss), and a deity (usually an old white guy in the sky). That's enough, I think. They expect too much if they also expect respect.
Posted by: bonze
|
November 7, 2009 3:44 PM
PZ: Ha! I didn't send a note to you about the weapons-dowsing madness because I knew you would pick up on it.
But you failed to quote the take-away line in the article... when the reporter trying out the Fabulous Device fails to detect grenades and a machine pistol in the General's office... and he says: "U R DOING IT WRONG! U N33D MOAR TRAINING!"
Posted by: Elaine | November 7, 2009 3:45 PM
I have an aunt who is schizophrenic. She honestly believes that her Wiccan powers are real and that the voices she hears in her head are Pagan spirits, and she insists that she keeps winning cars and things in contests but the government won't let her have them.
The difference between her and the people PZ Myers and others make fun of: No one is listening to her and trying to legislate based on her beliefs. I don't think anyone tried to stop NASA from doing the moon test based on Sonia/Tania/Tanja's email, but her brand of Bible-based lunacy drives a lot of public policy, because other people hera it and believe it. That is dangerous and often ridicule is a good way to get people to stop believing something stupid. Sorry if it seems mean, but I honestly think it is a useful deterrent against the non-crazy people following the crazy people.
Posted by: Islander | November 7, 2009 3:46 PM
As far as the loonies who are paranoid of fingerprints and RFID chips, I can almost guarantee they are the minions of Alex Jones. I have a couple of those in my family.
Posted by: BlueEyedVideot | November 7, 2009 3:53 PM
Hear, hear! Sometimes the adults among us have to step up and say, "Kiddies, you're acting stupidly!"
Now if I could only say that to about 3/4 of the population of the USA...
Posted by: Ken Cope | November 7, 2009 3:56 PM
I honestly can't tell the difference between religiously held belief, and insanity. In either case, the victim is beyond help. I found myself in a futile conversation with an ex-coworker on facebook, and had to walk away after this:
Posted by: raven | November 7, 2009 3:57 PM
This woman can't read.
1. Since when is the state of Texas or its government the antichrist? Bunch of braindead xian religious kooks is more like it.
2. Since when is fingerprinting a mark on the right hand and the forehead. I don't think they do forehead printing. You can even take fingerprints without ink by using scanning technology. And it isn't much of a mark if it promptly washes off.
3. She will still be able to buy and sell stuff with or without fingerprinting. She may not have a job but that is her problem. In fact if she loses her job, she can still buy and sell stuff but if she is really broke, she won't be able to. Not because of lack of a mark but because of lack of money.
Must be why most xians don't ever read the bible or know what is in it. They aren't literate enough to read for comprehension.
Posted by: 386sx
|
November 7, 2009 3:57 PM
He causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand and on their foreheads,
I'm confused.
The mark gets put on the paper, doesn't it?
Does she forget to wash her fingers or something?
Does she have crazy glue and she sticks her fingers to her forehead?
This seems very confusing.
Posted by: raven | November 7, 2009 4:00 PM
What is this nonsens about RFID chipping cows? Cows don't even have right hands. And the state of Michigan doesn't much look like the antichrist, Obama, or the Pope. And since when do cows buy and sell stuff anyway? I've never seen a cow in a store.
Posted by: sasqwatch | November 7, 2009 4:01 PM
This recent spike in humorless concern-bots has me... frankly... quite concerned.
Posted by: 'Tis Himself, OM
|
November 7, 2009 4:03 PM
Looking for bombs with divining rods? That goes way beyond stupid into staring at the wall and making gibbering noises about how the voices are making you do things.
Posted by: 386sx
|
November 7, 2009 4:04 PM
I too am worried about the concern trolls, however I do wish them all the best.
Posted by: SoulJacker | November 7, 2009 4:05 PM
That schoolteacher story sure is interesting. I wonder if there's a passage in the Bible I can use to justify getting a decent job without having to provide 5 years working history and references from former employers ... who am I kidding??? There's a passage in the Bible to justify ANYTHING. God damn I love religion.
Posted by: teachingsapiens.wordpress.com
|
November 7, 2009 4:07 PM
If a bomb dowser finds a bomb, there is a very good chance he knew it was there already. Draw your own conclusions.
Robert B / @RobsterFCD
Posted by: Naked Bunny with a Whip
|
November 7, 2009 4:17 PM
But PZ, it's mean to not assume that people who disagree with you are mentally ill.
Posted by: ThriceGreatMe | November 7, 2009 4:24 PM
A 22-year veteran kindergarten teacher?
Could someone please explain that one to me.
Posted by: Fred The Hun | November 7, 2009 4:27 PM
raven @ 14,
http://msnbcmedia2.msn.com/j/msnbc/2080000/2080066.widec.jpg
Posted by: Sili
|
November 7, 2009 4:28 PM
I was about to ask how a 22-year-old gets to be a veteran teacher.
Then it dawned on me.
'Thanks' for reminding me of the dowsing. It's not as if I didn't get nauseous the last two times.
At least I managed to deprogram a dowser at my last job (I think). He wasn't looking for bombs, though.
Posted by: TheoDoersing | November 7, 2009 4:34 PM
raven (#14) said:
"What is this nonsens about RFID chipping cows? Cows don't even have right hands. And the state of Michigan doesn't much look like the antichrist, Obama, or the Pope. And since when do cows buy and sell stuff anyway? I've never seen a cow in a store."
Sacred-cow-chipping is still all the rage here in Indiana. We ain't got nuttin better ta do anywho!
Posted by: Jeffrey E. | November 7, 2009 4:35 PM
NBW, I really don't think PZ algorithm for finding people mentally ill is based on disagree, but rather that anyone who disagrees with a mentally ill person would not only be completely alienated by the certainty but unable to identify it's basis. If you feel like the faithful are not to be lumped in with the insane, please explain how faith differs from a baseless conviction, a compulsion to do something irrational, a psychological crutch, or a frequent logic error. The number of faithful should be irrelevant to the question, just as racism is irrational and once counted most of the world as it's adherents.
PZ's exactly right. One way or another our society has to deal with this kind of madness and no amount of "respect" from PZ will change the fact that this person, Sonia, will feel a great deal of shame about her beliefs if she ever comes to her senses.
Posted by: Phodopus
|
November 7, 2009 4:36 PM
I am an atheist and have been a fan of this blog for a long time. Some of my best friends are atheists. But now I think this time you have gone too far! I am sorry to announce that with your meanness you leave me no choice but to cancel my subscription and join religion again!
But seriously, is ridicule of random weirdos/desses sending their revelations about the exploding moon over the internets justified by the fight against real world (TM) madness, I'm not sure ... maybe it is. It is somehow entertaining, but it leaves a bad taste im my mouth.
Posted by: Eamon Knight | November 7, 2009 4:37 PM
OK, now I understand why my son (currently doing grad work at GA Tech) wants to buy a car....
Posted by: Ken Cope | November 7, 2009 4:38 PM
Sacred-cow-chipping
I initially read that as "sacred-cow-tipping." [/Turlock]
Posted by: Xenithrys | November 7, 2009 4:38 PM
Richard Dawkins doesn't want to give fundamentalists the "oxygen of respectability"; I think you're right to give them the carbon monoxide of ridicule.
Posted by: Falconer | November 7, 2009 4:41 PM
Sadly, one of my cousins holds an office in Kentucky and recently joined a group demanding Kentucky's Christmas tree "back." I hope it was only political maneuvering before the elections next year, but I fear the hope is forlorn.
Posted by: Greta Christina | November 7, 2009 4:48 PM
Actually...
a) I'm not a psychiatrist... but it sure seems to me, based on her email, that Sonia/ Tanja Jensen qualifies as "clinically ill people who need medical/psychiatric help." She doesn't seem "crazy," as in "having some seriously wacky ideas." She seems crazy, as in "mentally ill."
The former deserves our mockery. The latter deserves our compassion.
b) I think there's a difference between making fun of crazy people who are trying to inflict their craziness on others through public policy/ commerce/ etc... and making fun of crazy people -- actually crazy, mentally ill people -- who send crazy emails to public figures. And again: The former deserves our mockery. The latter deserves our compassion.
Posted by: Phodopus
|
November 7, 2009 4:51 PM
second
Posted by: AVSN | November 7, 2009 4:57 PM
I suppose it would be useless to say, but I will anyway, if the emailer from BC is truly a mental case, your making fun of her will never help. It may amuse you, but it will never help, either her or the situation. Don't waste the time next chance you get. All of us will be better for the lack of it.
Posted by: Phodopus
|
November 7, 2009 4:59 PM
PZ, it seems to me this blog post originates more from a subtle pang of conscience (looking for confirmation from your readership) about your ridicule of this person than a complaint about concern trolls who are there all the time anyways. In this case, I think you were flogging an effectively dead horse - unless Ms Jensen is about to become director of NASA, in which case I retract my criticism
Posted by: Sastra
|
November 7, 2009 4:59 PM
I once read a book written by a psychologist who considered religion and schizophrenia to be similar thought patterns on the same continuum. The most significant division was whether the irrational beliefs were tracking along with a social group, and according to consensus. For example, those who were considered mentally ill would hear voices at the "wrong time" -- so they would be brought to a doctor.
Even a quick, off-the-cuff analysis requires knowing who and what the peer group is, first off. What would be batshit insane in a skeptic group, might be disturbing to the Episcopalians, intruiging to the Pentacostals, and highly valued by the New Agers.
Posted by: Naked Bunny with a Whip
|
November 7, 2009 5:00 PM
@Jeffrey E. #25: I was just sarcastically mimicking those on the last thread who behaved as though calling Sonia "schizophrenic" based on a single email was somehow less insulting than laughing at her claims.
Sorry if my phrasing was clunky!
Posted by: rufustfirefly | November 7, 2009 5:00 PM
Bombing the moon;
http://www.space.com/news/091106-lcross-moon-crash-protests.html
Posted by: Phodopus
|
November 7, 2009 5:06 PM
Yeah, we don't want this happening again
Posted by: intothewild | November 7, 2009 5:08 PM
PZ: It is ignorant to lump mental illness in with ignorance and stupidity. I think that's the point that some of us are making. Mental illness is an entirely different "affliction" than the other two.
Posted by: Antiochus Epiphanes | November 7, 2009 5:09 PM
Mental illness is characterized by irrational belief. What distinguishes someone who is mentally ill from everyone else is that they alone hold the irrational belief...
My mother believes that a communion wafer is magically transformed into the flesh of a mediterranean Jewish peasant during mass. This belief is irrational, but she'll never be institutionalized for holding this belief, because lots of other people believ that also. If she suddenly believed that grape jelly was transformed into the blood of a mediterranean Jewish peasant simply by spreading it on rye-toast, she would be regarded as mentally ill. If she started venerating toast publically, she would be institutionalized.
Posted by: Ken Cope | November 7, 2009 5:09 PM
I don't have any idea how to tell the difference between "having some seriously wacky ideas" and "mentally ill." How is it compassionate to pretend somebody isn't "mentally ill" for "having some seriously wacky ideas" if they rationalize them with religion? It is not compassionate to withhold mockery when somebody expects their seriously wacky ideas to be treated with respect.
Posted by: Uncle Glenny
|
November 7, 2009 5:10 PM
raven@12:
Ahh, every time one of goes forehead/keyboard, they record the key pattern.
It's becoming increasingly difficult to buy or sell anything without a credit card or bank account. (Note that because of the Patriot Act, you cannot even get a money order from a bank without an account. Just some independent agents.) Fingerprints aren't necessary now but that time may come.
Posted by: Phodopus
|
November 7, 2009 5:15 PM
To a certain extend, mental illness can probably measured by how well a person is able to function in a given society. My point is not that everything is relative, but that for example in a strongly catholic society it is likely to find people believing firmly in crazy things like holy crackers who are otherwise smart and not obviously impaired, simply because such believe is encouraged in the context.
Posted by: Fez | November 7, 2009 5:17 PM
Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them
-- Thomas Jefferson
Posted by: Glen Davidson
|
November 7, 2009 5:22 PM
Is there anything more insane in Tanja's letter than in Expelled or Signature in the Cell?
I'm afraid that I don't see it. It just looks like "truther" nonsense, IDiocy, and the like, something that seems reasonable enough if you don't know what you're talking about.
I am sorry if she's clinically crazy and we're laughing at her, but I'd have to believe that Dembski, Berlinski, and Behe are actually mentally ill (instead of lying charlatans) if I were to claim that Tanja's letter indicates true mental illness.
I'm glad the concern trolls aren't in charge of society, because I suspect that they'd put at least half of the population on psychotic medications, at least if they were consistent in their treatment of people having loony claims.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p
Posted by: John Morales | November 7, 2009 5:22 PM
intothewild @39:
PZ wrote: Crazy people — and I don't mean clinically ill people who need medical/psychiatric help — are everywhere [...].
No lumping there.
Posted by: intothewild | November 7, 2009 5:29 PM
@46: I'm talking about PZ's last paragraph. A mentally ill person would have a different motivation for putting their grandiose ideas out into the public sphere than someone who was simply stupid or ignorant.
Posted by: Phodopus
|
November 7, 2009 5:30 PM
@Glen D.,
You are right, in a way. But if we have to ridicule the potentially clinically insane, it would be wise to concentrate on those who are in any position of "power" in politics or the media. This might include the makers of Expelled as well as the some of the members of the DI for sure, even though they seem to know exactly what they are doing and to what end. No mercy for them!
Posted by: ckitching
|
November 7, 2009 5:33 PM
I don't know. I think the governor deserves a fair bit of ridicule, too! It's nice that he wants to respect the separation of church and government, but renaming things like Christmas trees is completely unnecessary.
Posted by: intothewild | November 7, 2009 5:35 PM
Phodopus@48: I agree.
Posted by: lordshipmayhem
|
November 7, 2009 5:35 PM
You're goddam right I'm going to the bomb dowsers alone. I don't want to be 100 miles of them when they're using their woo-sticks.
Posted by: Ompompanoosuc | November 7, 2009 5:39 PM
Someone said it on the other thread. She is not fringe, she is average.
My father-in-law thinks that one can dowse for money and that big pharma is trying to kill us all. My sister-in-law doesn't think we went to the moon and that heliocentricity is still up for debate. One brother-in-law is a theologian, the other is infatuated with colon cleansing products.
Also, my cat eats flies.
Posted by: Mr T | November 7, 2009 5:39 PM
Splitter!Posted by: red rabbit | November 7, 2009 5:45 PM
You know, even a psychiatrist would be hard-pressed to make a diagnosis of schizophrenia based on an email.
Personally, I don't think she's any more bonkers than the people who think shaken water will cure their cancer. She looks pig-ignorant to me, and if education has failed her, maybe "point-and-laugh" will reach her.
Posted by: Naked Bunny with a Whip
|
November 7, 2009 5:46 PM
The point that I see some people making is that they are able to diagnose schizophrenia from an email.
Posted by: Phodopus
|
November 7, 2009 5:46 PM
@Ompompanoosuc;
Average? I hope for the sake of humankind that with your application on your in-laws, you are stretching the Copernican principle a little too much.
Posted by: A. Noyd
|
November 7, 2009 5:59 PM
Greta Christina (#31)
Cuz, you know, there's a totally soild line between those two.
Fuck pious compassion.
Fuck pious compassion again.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~
intothewild (#47)
Maybe you can back that up with something other than your own hot air?
Posted by: The Chemist | November 7, 2009 6:04 PM
I don't care about the rest of them, but LEAVE THE SCHOOLTEACHER ALONE!!!
No really, I don't care what her reasons are or how far out there they are, fuck the idea of fingerprinting every individual who wants an education. This obsession with security and contingency that overrides privacy truly is the mark of the beast. (Metaphorically speaking.)
Posted by: 'Tis Himself, OM
|
November 7, 2009 6:05 PM
If Sonia were just muttering to herself and telling a few friends and relations about how NASA is going to kill all of us, we would leave her alone. Even if one or two of us were people Sonia muttered to, we'd leave her alone.
However, Sonia has decided to let everybody know about NASA's nefarious plans to rid the Earth of all life. She not only told PZ about his impending doom but also
I assume the German Balkan Trust is the Balkan Trust for Democracy, an arm of the German Marshall Fund. This is an organization whose function is to try to integrate Balkan countries into the EU and the world economy. They have nothing to do with NASA or even the European Space Agency. But Sonia thinks they should know about NASA genocidal ambitions.
If you're going to let everyone know that you're a looney, then it's unsurprising if everyone laughs at you. This is especially true if you're a harmless looney, like Sonia is.
Posted by: strange gods before me, OM
|
November 7, 2009 6:09 PM
Fuck you, A. Noyd.
I don't have an opinion on whether or not this woman is mentally ill, but people who are mentally ill do need compassion the same as someone who is sick with cancer.
Mocking cancer doesn't make it better. Mocking mental illness doesn't make it better.
Cruelty to people who are already suffering is inhumane. Fuck right off.
Posted by: A. Noyd
|
November 7, 2009 6:12 PM
Just to make myself perfectly clear: I am mentally ill. As a mentally ill person, I find all this "compassion" to be a mechanism that so-called sane people use to gently segregate mentally ill people from society. It makes us into some sort of "other" that must not be treated by the same rules as everyone else. Fuck that, okay? Your motives may be pure gold, but the effect of this self-censoring compassion so many of you spout is that you're making it suck more to be mentally ill. So knock that shit off. Thanks.
Posted by: Cath the Canberra Cook
|
November 7, 2009 6:14 PM
Oh, come on, mental illness is a very real and sad thing. And my totally uninformed internet diagnosis is for mental illness, on the grounds that she's too literate to be an uneducated whackaloon moran.
It's still interesting how the religious and the crazy seem so very close.
Posted by: Sastra
|
November 7, 2009 6:15 PM
The sad thing is, there is really no way to tell whether Sonia -- who worries that NASA will blow up the moon and start off Biblical Armageddon -- is actually clinically insane, or simply buying into standard conspiracy theories, framing things through a church's teachings, and/or combining common sense 'folk' physics with an active imagination. To make such a determination, we'd have to consult an expert in the appropriate field.
Ask Phil Plait.
Hey, Phil -- does this moon letter seem any crazier than the usual crap you wade through at Bad Astronomy?
Posted by: Richard Eis | November 7, 2009 6:16 PM
I believe the "mark of the devil" thing was just an excuse by the farmers not to do it. I wouldn't read too much into such stories without more facts.
Why did it take hours to put together an email about christmas trees? Did everyone huddle around the single computer screen deciding on punctuation and whether 2/3rds or 3/4s of it should be capitalised?
Posted by: pazuzu | November 7, 2009 6:17 PM
You americans drive me nuts. Do you really think it is more sane to willingly
have you fingerprints taken in order to be a bus driver than to refuse on
religious grounds? Hey, colo(u)r me religious!
Posted by: strange gods before me, OM
|
November 7, 2009 6:21 PM
Just to make myself perfectly clear: fuck you, A. Noyd. I know people who are mentally ill, you do not get to decide for them that they deserve to be mocked instead of treated with some goddamn human decency. Nobody who is in the middle of hallucinations needs to be mocked. They need to be treated with understanding. I'm not saying anyone has to smile and nod; it's perfectly fine to disagree with a mentally ill person's view of reality. But for you to say outright that sick people do not deserve compassion? That is disgusting.
Posted by: Newfie | November 7, 2009 6:22 PM
Jon Stewart and his writers should get an Emmy Award for that segment. Pure brilliance. I also wonder if it will have any effect on the Glenn Blech fans that see it.
Posted by: 'Tis Himself, OM
|
November 7, 2009 6:22 PM
Get a brain! morans
Posted by: Ompompanoosuc | November 7, 2009 6:35 PM
@Phodopus
I know I don't feel like a "privileged observer" when everyone except me is praying at the Christmas table.
Posted by: intothewild | November 7, 2009 6:37 PM
A. Noyd @57:
This is a quick description of what a mentally ill person's motivation for publicity might be.
"Grandiose delusions or delusions of grandeur are a type of delusion characterized by fantastical beliefs that one is famous, omnipotent, or otherwise very powerful. It is a criterion for psychotic disorders such as schizophrenia or bipolar mania."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grandiose_delusions
Other reasons could be racing thoughts, increased goal-driven activity, risk-taking and poor judgement, all found in the manic phase of bipolar disorder.
http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/bipolar-disorder/DS00356/DSECTION=symptoms
These symptoms don't necessarily reflect on a person's values or on their typical behavior when not in a manic phase.
Posted by: Blind Squirrel | November 7, 2009 6:38 PM
strange gods before me, OM
Right beside you on this one. Compassion yes, sympathy no. Sympathy kills.
Posted by: uncle frogy | November 7, 2009 6:38 PM
Even if you know a person on a personal basis just how are supposed to tell the difference between those who are truly mentally ill and have a medical diagnosis and someone who is mentally ill and has not had a diagnosis yet and those who are clearly being irrational and may not be diagnosable and those who are just under the influence of religion or other irrational "philosophy" due to willful ignorance, innocence or fear?
I try to have compassion for all of them but I will laugh when it is truly funny except when I can't.
If I am under attack I may not turn the other cheek I make no promises.
Posted by: Ken Cope | November 7, 2009 6:39 PM
It is not compassionate to pretend somebody's ideas aren't crazy, or fail to urge them to get help. If mockery is the two by four that gets their attention, then employing it is compassionate.
Posted by: strange gods before me, OM
|
November 7, 2009 6:42 PM
This is worth clarifying. I assume that what you mean is not to play along with delusions? It is important if someone expresses views that are delusional, that people tell them that they are wrong, and that's not the way the world is.
Posted by: Antiochus Epiphanes | November 7, 2009 6:45 PM
The lady e-mails crazy shit. Its funny. It doesn't matter if she is mentally ill or not...it is still funny.
Posted by: strange gods before me, OM
|
November 7, 2009 6:48 PM
Bullshit armchair psychology, pulled right out of your ass. I guarantee that is not going to help at all. People who are experiencing delusions are already prone to feelings of persecution. Mocking them will make it worse, "proving" to them that they know something special and hidden which the outside world is trying to attack them for. Calmly telling them "I think you are wrong, and here is why" is much more likely to work. Listening is important. Gaining trust is important. If they feel that you are not one of "them" who is motivated by persecution, they are much more likely to listen to your advice to seek medical attention.
Posted by: Blind Squirrel | November 7, 2009 6:49 PM
strange gods before me, OM
Sympathy feels good to the sympathized, so it is a reward for behavior. Sometimes it is compassionate to be somewhat cruel. Certain other assumptions apply, of course.
BS
Posted by: John Morales | November 7, 2009 6:50 PM
SGBM,
If you refer to this:
As a mentally ill person, I find all this "compassion" to be a mechanism that so-called sane people use to gently segregate mentally ill people from society. It makes us into some sort of "other" that must not be treated by the same rules as everyone else. Fuck that, okay?
A. Noyd scare quotes "compassion", and makes it clear that what's being said is about a mechanism identified as "compassion", not about compassion proper.
Posted by: strange gods before me, OM
|
November 7, 2009 6:54 PM
No, it was a direct response to Greta Christina who said only that mentally ill people deserve compassion, and A. Noyd said fuck that.
Posted by: Antiochus Epiphanes | November 7, 2009 6:55 PM
Strange Gods Before Me; If you know someone who is mentally ill, of course your approach is reasonable. However, I'm not visiting this site to help people. As interesting as all of these threads are, no one is being helped. One hears 30 stories like Sonia's everyday...can you help all of these people? I visit this site because living in the bible belt makes me feel like I'm taking crazy pills. I just want to know that other people find irrational belief as exasperating as I do. Mockery and derision go along with that.
Posted by: A. Noyd
|
November 7, 2009 6:55 PM
strange gods before me (#66)
I never said that. Actual compassion for someone you know well can sympathize with or who needs (and maybe asked for) help? That's one thing. What I'm talking about is this pious compassion where, rather than understanding the situation of the person in question, everyone automatically makes them exempt from criticism and mockery just by the fact of the person's mental illness (or perceived mental illness)! Or the sort of compassion that labels mental illness as something 100% tragic. I'm talking about the usless "compassion" for a generalization, rather than for actual people and their actual states of mind. That shit needs to stop because it's useless and makes being mentally ill suck more.
(#76)
Most mentally ill people being irrational are not in the midsts of a delusion induced by mental illness, though.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~
intothewild (#70)
And the motives of someone who is simply stupid or ignorant would be... what? Simply trotting out descriptions of the thought processes of some mentally ill people doesn't support your claim.
Posted by: Ken Cope | November 7, 2009 6:58 PM
Bullshit armchair psychology, pulled right out of your ass.
So, mockery is OK for thee, but not me? Got it. Had it not been for your concern trolling, it never would have occurred to any of us to try those other strategies first.
Posted by: Knockgoats | November 7, 2009 6:58 PM
She is not fringe, she is average.
My father-in-law thinks that one can dowse for money and that big pharma is trying to kill us all. My sister-in-law doesn't think we went to the moon and that heliocentricity is still up for debate. One brother-in-law is a theologian, the other is infatuated with colon cleansing products. - Ompompanoosuc
Er, no, not average at all! Sorry to be the one to break the bad news, but you just happened to marry into a family of lunatics. Hope your spouse is not afflicted!
Posted by: intothewild | November 7, 2009 6:59 PM
strangegodsbeforeme @76 says:
"People who are experiencing delusions are already prone to feelings of persecution. Mocking them will make it worse, "proving" to them that they know something special and hidden which the outside world is trying to attack them for."
My response: yes, exactly. Perhaps you can free someone from ignorance or stupidity through mockery, but you can't free someone from mental illness with that method.
Posted by: Cruithne
|
November 7, 2009 7:00 PM
Well as I noted on the other thread, her post made me want to give her a cuddle and tell her it's all going to be all right.
I don't think that comment puts me in the category of concern troll but if it does, y'all can go fuck yourselves, it's my honest opinion.
Neither do I have a problem with all the comments, since I doubt she's reading them.
Posted by: A. Noyd
|
November 7, 2009 7:01 PM
John Morales (#78)
Yup, exactly. Also known as pious compassion (a term I stole from kalibhakta in the thread about the Christian lady who hears voices).
Posted by: strange gods before me, OM
|
November 7, 2009 7:03 PM
Again,
It's a legitimate question if this person is ill. I am taking issue with A. Noyd's "fuck compassion" shit.
Posted by: John M H | November 7, 2009 7:04 PM
For the record, I have a chronic mental illness and no self-righteous, politically correct Yay-hoo, ever did a single thing to help me out when I was down.
Cthulu save us from self-righteous, politically correct Yay-hoos!
Posted by: strange gods before me, OM
|
November 7, 2009 7:06 PM
Then you should have just said as much instead of responding to someone who said that mentally ill people deserve compassion. Nowhere did Greta say that mentally ill people should not be criticized. Indeed delusions should be criticized. Mockery sure as fuck doesn't help, though.
Posted by: strange gods before me, OM
|
November 7, 2009 7:10 PM
Bullshit, Ken, I am not mocking sick people. And if you read the other fucking thread, I never weighed in on this woman, so it's nothing to do with me that this discussion is going on. Again, I don't have any opinion about her particular situation. Nothing jumps out at me that gives me any clue on how to differentiate her mindset between ignorance and illness, so I'm not weighing in on that.
Posted by: intothewild | November 7, 2009 7:10 PM
what's a Yay-hoo? do they live in Dr. Seuss land?
Posted by: Ken Cope | November 7, 2009 7:12 PM
Mockery sure as fuck doesn't help, though.
Mockery is an attention getter, as is shunning, seventy-two hour holds, and other forms of intervention when people go 5150. I'm going to, again, try to draw a distinction between mocking delusional beliefs and mocking those who hold them, lamenting that too many people refrain from mocking beliefs out of fear that it would be disrespectful to the person, which is profoundly disrespectful to the person.
Posted by: strange gods before me, OM
|
November 7, 2009 7:14 PM
as is making up bullshit.
Posted by: co | November 7, 2009 7:14 PM
If a bomb dowser finds a bomb, it's likely that a *lot* of people will find out about it, rather quickly.
Posted by: John Morales | November 7, 2009 7:14 PM
SGBM, if I just quote your conclusion to #89, am I in effect quotemining you?
Posted by: Alverant
|
November 7, 2009 7:18 PM
That bus driver should have been fired at the least. Heck, he should have been taken to gitmo for terrorism. I mean come on, he unlawfully restrained people (kidnapping) for religious reasons. That's the virtual definition of terrorist. Did anyone else see the responses, 5 day suspension and some say that was too harsh.
Just another case of "It's Only OK if You're a Christian."
Posted by: Cath the Canberra Cook
|
November 7, 2009 7:19 PM
But we can't free anyone from mental illness by *any* means over the internet. Third hand commentary on a website, about email she sent to someone else, is not going to help - regardless of whether it's mocking or compassionate. Only the person's close associates, family and friends, are actually in a position to help. We pharyngulites don't have that option. Let's not get too self-important here.
Obviously the ideas are idiotically laughable. And I agree that once stupid ideas are in the public domain, they are fair game for ridicule. And that goes especially strongly for people trying to influence public policy - most of the ones PZ cites.
The high ground is to trash the ideas, not the person. Though trashing the person is irresistable when they are clearly as venal as Pat Robertson et al, I find that in this specific case it is much easier to resist. Mental illness can strike even very smart and good people. Skepticism is no defense. My lab partner in university physics developed schizophrenia, and it was a tragedy for him and his family.
(BTW, 'Tis, 'twas nice to see that you got my reference.)
Posted by: strange gods before me, OM
|
November 7, 2009 7:20 PM
No, I think that is fair and succinct, John.
"Haha it sure is crazy to believe that the government is conspiring against you" is completely useless, and will not help anyone. The distinction you are making is between mocking someone for having cancer, and just mocking their tumor.
Respect isn't even the major issue here; mocking the symptoms of someone's mental illness is not going to help anything, and if the issue is delusions, it's more likely to trigger further delusions of persecution than anything else.
Posted by: Blind Squirrel | November 7, 2009 7:22 PM
Alverant
Hi Alverant. Thanks for visiting.
BS
Posted by: Lars | November 7, 2009 7:23 PM
When someone is wrong about something, the respectful thing to do is to tell them. Smiling and nodding while knowing better, is a cowardly, unethical response.
When someone has batshit crazy ideas about something, the respectful thing to do is STILL to tell them. The Internet has made lots of crazy people vulnerable to feedback, because the Internet gives them a medium for their crazy ideas, and the Internet isn't a one-way medium.
That's the times a-changing. We have to adapt, and so does mentally healthy people.
You can be as crazy as you want, but if you think you can say anything without being criticized, you're not only crazy, you're also stupid. And I don't just mean a little dim, I mean the Darwin award candidate kind of stupid. You can't always protect people from themselves, and by trying to do so you are taking away their responsibility, which is a kind of theft.
Posted by: strange gods before me, OM
|
November 7, 2009 7:26 PM
That isn't what I'm talking about -- I'm responding to A. Noyd's "fuck compassion" in general and I have nothing to say about this woman.
But regardless of whether the target is going to read a thread, it's messed up to mock people with cancer for having cancer and it's just as messed up to mock people with a mental illness for having a mental illness.
Posted by: John M H | November 7, 2009 7:26 PM
To intothewild:
Yay-hoos *do* sound like something from Suess but I used the word as a variation of Yahoo, from Jonathan Swift. In my experiance, section 2 below, from Webster-Mirriam descibes many, many people I've met who talk compassion but do not practice that admirable act.
Main Entry: 1ya·hoo
Pronunciation: \ˈyā-(ˌ)hü, ˈyä-\
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural yahoos
Date: 1726
1 capitalized : a member of a race of brutes in Swift's Gulliver's Travels who have the form and all the vices of humans
2 [influenced by 2yahoo] : a boorish, crass, or stupid person
Posted by: strange gods before me, OM
|
November 7, 2009 7:30 PM
Yes. And who here has disagreed with that?
A feature of some mental illnesses is not being able to predict the consequences of one's actions. That does not make the person stupid. It makes them ill.
Posted by: Ken Cope | November 7, 2009 7:30 PM
"Haha it sure is crazy to believe that the government is conspiring against you" is completely useless, and will not help anyone. The distinction you are making is between mocking someone for having cancer, and just mocking their tumor.
What a useless, inappropriate and obfuscatory metaphor. You and I both would tell somebody it's crazy to believe the power of prayer is adequate to heal their cancer, which is not the same as mocking a tumor. Saying "Haha it sure is crazy to believe that the government is conspiring against you" is more compassionate than smiling and nodding and changing the subject, less dismissive and disrespectful than making the bullshit armchair diagnosis that the person is going to get even more delusional if you point out their delusion to them.
Posted by: strangest brew | November 7, 2009 7:31 PM
What is the difference between religious mania...seeing visions of angels and Mary et al...and talking to holy spooks...jeebus giving instructions...god giving goals etc etc and ...
Worrying about chain reactions on the moon...or missions 'bombing' the moon..or UFO abductions...or government sinister operations...etc etc?
Well on a scale ..pretty much of a muchness!
Except one is allowed even protected under the constitution and one is classed as barking nuts, and that is the problem!
The former get to be in charge of educational bodies...government departments...public transport...and whole states...even given charge of weapons of mass and indiscriminate murder.
And no one is supposed to poke fun at them or laugh at their delusions, cos that is religious intolerance and a hate crime!
The other get, if lucky, hospitalisation, but more usually 'care in the community' because that is the cheaper option.
Mental illness a very grey and undefinable phenomenon.
I contend the religious and the plain crazy suffer from the same thing...but one is very lucky and their insanity gets expressed by worshipping an invisible non existent figment of a long dead goat herders imagination, that is apparently laudable and recommended to help in politics and some careers, the other is ignored more or less, and mostly abandoned.
Thing is the likes of Mizzy Jensen get to positions where their insanity is accepted as gospel amongst other like deluded...and no one can say a peep!
So you get a crowd of fools following verbatim the edicts and bigotries of just one fool...but that fool just has a bigger mouth...and very likely a smaller intellect!
It works in every religion and every society!
Summat is wrong!
Posted by: strange gods before me, OM
|
November 7, 2009 7:33 PM
No, the compassionate thing to say is "you are wrong, the government is not conspiring against you."
I'm the one who fucking said don't smile and nod, you bullshitter.
Liar and a bullshitter, Ken. Time to shut the fuck up. I said point out the delusion.
Posted by: Abber | November 7, 2009 7:34 PM
Rudeness and intolerance are rarely the best solutions to a disagreement, but to every yin there is a yang. PZ makes a good justification of why it is necessary to push back against the forces of ignorance and idiocy in our society.
Posted by: Ken Cope | November 7, 2009 7:37 PM
Chill the fuck out with your bullshit, SGBMOM. Where do you get off calling me a liar?
Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | November 7, 2009 7:38 PM
My mailbox would depress you. I think I am notified about just about every dufus who pops up and demands public respect for his delusions.
Sooner or later one of our esteemed host's countless correspondents is going to join the ever-growing flaming flipout club, and every bit of it will, of course, be his fault.
Good thing all the minions are so stable, huh?
Posted by: strange gods before me, OM
|
November 7, 2009 7:41 PM
And no, the delusion is the symptom. You are talking about mocking the symptoms of mental illness, which is analogous to mocking the tumor.
Not in the USA. I don't know where you live.
Actually the hypothesis of meta-atheism predicts a pretty useful distinction here. Merely religious people tend not to actually act in accordance with their stated beliefs except in trivial ways that earn social reward. Mentally ill people tend to act in accordance with their delusions, with less regard for social sanction. Of course there is some overlap; since most people are religious, most mentally ill people are religious, and places like "charismatic" churches have little way of making a distinction.
Posted by: strange gods before me, OM
|
November 7, 2009 7:43 PM
Right there where you lie about what I said in no uncertain terms, Ken.
Posted by: A. Noyd
|
November 7, 2009 7:44 PM
strange gods before me (#87)
FFS, John Morales was right about the scare quotes and the other instances were qualified as pious compassion. Real compassion is something else, but it takes knowing way more about a person than the way they write emails or even that they are mentally ill. And I certainly don't want compassion just for being mentally ill because I do not see it as tragic. (Of course, not everyone has the same experience of mental illness as I do, but that's the damn point!)
(#89)
The assumption made was that this woman's crazy talk was specific to mental illness and that made it wrong to mock. Or, as Greta Christina said: "She doesn't seem 'crazy,' as in 'having some seriously wacky ideas.' She seems crazy, as in 'mentally ill.'" And that we shouldn't mock the "seriously wacky ideas" of mentally ill people. Well, why the fuck not? If you know that the person's actually ill and that their particular illness is responsible for their crazy talk and that what they're experiencing is something that won't respond to mockery, fine. But no one here has enough information to make that call and even knowing someone is mentally ill should not make mockery of their notions or person off limits.
(#101)
And that's another argument instead! I would agree that to mock people for the things they can't help is wrong. But that's not what I'm responding to. I'm responding to the idea that we shouldn't mock mentally ill people, period.
Posted by: A. Noyd
|
November 7, 2009 7:46 PM
Cath the Canberra Cook (#97)
Maybe skepticism can't help schizophrenia (I don't know enough about it to say), but it can help plenty of other sorts of mental illness. Though, really what would help is if more people around us clinical nutters were better skeptics. Nothing to make the world more surreal than a whole horde of "sane" people abandoning themselves to cultural delusions. Whee!
Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | November 7, 2009 7:50 PM
strange gods before me @ # 106: No, the compassionate thing to say is "you are wrong, the government is not conspiring against you."
I guess you haven't been following what's been happening to the Constitution, the economy, etc lately. Jensen per se may not have her very own personal conspiracy, but her general feelings of alarm are not totally mistaken.
Posted by: John Morales | November 7, 2009 7:50 PM
SGBM,
But it's not a dichotomy. Someone could both be ill and stupid, maybe even stupid because they are ill.
Posted by: Ken Cope | November 7, 2009 7:50 PM
I'm talking about mocking delusional ideas without making an immediate diagnosis of mental illness/tumors. Why not extend the benefit of the doubt that the person has never encountered the notion that such ideas are beyond the rational pale instead of presuming they're insane? If the discussion gets more crazy, rather than less, armchair diagnose away.
Posted by: Marcus Ranum | November 7, 2009 7:53 PM
strange gods before me, OM writes:
Mocking cancer doesn't make it better. Mocking mental illness doesn't make it better.
Compassion doesn't make it better, either.
Posted by: Ken Cope | November 7, 2009 7:57 PM
Right there where you lie about what I said in no uncertain terms, Ken.
Then why didn't you point out where and what I've misstated to show me where I'm mistaken and misunderstanding your point (since I'm trying to find out if we're shouting at each other more than we're disagreeing), rather than calling me a liar and bullshitter?
Posted by: Cogito | November 7, 2009 7:58 PM
I wouldn't have published the email. The person who wrote it is obviously unbalanced and possibly has a severe mental problem. And no, you can't honestly equate that with the regular stupidity from Bill Donohue and others like him. To do that is cruel towards the many millions of people who suffer from mental disorders. At the very least PZ could have omitted her name.
I'm all for taking a tough stand against mindless believers, but religion is not the main problem I see when I read this womans email.
Bad call, PZ.
Posted by: Blind Squirrel | November 7, 2009 8:01 PM
No, it does not. The schizoid may learn to avoid expressing certain symptoms around you, however. BSPosted by: strange gods before me, OM
|
November 7, 2009 8:01 PM
Well you misrepresented Greta to do it, and I responded to your dismissal of compassion for mentally ill people. There may have been a miscommunication between us, but I stand by my response to your initial statement.
Taking issue with the premise that she's mentally ill is not in itself objectionable.
Or what she actually said, which was that "The former deserves our mockery. The latter deserves our compassion." And that's true. People who are sick deserve compassion. Not fake compassion, which Greta never implied. Not "everyone should smile at you because you have a mental illness." No, you're an asshole so I'm telling you you're an asshole. You deserve it. Doesn't mean I wouldn't help you if you asked me for it, it's not as though I don't associate with assholes.
You took a completely unobjectionable thing out of her mouth and made it into something you decided was worth attacking.
Actually mocking someone's illness, though, is just fucked up.
Nothing to do with it. It's just fucked to mock people for being sick, and that's what mocking someone's symptoms -- be they delusions, depression, cluttered speech -- amounts to. Nobody who's sick actually benefits from mockery, but even if they aren't going to be seriously hurt by it, it's tasteless and inconsiderate just like mocking someone's cancer.
If someone who's ill slips on a banana peel, you know, point and laugh if you must. But the discussion here has been about mocking people for the symptoms of their illness.
Posted by: titmouse
|
November 7, 2009 8:03 PM
If a delusional person says something so weird it's funny... is it ok to laugh about it later when they're not around?
Posted by: John Morales | November 7, 2009 8:05 PM
Cogito,
PZ's post contains multiple emails. You only speak of one, apparently missing the point of the post.
Posted by: strange gods before me, OM
|
November 7, 2009 8:06 PM
Wrong, Marcus the Misanthrope. Compassion opens the avenue of trust, creating a social safety net that can act to prevent suicide and bring the person to medical attention.
Posted by: Blind Squirrel | November 7, 2009 8:08 PM
The professionals do, in a compassionate sort of way.
BS
Posted by: strange gods before me, OM
|
November 7, 2009 8:08 PM
I already did, Ken, right there in the comment you objected to. Personal attacks omitted this time so you aren't too distracted to actually read it:
Posted by: IaMoL | November 7, 2009 8:10 PM
And I thought I was sick of the TM ad invective syndrome on the other recent infamous thread. Where the hell is Bilbo when you need to hurl insults?
Posted by: Cogito | November 7, 2009 8:12 PM
>PZ's post contains multiple emails. You only speak of one, >apparently missing the point of the post.
Eh... John Morales, PZs post concerns one email that he published earlier today. Yes, in his follow up he qutes from several other emails, but what prompted this whole thread is a single email. You seem to not have noticed this, apparently missing the point of this whole thread.
Posted by: Kyorosuke | November 7, 2009 8:14 PM
I don't have any opinion on the issues at hand, but I'd just like to say that, next time someone says atheists are all dogmatic and march in lockstep with PZ as our Pope, that this thread should be exhibit A for the defense.
Posted by: strange gods before me, OM
|
November 7, 2009 8:14 PM
Could be stupid separately from ill, but I don't know of any mental illness that causes people to become stupid. Stress can lower IQ, but it's temporary and not a huge difference.
Posted by: strange gods before me, OM
|
November 7, 2009 8:26 PM
Ken, I've made it clear that I'm not talking about this woman. If she is not mentally ill, I'm not objecting to mockery. Same premise in general for anyone else.
I began by responding to A. Noyd who objected to Greta saying "mentally ill people deserve our compassion."
I said right from the beginning, "I don't have an opinion on whether or not this woman is mentally ill, but people who are mentally ill do need compassion the same as someone who is sick with cancer. Mocking cancer doesn't make it better. Mocking mental illness doesn't make it better. Cruelty to people who are already suffering is inhumane."
I couldn't have been any clearer about that.
But as for people who are mentally ill, your proposal of mockery as compassionate treatment is bullshit.
Urge them to get help if you think they might be mentally ill. And if you aren't "making an immediate diagnosis of mental illness/tumors" then who the hell are you urging to get help? This is incoherent.
Posted by: AJ | November 7, 2009 8:29 PM
Glenn Beck's awesome!
Posted by: John Morales | November 7, 2009 8:33 PM
Cogito @128:
I thought PZ opened with the point: "The concern trolls are very concerned. They are responding to my posting of Sonia/Tanja/Rosa/Whoevera Jensen's crazy email — she's disabled! She's mentally ill! It's cruel to post her wacky screeds publicly where people will point and laugh! You're picking on her!
[...]
No."
The post then addresses why not, and offers similar example emails as evidence for his opinion.
What is the point I apparently have missed, if not that?
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
November 7, 2009 8:47 PM
PZ has presented a large amount of crazy ideas being sent to him today. Whether the people spouting the crazy ideas are mentally ill or not is a moot point, and definitely beyond my expertise. Discussing and mocking the crazy ideas is not the same same as mocking the person. True mental illness requires compassion. Eccentricity in beliefs, not so much.
Posted by: Kismet | November 7, 2009 8:58 PM
I too disagree with "mentally ill people deserve our compassion."
Lack of compassion is not the same as mockery (as far as my grasp of English is concerned). Compassion alone doesn't make the illness better, either. So I think you are wrong in pointing out lack of compassion in and of itself as something detestable (again as far as I understand).
Fuck compassion. I'd prefer to actually *do* something about illness (e.g. donate money towards research).
Posted by: Ken Cope | November 7, 2009 8:59 PM
In the heat of posting I haven't been reading you carefully enough.I extend the courtesy and respect that the person is not mentally ill, mocking crazy beliefs (going so far as to say, "it's crazy to believe X," instead of reservedly claiming "X is wrong"). It isn't going to take much discussion to learn whether they're A: ignorant and wrong while wanting to believe that they are right, but not crazy B: religiously delusional, C: too crazy for an attempt at rational discussion to go anywhere, along with the caveat that the distinction between B and C can often be hard to make. I'm saying it's not compassionate or respectful to presume that the belief is held because of B or C; if they hold the belief because of B, it's going to take more discussion to find out whether they tend toward A or C.
I've been C, it's a constant struggle to avoid A, harder for me than avoiding B, at least for the last couple of decades. We appear to agree that mocking the idea is the point, that helping people avoid toxic, crazy ideas is good.
Posted by: A. Noyd
|
November 7, 2009 9:00 PM
strange gods before me (#121)
Did I? Really? What I saw was: crazy idea X is okay to mock if the person expressing it is sane, but if that person is mentally ill and expressing the same crazy idea X, then mocking it is wrong. Even if we take it to the level of mocking the person, there are plenty of times when a mentally ill person will be irrational just because most everyone is irrational, even loudly irrational, at times. It's not necessarily anything to do with mental illness. So insisting on different rules is a perversion of compassion, one that does mentally ill people no favors.
For being irritated by those who accidentally marginalize mentally ill people or submit us to well-meaning double standards out of the urge to be politically correct? Or for something I never actually said?
Again, this only works if you have detailed knowledge of the person in question which no one here does! It's the whole process of assuming and labeling and turning people into "others" going on here that's got me pissed off. If the case were that we knew enough to say definitely this woman's emails were symptomatic of a mental illness and that mocking the ideas in them would absolutely be bad for her, then sure, we ought not do it. But that's not what's going on.
Bullshit. Who's taking things out of people's mouths and making them into things worth attacking?
Posted by: Rorschach | November 7, 2009 9:06 PM
Problem is, and it's clearly visible in this thread, that
a) it's pretty silly to make a remote diagnosis about someone from an email
b) there is a continuum of conditions here rather then disctinct categories, from uneducated to stupid to willfully ignorant to harmlessly deluded to religiously deluded onwards to outright mentally ill, with lots of overlaps between them.
I dont know of anyone who would mock a mentally ill person, but the problem is really that the borders are not well-defined, and most people here probably would have no hesitation to mock the praying bus driver, or Sarah Palin's congregation speaking in voices.
As for the yelling contest going on, if someone would actually listen to A Noyd, he /she has said 2 very interesting things : that he/she doesnt want pious/pretense compassion and that real compassion takes a lot of knowledge about the person and their circumstances, and that mental illness isnt for him/her necessarily something tragic that he/she wants compassion for in the first place.
Posted by: BlueEyedVideot | November 7, 2009 9:17 PM
#80 Posted by: Antiochus Epiphanes
I visit this site because living in the bible belt makes me feel like I'm taking crazy pills. I just want to know that other people find irrational belief as exasperating as I do. Mockery and derision go along with that.
I, like you, live in the bible belt. And yes, I do find irrational belief as exasperating. I used to try and ignore the batshittery but that only seemed to make things worse: the lunatics began thinking I was one of them! Since then, I've found outright hostility rapidly makes my point and requires much less finesse. It also conveys a modicum of self-satisfaction not found in any other coping mechanism.
Posted by: A. Noyd
|
November 7, 2009 9:19 PM
Thanks for hearing me, Rorschach. And I'm a she. (Damn English and its lack of a decent neuter pronoun.)
I'm also going out for a few hours, so I'm dropping the yelling contest for now.
Posted by: Caine
|
November 7, 2009 9:20 PM
Well, I'm with A. Noyd on this one. Two very good friends of mine, who I am very close with are mentally ill. (Different illnesses). What matters most to them both is that they are treated normally. That doesn't usually happen, people get weird when they find out someone has a mental illness. A lot of times, that weirdness springs from misplaced compassion. (Or misplaced sympathy or pity.)
I don't have the least problem saying "are you effin' crazy?" to either of my friends, if the circumstances warrant it. Most everyone else is too busy wandering about on tiptoes trying not to crush eggshells and other bullshit.
As for bizarre emails, well, a lot of people out there have very strange ideas and beliefs; I'm not qualified to armchair diagnose, but I wouldn't automatically assume mental illness. Especially from one email.
Posted by: Sameer | November 7, 2009 9:32 PM
Umm.. kind of like a social security number. When I came to the country, I couldn't get a credit card or a bank account without a social security number. So I couldn't buy anything that couldn't be bought with cash (which was limited to the traveler's checks I could cash). I am going to refer to it henceforth as the number of the beast!!
Posted by: AJ Milne | November 7, 2009 9:37 PM
Man... so it's fuck those who figure mebbe there's a line at which the mentally ill do deserve compassion... fuck those who don't...
I dunno, man... I just wanna get along, knamean? Trying not to choose sides here...
So... umm...
Well, fuck you all, I guess...
(I felt the need to say this... to someone... to anyone... but honestly, it comes more from a weekend of arbitrating between my spouse who hates my parents and my parents who don't seem to know why... anyway...)
Somewhat more seriously, there's this alienating egoism about so many of these people. I find I mostly want to ask 'em: listen, what makes you think I give a rat's ass what you think your god is telling you? He or she or it sounds like a fucking moron, honestly... Enough already. No one asked him...
(/Or you, for that matter... and in related news...)
Posted by: FlameDuck | November 7, 2009 10:03 PM
First of all, what qualifications do people have, who are capable of giving such a specific medical diagnosis, on the basis of a single e-mail? Shit I must have spent a small fortune on Psychiatrists over the years dealing with my paranoia and bipolar personality disorder. Too bad I didn't know that all I really needed to do was send a crazy mail to PZ Myers, pray he posted it on his blog, and wait for y'all to jump in and diagnose me.
I invoke Occams Razor. You assume that she is mentally ill. I assume nothing, other than that her ideas are stupid, which by the way is demonstrably true. So until you have any evidence at all, in the form of a proper medical diagnosis, or a prescription for psychopharmaca, your concerns don't count for much.
Also the idea that she must be medically insane, because she knows how to spell check an e-mail is just absurd. Crazy people like Kent Hovind don't make spelling mistakes in his emails either, which apparently proves that he must be clinically insane, because for some reason high school graduates, or someone with a similar level of education can't also be stupid? Literacy is a poor metric for a persons intelligence, not to mention sanity.
#124 I haven't really met anyone with cancer who thought suicide was a way out. Of course the only people I knew who had cancer (Leukemia) were much too young to care about compassion. They wanted to have fun while they still could. When you're terminally ill, compassion doesn't count for much. They get it all the time. What they want, in my experience, is someone who's not too much of a pussy to be a real friend, and be there for them when they need it. People who feel sorry for them, come by all the time. All the nurses and doctors, family and friends. Sometimes they just need someone to raise hell with. Be that person, and I swear you won't have any regrets when they're gone.
Posted by: Pacal | November 7, 2009 10:48 PM
Well has someone who as worked with "Consumer Survivors" and been nuts myself I can tell you that patronizing "compassion" is absolutely despised by the Mentally ill. Esspecially those severely ill. I could give a very long list of the patronizing, condescending shit I and so many of my friends got from "concerned" people. There is compassion and then there is "compassion". Real compassion treats you like a real person and doesn't patronize you and that includes telling you when your delusional, not this patronizing shit that tries to avoid upsetting you and handles you like your a fragile doll. Those who were really there for you didn't put up with addled crap but were there for you, supporting and helping you cope. Patronizing condescenion doesn't help at all. Now I agree that that making fun of a person whose is ill is wrong but I see nothing wrong in pointing out someones delusions are ridiculous. I had quite enough of patronizing shit when I was ill and so did my friends, so much so that I loathed someone using me as an excuse to feel good by being "compassionate" to me.
I also note that me and my friends were pretty good about making jokes about our various, phobias, paranoid delusions, hallucinations, bipolar episodes and general nuttiness. Along with with joking about our treatments, medications and the way so many people walked on eggshells around us. Well All I can say is lighten up.
As for this example given by P.Z. I see no evidence given here that the writer is mentally ill in any way just that she is stupid, which is hardly a mental illness and far too common.
Posted by: Gilgamesh | November 7, 2009 10:58 PM
PZ, I check into your blog several times a day to see if there is anything new. I have admired your writing. This evening, after earlier having written a post going against the grain I bring up Pharyngula to find you have written a screed aimed at myself and a few others. I have not commented much in your blog because I read every post to date of each entry so I don't repeat what another commenter has written, I've tried to be civil and kind. Now you write a post that derides me, a nobody to you, and you call me a 'concern troll'. Even adding in an attempt at derisive humour.
PZ, I remember profs like you during my university years. I quickly learned to agree with them and kiss their ass or my grade would slip. In all the time I've read this blog, I don't remember once hearing you say that you might be wrong.
All I can say is: Fuck You, Fuck you in the ass.
Posted by: Gruesome Rob | November 7, 2009 11:07 PM
@Gilgamesh:
I'm not PZ, nor am I a professor. Telling you straight, you look like a concern troll from the posts of yours I've seen today. I don't blame PZ for calling it at all.
Posted by: Gilgamesh | November 7, 2009 11:20 PM
Fuck You Gruesome Rob, is that rude enough?
Posted by: John Morales | November 7, 2009 11:25 PM
Gilgamesh,
Surely not you specifically? :)
Um. That's quite an insinuation, and baseless in terms of this post.
I suspect some emotional investment here.
Had I posted something which PZ in a latter OP characterised as trollish, I'd reconsider it and then maybe respond.
I'd probably not do it when in a snit, though.
Posted by: MadScientist | November 7, 2009 11:28 PM
I'd just like to point out that Pam McLaurin was being honest when she said that her fingerprints would be the mark of the beast. However, that is still no excuse to refuse to be fingerprinted. She may, however, subject herself to a biblical stoning (as opposed to a hippy stoning).
Posted by: Antiochus Epiphanes | November 7, 2009 11:46 PM
Some comfort for the screwballs:
Matt 5,11: "Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me".
Posted by: Bride of Shrek OM
|
November 7, 2009 11:58 PM
Well, there really is only the half full and half empty kind of people aren't there.
...now me, if my esteemed Evil Overlord (tm) wrote about me in a post, ANY post, I'd be totally fucking flattered instead of bitching about it.
At any rate, get a grip, he didn't mention you in any way personally and probably doesn't even know you exist so I rather think you've got a serious case of egotistical, self-centred, little whiny shitness happening.
Posted by: Peter G.
|
November 8, 2009 12:15 AM
Alright so sometimes you've just got to club those baby seals. Am I the only person who found Sonia's letter incredibly funny. The earnest ignorance and religious mania makes a fine combination. I'd say she's ready to stand for parliament. It's just a matter of finding the right party. I'm thinking NDP.
Posted by: Gruesome Rob | November 8, 2009 12:37 AM
OK, you're not a concern troll, you're just a troll.
Posted by: lneely | November 8, 2009 12:37 AM
oh, pz, you must have not received the memo. we can't call crazy people "insane" anymore, they don't like that word. we have to call them differently sane to be politically correct...
Posted by: The Chemist | November 8, 2009 12:37 AM
@MadScientist #150
"However, that is still no excuse to refuse to be fingerprinted."
You need an excuse?
Posted by: Sean | November 8, 2009 12:50 AM
I know this is a bit of a tangent, but what is the rationale behind fingerprinting school teachers?
I mean, what is the threat model they are protecting against by collecting fingerprints?
Kidnapping students? Kidnapping teachers? Stealing school supplies? Some sort of fraud?
-S
Posted by: Peter G.
|
November 8, 2009 1:07 AM
@157 Fingerprinting is usually part of a background check. I don't know about the US but up here in Canuckistan it is quite common for any position where contact with children is involved. I did some volunteer tutoring for the local school board and it was required even for that.
Posted by: Bruce Gorton | November 8, 2009 2:06 AM
Speaking of crazy, anybody with shares in Goldman Sachs? Sell 'em.
http://www.timeslive.co.za/business/article183880.ece
Goes from needing a bailout to giving $20bn in bonuses, and then invokes God - something definitely fishy is going on there.
Posted by: Falciparthem | November 8, 2009 2:22 AM
Has anyone considered the possibility that our subject, Tanja, is the alter ego...pardon the pun...of a saber rattling atheist?
Posted by: MikeM | November 8, 2009 2:25 AM
I can't differentiate between the religious and the insane anyway.
As an aside, it sure is hard to comment using a WII... Speaking of going insane...
Posted by: Feynmaniac | November 8, 2009 2:28 AM
"Isn't it interesting that religious behavior is so close to being crazy we can't tell them apart?" - House
Posted by: bobxxxx | November 8, 2009 2:31 AM
That logic would mean we'd have to restrain ourselves from mocking Glenn Beck or rebuking Michele Bachmann. They're no less crazy than Sonia Jensen, after all.
The pastors and preachers of America are equally crazy. They are compulsive liars and they make a living from mentally abusing millions of children. They need to be attacked and ridiculed relentlessly. Preachers have caused more damage to the future of this country than the 9/11 terrorists. They deserve to be treated like terrorists.
Posted by: C.W | November 8, 2009 2:38 AM
I was drunk. Don't know about the other concern trolls.The point is that it's a good idea to pick your battles. A lone headcase like Jensen is just sad. Crazy people with actual power, like Bachmann and the dowsing police, is fair game IMO.
Posted by: bobxxxx | November 8, 2009 2:38 AM
James said the bus driver asked him and three other passengers to join hands in prayer. James said the driver prayed with the group for about four minutes.
What the fuck? People like that belong in prison.
The wimps who obeyed that asshole should be ashamed of themselves.
Posted by: Rorschach | November 8, 2009 2:50 AM
Feyny @ 162,
The medicine depicted in House is often ludicruous and I dont often watch it for that reason, but I liked that line a lot, and also them picking "As tears go by" as ending music in the spisode where he is admitted to the Psych hospital.
We should really have a new internet law for this, analogous to Poe's law, something down the lines of :
Without a medical certificate from a MH professional or other objective signs and symptoms of mentall illness as defined by the DSM, it is impossible to create a resemblance of mental illness that SOMEONE won't mistake for the real thing.[1]
Posted by: Dan | November 8, 2009 2:55 AM
I think this may help you to understand;
Years ago,after leaving the armed services, I was abducted by Grays that are working for "the Federation".
The Federation is "a NATO type organization", of Grays,
Reptilian, Moth men,(all non human types about 42 different beings mostly violent military males ) different recessive beings too, that are discussed in various
contact books, and thousands of internet sites for the smart people to learn and study.
I was taken to the Federation by physical, barely visible in our spectrum.. I used infrared/spectrum lenses goggles,to see them
race of sub space beings. Regressive Beings working with Grays, called the White Brotherhood. After my negative experiances
of many years I learned from the Grays themselves ,(they abducted me for sperm, surgical removal, as they do with womens eggs all around the world),
This is what I know to be true: 1. all extraterrestrials are physical carbon based,
silicon based, or molecular based beings,including the ones who use magnetic field tecnology to cloak themselves, travel or
appear as a humans, i.e. stable plasmon technology. These technologies can be detected with geiger counters,
and magnetic field detectors sold "on line", directional is preferred....find the electrical devices on them,and around them in their nearby craft.
For your homes and cars..some of the Gray and reptilian devices can be disrupted by Mhz frequency devices built at home,
someone could make a small fortune selling better portable particle and wave detection, and disruption devices for our pockets.
High voltage tazer weapons as well, work. As with hand held powerful battery operated magnets,in close proximaty some can interfere
with gray technologies. Magnetic shielding paint can shield a room in your house where no EMF or ELF is detected! Other
races of sub space
beings have technology that I have seen, are defended against with hand lasers, built at home!!
2.Critical, we are not the only humans in the universe or multiverse...there are humans from Lyra, Pleadians,
Andromidan, Cassiopeian, Simion and billions more! 3, Even more important the Gray Federation is using Religion to "Dumb Down",
all of us on earth. 3. All Religions are false, there is no god, only Extraterrestrials and human support groups from other
worlds, the earths which NASA is just now locating are inhabited.
Our military is being attacked by the Grays ,(google on the internet), and
Reptilian Federation all the time, all the time, The shootings at Army bases world wide are mind controlled by the Gray Federation,
as is the sweat lodge incident , 911, and the current state of our economy and health...chem trails,
( 8-120 MHZ broadband mind control technologies piggybacked on T.V. cell phone and cable, important for you to remember).
A strategy used by the Grays and others is to mind control in the name of Religions, a not so well informed
person into doing the killing or attack on our government. Obama needs to know this as he has been manipulated openly by the federated grays,
those of us who understand Gray, Reptilian Military mind control Strategy and Tactics( for example...
Jesus is my mentor and I
am speaking with him now, no!! Jesus is dead It was told to me Jesus did exist , but he is dead it's an ET who learned earth languages.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)
It is not Obamas fault,
nor is it Hilliary Clintons fault...it was not President Kennedy fault, but the Gray military Federation did kill him in part
because the Grays and others did not want us in Space.
It's being done mainly because these other types of ET"s, Grays, reptilian Snake beings, insectoid which are more technically advanced
and regressive in the way they think and act are working together against humans, abducting women for there experiments etc.
As we speak somewhere on earth a child is being abducted for food by the reptilians, and or for DNA by the grays I know!!!
There are technologies you can buy to protect yourselves, guns, tazers high volts, mind brain protection velostat caps,velostat 3M
shielding material also works in many labs with high emf use.
at home depot, particle dectors magnetic particle detectors...Critical infrared binoculars,
portable magnetic field room detectors, they have through chem trails and dropping poisons form the ships into our water supply,
use water filters and A/C hepa filters, our government needs to do more to protect its population.!! WE must invent
better ways of protection against these recessive extraterrestrial races, mind defense technologies and home shielding as well
as robots to detect and defend!!!
Have extra food at home for your family, it is no coincidence that in the movies on
abduction and on aliens we are seeing a lot of ET films, on T.V. "V", house, etc...They are signaling massive problems ahead,
maybe another war? The humans from hollywood, like me are trying to through this note, and films to
inform you of the risks we are in! 2012, alien mind control, H1N1 gray federation attacks on humans.
The Gray Federation ruined myself and family like they did with Alex collier, and Billy Meir, Michael Salla and others... I know about the
Photon belt we are entering please look it up on the internet...many friendly human races are trying to help us now
When I was at the Gray army here in Santa FE, N.M.base, I did see many things, I have a PhD, I'M a quick learner and
can now read their sumerian type alphabet and words... I was taken on one type of craft they use, how they fly and what they use in them...the saucer
shaped craft use electrical batteries as propulsion power, in the middle of some saucers there is a large circular ceiling to floor
barrel structure it contains lithium type batteries extremely high voltage charges. The craft are made of layered and compressed metals titanium compounds,
the outer skin is electrified to reduce and eliminate drag and atmospheric resistance. Inside the saucer is a network of Compressed
frequency transmitting fiber optics for controls and for ON BOARD GUIDENCE SYSTEMS, SIMPLE. THEY USE THE EARTHS MAGNETIC AND GRAVATATIONAL FIELDS TO FLY.
THE COPPER CLINDER CIRCLES ON TOP OF THE CRAFT AND BOTTOM SPIN, PICTURE TWO SMALLER CIRCULAR DISKS ON TOP AND BOTTOM
SPINING INDEPENDENTLY OF THE SAUCER. THEY CHARGE UP..THAT DIFFERENTIAL OF CHARGES INTERACTS
WITH A PLANETS OR SPACES MAGNETIC FIELDS FOR LIFT AND MOVEMENT. THE SAUCERS ARE SHIELDED TO PREVENT EXPLOSIONS AND TO PREVENT
MAGNETIC FIELD INTERACTIVITY......(THE OUTER SHELL IS CHARGED UP TO FLY W/O RESEISTANCE, IT STINGS when touched electrical pulse).
...I'M NOT A PHYSICS MAJOR BUT DID STUDY SOME ENGENERING.
They are trying to mind control our socities through Mhz frequency control, we think in about 11-80 Mhz,
and they use computers and oscilloscope combo. type MRI type equipment to read thoughts as we read print or a scientist reads peaks on a
graph, as well as gravitational field tech. to beam in false info.
Shield your brains and spinal cords!!!
All of our military and armed forces should wear velostat (signal protection electrical grounded materials on your head)
caps and monitor the frequency changes around them, the
government of the USA ours, needs to be informed of the grays methods and take steps to help each other, protect our
families people this is real....(people in Britian were not ready, prepared for WWII, Study military history )
...(we have a very weak and complacent military/police/NSA/CIA/) The Grays have even infiltrated some gov't individuals
in these agencies.......................!!! Just because you were in church on sunday and you see people speaking in tongs,
falling to the floor, and saying they are talking to god? there is no god only ET groups, ET governments.
Love
Dan
P.S. This was written under partial duress......they know where I live. Pass the info on.
The Federated reptilian/gray/insectoid societies are using harmful
technology to harm the human mind, causing
memory loss and fatigue...FIGHT BACK, I use the above mentioned technology
and when I go out and they start to harm my body with high intensity back spasm devices
i.e. microwave, particle , mind control. I use my mind and picture each attacker
being attacked by me. They hate loud music, food odors, perfumes, light, and our
minds killing them...! I keep a gun and tazer by my side always now!!!
Listen to this highly educated old man, if you see a craft these are not dolls, these are recessive
violent, harmful, controlling alien males..read the info on the net with a grain of salt,
why haven't they come forward? They wont because of violent abductions, use logic.
Protect your brains!!! stay away from them, Betty and Barney Hill were assaulted,
all of the abduction cases are harmful rape and kidnapping humans, we in the USA have laws
against these crimes yet our government turns in another direction. Because they control some
people in our not one world gov't yet.
Space is alot more crowded than most people know, extremely dangerous NASA knows..Our Rocket
systems and defense systems are frail...
Connect the dots.........biology, secrect governments, mind control, abductions,
alien tecnologies genetic and magnetic, and we wonder where
they come from reverse designs from crashed UFO...dreams!
Posted by: Greta Christina | November 8, 2009 3:08 AM
Okay.
First: I'm a little puzzled. A. Noyd, and others who have critiqued my comment: Where, precisely, in my comment, did you get the idea that the compassion I'm calling for is fake, or pious, or deserving to be put in quotation marks? What, precisely, did I say to lead you to that conclusion?
It seems that my comment was a pretty straightforward call for compassion. And while compassion with mental illness can mean many different things with many different people in many different contexts -- including shared humor with people you're close to who have a sense of humor about their illness -- I am hard-pressed to think of a context in which it might mean "publicly mocking what is very likely a symptom of mental illness in someone you don't know and clearly don't respect."
Second: I'm going to agree with strange gods before me, OM (mainly #76 and #124). When it comes to mental illness, mockery does not generally help. It generally alienates and antagonizes. Compassion creates a bond of trust. It does help.
Again, compassion can take many forms. I have mentally ill friends and family members: with some I show compassion with twisted, fucked-up humor -- a humor they themselves are using to deal with their illness. With others I show it by taking their illness very seriously. Others, sadly, seem to be largely beyond compassion and help, and I show my compassion as best I can just being with them peacefully and not trying to help at all. (Long, sad, awful story.) But I don't see how, with any of them, compassion would translate as "having a private correspondence with a stranger held up for mockery and derision in a public forum."
Third: There's a commonly-held and very mistaken idea being expressed by some in this thread: the idea that, when dealing with mentally ill people with delusions, all you have to do is point out their delusions and show them evidence that they're mistaken, and that'll clear it right up. This is what my wife Ingrid (a nurse practitioner who works with many mentally ill people) calls the "hedgehog" error, from the fourth book in the Hitchhiker's Guide trilogy, where someone says about a purportedly mentally ill person who purportedly thought she was a hedgehog (paraphrasing here), "Well, not a hedgehog. Presumably if someone thinks they're a hedgehog, all you have to do is show them a mirror and a few pictures of hedgehogs, and that'll clear it right up."
It doesn't clear it right up. If someone has (for instance) delusional parasitosis, you can spend all day trying to prove to them that they don't have bugs on them, you can even show them them the "bugs" under a microscope to prove to them that they're bits of lint and not bugs... and it doesn't work. If anything, it just makes them more agitated -- and less likely to trust you. Delusions don't work that way. That's part of what makes them delusions.
Again: I don't know if Sonia/ Tanja Jensen qualifies as "clinically ill people who need medical/psychiatric help." I'm not a psychiatrist, and even if I were I doubt that I'd be diagnosing people over one email. But I think it's a distinct, non-trivial possibility. Very possible. Likely, even. And given that, my judgment call would not have been to mock her beliefs in a public forum as if they were just garden-variety silly religious beliefs.
Posted by: Ken Cope | November 8, 2009 3:10 AM
If you are viewing this film, then we are under extraterrestrial attack. Beware! Your brain may no longer be the boss.
Posted by: Ken Cope | November 8, 2009 3:21 AM
GC, can you show me where anybody was proposing finding people who are obviously mentally ill and mocking them? Should obviously crazy ideas not be mocked? Personally, I'm not going to go over this line of argumentation again and expect a different result, but hey, knock yourself out.
Posted by: Greta Christina | November 8, 2009 3:22 AM
Kyorosuke #129:
At which point, it'll used as evidence of a Deep Rift in the atheist movement. We can't win.
Posted by: Ken Cope | November 8, 2009 3:27 AM
More like Rorschach @138, please.
Posted by: Caine
|
November 8, 2009 3:40 AM
Greta Christina @ #168:
I think it's pretty damn silly for anyone to assume someone is mentally ill on the basis of an email.
Also, it's pretty insulting and condescending to automatically equate believes in moonbatty things to someone who has a mental illness. The people I know with mental illnesses are smart and rational. Obviously, this is not always the case. As it has been pointed out in this thread, regular people, with no mental illness, believe a lot of truly weird shit. Spend three days, hell, spend three hours reading Rapture Ready and you'll be tempted to start sending out strait jackets.
As I see it, crying "oh, they're possibly mentally ill" has become the annoying new way to say "shhh, pat them on the shoulder, say there, there and we'll say no more about it." If someone has specific beliefs and takes the time to spread it all over the net, they want people to read what they think. If the basic response is negative, hey, that's a chance you take when you put your thoughts out there. The beliefs, opinions, etc., of any given person are fair game, and that's primarily what people responded to, not the person themselves.
Being taken at face value is better than a bunch of people saying shhhhhh, don't talk about it!
Posted by: Rorschach | November 8, 2009 3:40 AM
Greta Christina stating the obvious @ 168 :
Duh.Im glad we cleared that up.
And then this :
Ahem.So you're not a psychiatrist,but that doesnt keep you from making the uninformed guess that the person is mentally ill? I think that's rather not good critical thinking.
The problem is, as I will happily point out again, that certain utterings are indistinguishable from mental illness.Whether the person making it is just stupid or cognitively impaired, or actually really outright mentally ill, or a just making shit up and lying, it's hard to tell !
Posted by: Greta Christina | November 8, 2009 3:45 AM
Ken Cope #170:
Among other places:
Most explicitly:
Elaine #8: "I don't think anyone tried to stop NASA from doing the moon test based on Sonia/Tania/Tanja's email, but her brand of Bible-based lunacy drives a lot of public policy, because other people hera it and believe it. That is dangerous and often ridicule is a good way to get people to stop believing something stupid. Sorry if it seems mean, but I honestly think it is a useful deterrent against the non-crazy people following the crazy people."
Ken Cope #73: "It is not compassionate to pretend somebody's ideas aren't crazy, or fail to urge them to get help. If mockery is the two by four that gets their attention, then employing it is compassionate."
A. Noyd #81: "What I'm talking about is this pious compassion where, rather than understanding the situation of the person in question, everyone automatically makes them exempt from criticism and mockery just by the fact of the person's mental illness (or perceived mental illness)!"
Ken Cope again, #92: "Mockery is an attention getter, as is shunning, seventy-two hour holds, and other forms of intervention when people go 5150."
A Noyd again, #112: "Or, as Greta Christina said: "She doesn't seem 'crazy,' as in 'having some seriously wacky ideas.' She seems crazy, as in 'mentally ill.'" And that we shouldn't mock the "seriously wacky ideas" of mentally ill people. Well, why the fuck not?" (snip for space) "Even knowing someone is mentally ill should not make mockery of their notions or person off limits."
And of course, PZ in the actual post:
"It's cruel to post her wacky screeds publicly where people will point and laugh! You're picking on her! No." (snip) "I guess I'm one of those people who will continue to say that stupidity, ignorance, and even mental illness do not demand that people stand silent when victims of those afflictions thrust themselves forward and demand respect for their views."
More subtly elsewhere, but I don't have the energy to pull it all out right now, and this comment is getting too long anyway.
Posted by: Feynmaniac | November 8, 2009 3:48 AM
Rorschach,
Good points.
Despite the pressure from my mother I never went to medical school, so I don't catch most of the bad medicine. From what I hear it's more accurate than most medical shows (though that isn't saying much). However, there are times where even a layman is snorting at their medicine.
Posted by: Ray Moscow | November 8, 2009 4:02 AM
Yes, rudeness is sometimes the best approach.
Friends sometimes ask me how I expect to "change the mind" of people saying or writing crazy stuff if I'm rude to them in response. Well, I don't usually set out to be rude, but often I just ridicule the position in it's not even the rational ballpark.
It's not just that I want to convince the wacko of a more reasonable view -- that's usually impossible. I just want them to stop posting crazy stuff without at least considering whether it's true. IOW, get it out of my face.
Posted by: Greta Christina | November 8, 2009 4:14 AM
Rorschach #174:
I don't need to be a psychiatrist to make a reasonable educated guess that the person marching every day on Market Street with the sign saying "Impeach Clinton 12 Galaxies Guiltied to a Dectrological Rocket Society" stands a very good chance of being mentally ill. Or the guy who paints his skin orange and writes 20-page longhand letters to the newspapers about numerology. Or the woman standing half-dressed in the middle of the street screaming.
I'm not competent to make a medical diagnosis, of course. But I am competent to draw a reasonable layperson's conclusion that, in these cases, mental illness is likely... and to act accordingly.
It is sometimes hard to tell. I don't disagree with that. The line between "basically functional people with batshit ideas" and "clinical mental illness" is often blurry. I just didn't get that from this particular letter. To me -- and again, yes, this is a layperson's conclusion and not a psychiatric evaluation, see above -- this letter screamed "clinical mental illness" almost as loudly as the guy with the "12 Galaxies" sign. Or at least, if it was on the blurry gray area, it was close enough to the "clinical mental illness" side of that blur that I would have erred on the side of treating it as such... and done the author the kindness of ignoring it rather than holding her up to public mockery.
If PZ genuinely thinks she's not mentally ill, that's one thing. But he basically said that he didn't care one way or the other: that he saw no reason to treat the crazy religious beliefs of the mentally ill any differently from the crazy beliefs of the stupid and ignorant. That's what I don't agree with.
Posted by: Greta Christina | November 8, 2009 4:18 AM
Rorschach #174:
I don't need to be a psychiatrist to make a reasonable educated guess that the person marching every day on Market Street with the sign saying "Impeach Clinton 12 Galaxies Guiltied to a Dectrological Rocket Society" stands a very good chance of being mentally ill. Or the guy who paints his skin orange and writes 20-page longhand letters to the newspapers about numerology. Or the woman standing half-dressed in the middle of the street screaming.
I'm not competent to make a medical diagnosis, of course. But I am competent to draw a reasonable layperson's conclusion that, in these cases, mental illness is likely... and act accordingly.
It is sometimes hard to tell. I don't disagree with that. The line between "basically functional people with batshit ideas" and "clinical mental illness" is often blurry. I just didn't get that from this particular letter. To me -- and again, yes, this is a layperson's conclusion and not a psychiatric evaluation, see above -- this letter screamed "clinical mental illness" almost as loudly as the guy with the "12 Galaxies" sign. Or at least, if it was on the blurry gray area, it was close enough to the "clinical mental illness" side of that blur that I would have erred on the side of treating it as such... and done the author the kindness of ignoring it rather than holding her up to public mockery.
If PZ genuinely thinks she's not mentally ill, that's one thing. But he basically said that he didn't care one way or the other: that he saw no reason to treat the crazy religious beliefs of the mentally ill any differently from the crazy beliefs of the stupid and ignorant. That's what I don't agree with.
Posted by: Walton | November 8, 2009 4:42 AM
I don't, actuallly, think it's material whether or not a person is mentally ill in a strict clinical sense. We should always be compassionate, regardless of this.
Our society tends to operate on the assumption that any adult, who is not mentally ill or otherwise incapacitated, is morally responsible for his or her actions and deserves to take the consequences of those actions. But I do not believe that this is the case. In the real world, capacity is a sliding scale, not a simple binary state. For most people, there are a variety of factors which diminish their responsibility for their actions and choices. People do not make decisions in a vacuum; "absolute free will" is a myth. And just as a mentally ill person is not morally responsible for his or her condition, neither can unintelligent or overly credulous people be blamed for being unintelligent or credulous. It isn't their fault.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying we shouldn't attack successful blithering idiots like Bill Donohue or Glenn Beck. These people have embarked on a career path which puts them constantly in the public eye, and they earn fat salaries for ranting in public about their pet political and religious causes - so fielding criticism and personal attacks from their opponents goes with the territory. It's part of their job, and they certainly get paid well enough for it. But this isn't one of those cases.
I said the same thing on Ed Brayton's blog, when he started ripping into an obscure blogger called "Pat" who had foolishly picked a fight with him. Pat was an unemployed, overweight 37-year-old former truck driver who lived with his parents, and who clearly suffered from emotional problems. I thought it was incredibly unpleasant of Ed to attack him, and I said so (repeatedly). When a person's life is already in the doldrums, why deliberately make it worse for them? It's like kicking a beggar on the street. Ed reacted, of course, exactly the same way Professor Myers did: by becoming all defensive, and saying that, in the absence of evidence of mental illness, he was going to carry on attacking Pat. Both bloggers seem to subscribe to the erroneous assumption that, unless a person is demonstrably mentally ill, he or she is fully responsible for his or her behaviour and deserves to suffer for it. This is the kind of attitude I hate.
Posted by: Aquaria | November 8, 2009 4:48 AM
#177:
The problem, of course, the notion of "rude" is arbitrary. It's rude when a godtard asks me, "What church do you go to?" and I reply, "I don't go to church." "Why not?" "Because I don't believe in that stuff." Much wailing and gnashing of teeth ensues at that point. It's "rude" when an atheist expresses himself honestly and openly, but it's A-OK for fundies to spout remarks so stupid and/or bizarre that it's impossible to tell if they're what Rorshach described upstairs about being stupid, ignorant, cognitively impaired, the ravings of mental illness, or flat out lying and making shit up. Who can tell, really?
I'm sorry, I'm tired of that subset of people who think they're entitled to respect, no matter what. This is the crux of the problem, because people have for too long conflated respect for ideas with respect for people, and this fallacy has successfully ruined the good sense of huge swaths of kind-hearted people who otherwise know better, never mind being fully capitalized on by people who don't have the best intentions.
Here is the reality: Beyond a basic respect for one's existence as a being, respect is earned. Period. Criminals deserve to be treated respectfully and humanely, but that does not exempt them from punishments in line with the seriousness of their offences. Likewise, people who post their ideas in a forum as typically anonymous as the Internet don't automatically get more than respect for their humanity. The ideas they spout are fair game. I understand about compassion for those with mental illness; I've walked down that road, too, until I got treatment for it. But where do we draw the line between respecting people and the ideas they express?
I am not--repeat, not--going to excuse every frothing fundie nutbar's ranting as the product of mental illness. Not without some good hard evidence of said illness. Too many of the deluded faithful would think nothing of hiding behind the very real problems of the mentally ill, to make themselves exempt from criticism. Even when they're not quite that Machiavellian, some perfectly normal people IRL will say things exactly like what we saw from Sonia or Tania or whatever her name is. Anyone who doubts it needs to visit Texas sometime. In the land of "Houston, we have a problem," we have plenty of people walking around free, and even holding positions of authority and power, too many of them fully armed, who say crazier things than that, and no one thinks they're the least mentally ill. For example: John Hagee--he says crazy things, but I have no doubt the man is perfectly sane. Same thing goes with the other Jebus freaks. What they say can be despicable, stupid, ignorant, and self-serving, but the person saying such things is nevertheless (and more than likely) bereft of any mental illness other than religious indoctrination.
In fact, I'd go so far as to say that it's an insult to the mentally ill to compare the fundie nutbars to them. They're not in the same league. Not by a long shot.
Posted by: John Morales | November 8, 2009 5:02 AM
Walton:
By your own contention you don't think PZ or Ed are fully responsible for their behaviour, so perhaps you should be a little milder in tone.
I guess it's OK though; after all, I wouldn't want to erroneously assume you are fully responsible for your own behaviour.
Um.
Posted by: Aquaria | November 8, 2009 5:05 AM
Walton:
I understand what you're saying, but, sorry--this guy had no remorse about publishing the personal data of an online personality in an attempt to intimidate that personality. What's pathetic in this instance is that Pat was so stupid he posted the wrong person's data.
I've seen this happen too often. Here are just two of the many examples: One of my friends over at Atrios who started his own blog was outed, when he didn't want to be, simply because a perfectly sane idiot couldn't best him in a very silly argument. Fox News published the personal residence data of conservative CNN commentator Tucker Carlson over some bland remarks he made that wasn't in lockstep with the Bush cult worship. I am not kidding.
The wingnuts consistently employ this tactic, to intimidate their opponents. They deserve all the scorn they get for resorting to it.
Posted by: Bruce Gorton | November 8, 2009 5:07 AM
Okay, just to give my opinion on this:
A person who is mentally ill is the equivelant of a child, they can't be held 100% accountable for their actions. It is basically beating up on criples to treat them as laughing stocks.
In that regard, I agree with Greta Christina.
That said, I think the guiding line is this: We don't actually know that she is insane.
We live in a world where a fair chunk of the world's major superpower believes the world was created in 7 days by a being that got so angry over a bit of scrumping it damned all of humanity, yet forgave humanity of all of its sins after it got nailed to a tree.
We live in a world where people will trust Jenny McCarthy, a complete moron who just happens to be famous, before their medically trained doctor. We live in a world where people still kill children for being witches and where a guy can shoot up a military base shouting "Allah ackbar" without it being about religion.
We live in a world where TV presenters blame liberal elitist college professor atheists for random street crime.
And these people we live in the world with - aren't insane. Without a qualified medical opinion I can't say whether the letter was written by someone who is actually mad - and nor could PZ Myers.
And I think that is what PZ means when he says that it doesn't matter - we can't assume she is insane so we can't make allowances for that, hence we treat it as though it is from a sane person and laugh at it.
Posted by: vanharris
|
November 8, 2009 5:16 AM
OT
Congratulations, America, & President Obama.
Posted by: Bruce Gorton | November 8, 2009 5:23 AM
Now onto the second thing that got me here: Concern trolling.
There is a bit of a problem with it - its making us a bit insane ourselves. We seem to be starting to hit the problem where legitimate concerns are being brushed aside because we are so used to the BS spouted by fatheists and their ilk, that when there really is something that makes people uncomfortable we act like its just another person telling us to shut up.
I think we need to be aware that not everyone who tells us we are looking a bit assholish is a concern troll - sometimes we do things that make us look a bit assholish.
I am not saying try to behave better if you don't see anything wrong with what you write, but rather pay some attention to the other side of the argument.
Posted by: Rorschach | November 8, 2009 5:23 AM
vanharris @ 185,
here's the link:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/11/08/health.care/index.html?eref=rss_topstories
Pending Senate approval, I notice.
Posted by: Ted Dahlberg
|
November 8, 2009 5:34 AM
Bruce Gorton @184:
Wow, that's pretty damn condescending. Personally I prefer to respect people's basic human dignity and not assume that they're helpless puppets who can't take care of themselves. Mental illness by no means has to be as debilitating as you assume it to be. A couple of the people in my life whom I respect (both in a general sense and for their intelligence in particular) the most have some form of mental illness. To treat them as somehow inferior because of some quirk of their brains would be... detestable, and doing them a huge disservice.
Posted by: Bruce Gorton | November 8, 2009 5:56 AM
Ted Dahlberg Author Profile Page | November 8, 2009 5:34 AM
It depends on what you mean by mentally ill.
In this context I mean it in the sense of if you went to court you could legitimately plead insanity. Hence me saying "the equivelant of a child."
Posted by: Islander | November 8, 2009 6:00 AM
Vanharris, Rorscach:
Just wanted to share a quote from Rorscach's link that made me laugh:
Um, no, Pelosi, that equals the usual group of assholes behaving like children, except for one that comes from a heavily democratic state close to election year.
Hopefully the Senate will pass it quickly; of course if it does the two Houses still have to agree on a common bill.
Posted by: vanharris
|
November 8, 2009 6:40 AM
Democrats were forced to make major concessions on insurance coverage for abortions to attract the final votes to secure passage, a wrenching compromise for the numerous abortion-rights advocates in their ranks.
Feckin' amazing, isn't it, how Bronze Age mythology influences public policy in the 21st Century.
But I guess we shouldn't hijack this thread, because PZ will no doubt have something to say about it when he wakes up & gets blogging.
Posted by: strangest brew | November 8, 2009 6:55 AM
There is a prime example of the collective reaction of the so called rational society to...shall we say ODD ideas!.
Right here at post 167!
Dan ....Poe or abductee...is it not passing strange that abductee stories relate a similar tale of paranoid mind controlled technology?
That post could easily be a cut and paste from the internet of a site dedicated to exposing the 'truth that is out there!'
So either a good Poe...or a genuine 'belief' that he was abducted?
The point is not the story told but the reaction of the community here...
There is no barbed comment..there is no derision or laughing and no mockery...?
According to post #110...
And a fair enough comment.
But one might consider that the unspoken attitude here is that alien abduction is a phenomenon no one can categorically deny...therefore mocking is not permitted?
Alien abduction or Religious wingnuttery seem to share the same state of embarrassed grace in the psyche..best not to mock cos that is rude and or the position of the claim is such that it cannot be disproved..or the person is mentally unstable and it is not polite to point and laugh!
Why is that?
The only way to eradicate foolishness and ridiculous memes in society is to laugh at the nonsense...not doing so will encourage other folks to think it an open goal...that ridiculous fantastical claims will be met with the same deference and privilege in society!
Okay methinks most folks here would agree that abductee stories are a figment of a delusional episode...
Not quantifiable and not really true.
It deserves being dismissed...but like religious claims of all sorts of it is not!
That abductee stories and religious nonsense continue to plague society has seemingly the anchor of 'respect' that gives the delusions oxygen to proliferate.
Posted by: FlameDuck | November 8, 2009 7:40 AM
But why? The beliefs are no less crazy, because the person spouting them, is demonstrably insane. Glenn Beck is in my opinion, the most insane person on Earth. Why he's having his appendix removed, instead of the crazy is a mystery to me, although obviously if they removed the crazy from Glenn Beck he'd have to get a real job, because there'd be no place for him on Fox anymore. But I digress.I'm seeing a pattern here, it's okay to mock the possibly mentally ill when:
1) Their a redneck shit kicker, who can't spell "Moron" or "American" correctly.
2) They've got their own show on Fox.
It's like you can mock the lower class for being "pants-on-head retarded", and the upper class for being "eccentric", but the real or imagined mental illness of the middle class is somehow off limits. Why do you think that is?
Posted by: strangest brew | November 8, 2009 7:46 AM
#193
Exactly my take on it...only stated more clearly!
Posted by: Phodopus
|
November 8, 2009 7:47 AM
Its Socialism!
Posted by: Lars | November 8, 2009 8:24 AM
versus Solipsism.
Posted by: Antiochus Epiphanes | November 8, 2009 8:40 AM
Everyone holds irrational beliefs...in my completely non-clinical opinion, we are all crazy. Somewhere inside your head right now you have an idea rattling around that is so malignant that suppressing it has likely become an adaptively conscious decision.* The difference between the undiagnosed and the "out" crazies is a matter of PR only-- an inability of disinterest in suppresion. You believe that a communion wafer is the flesh of another man? Why not, if everyone else around you believes it to, and there are no consequences to expressing that belief. In my experience, part (though not all) of the hilarity of the ideas of the "out" crazies is one of familiarity with the process of having bad ideas..laughter arising from discomfort.
*I'm in the closet, so you don't get to hear about my looney ideas...unless, once again, I have just spouted them on the interwebs...gotta stop doing that.
Posted by: Andreas Johansson | November 8, 2009 9:10 AM
strangest brew wrote:
And your evidence for this unspoken attitude is that no-one's bothered to respond to what looks like a driveby troll?
Anyway, FWIW, I think most "abductees" are nuts, the rest simple liars, and that your posting style needs work, badly.
Posted by: Creature of the Universe | November 8, 2009 9:25 AM
no one picks on Fall Dog...what a dog!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-zRr3oJGr8
Posted by: KillerChihuahua | November 8, 2009 9:32 AM
I'm sooo sorry, PZ! I did not mean to depress you. Its just that I have an audience of approximately 12. You have an audience considerably larger, and I thought it needed to be placed in public view and ridiculed.
...but I didn't want to make you sad.
Posted by: lordshipmayhem
|
November 8, 2009 9:36 AM
And a diagnosis of mental illness is beyond my expertise. However, ideas that are batshit insane are not so difficult to diagnose and do not require that the holder of the batshit insane ideas be themselves insane. Uneducated or silly or eccentric or misinformed != insane.
Lying might = insane, or not. Someone lying to profit from it might or might not be insane, someone lying from compulsion I understand is suffering from a mental illness (not being an expert on the subject, I could be wrong).
And those ideas presented above are definitely batshit insane, but then so are a lot of ideas that fall under the category of "religion". I laugh at insane ideas. I do not laugh at the insane. I also laugh at the funny ideas that someone suffering from confabulation has, but I am certainly not laughing at them, nor am I laughing at their long-suffering caretakers.
Posted by: Andreas Johansson | November 8, 2009 9:39 AM
strange gods before me, OM wrote:
The page says professor Rey has developed the idea in more detail elsewhere. Could you point me where?
Posted by: Walton | November 8, 2009 9:51 AM
This sentence encapsulates the whole problem here. You're drawing a false dichotomy between "sane" and "insane", as if the world were neatly divided into "sane people" and "insane people". This has no basis in reality. The distinction is rather one of degree, not of kind. None of us are 100% in control of our actions. All human behaviour has a deterministic element; we are moulded by our genetics, our experiences and our environment, and most of us have emotional compulsions that cause us to act in certain irrational ways. There are many forms of psychological illness whcih stop short of constituting "insanity".
There is a reason why "insane" is not used as a clinical term. It is far too simplistic. There are many different psychological afflictions and mental illnesses which affect behaviour, some more serious than others. The arbitrary legal definition of "insanity" (which dates back to the M'Naghten rules in the nineteenth century, long before the development of modern psychiatry) should not be confused with psychological reality.
Posted by: Ray Moscow | November 8, 2009 9:57 AM
Clinical psychology FTW: http://img8.imageshack.us/img8/7166/justplainnuts.png
Posted by: Daniel | November 8, 2009 9:57 AM
Bravo.
Posted by: Andreas Johansson | November 8, 2009 10:12 AM
Walton wrote:
a) necessarily indeterministic?
b) not moulded by one's genetics, environment and experience?
c) always under conscious control?
Posted by: vanharris
|
November 8, 2009 10:12 AM
But the guy on the couch is sporting any religious symbols or wearing religious clothing.
Posted by: Andreas Johansson | November 8, 2009 10:14 AM
What the ... ? There seems to be something wrong with my ability to blockquote today. My response to Walton begins at "There seems to be ..." towards the end of the "quote", only the preceeding part of which is actually Walton's.
Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | November 8, 2009 10:24 AM
I just replied to Dan on the thread that triggered this one. I bet he has sleep paralysis. It's probably driving him insane; I don't think he's lying.
That's because he's a scientist and thus simply assumes everyone knows he's not so stupid as to believe he'd know absolute truth with absolute certainty.
I mean, duh.
Posted by: vanharris
|
November 8, 2009 10:24 AM
Shoulda been:
But the guy on the couch isn't sporting any religious symbols or wearing religious clothing.
Posted by: Sven DiMilo | November 8, 2009 10:34 AM
Your metaconcern is noted.
Posted by: Marcus Ranum | November 8, 2009 10:45 AM
I said the same thing on Ed Brayton's blog, when he started ripping into an obscure blogger called "Pat" who had foolishly picked a fight with him. Pat was an unemployed, overweight 37-year-old former truck driver who lived with his parents, and who clearly suffered from emotional problems. I thought it was incredibly unpleasant of Ed to attack him, and I said so (repeatedly).
Why is the fact that pat is "overweight" or "unemployed" or "living with his parents" relevant on a semi-anonymous medium?? Unless that information is put forward, it's not obvious from an internet posting. Indeed, one of the nice things about the internet is that a poster can (if they choose) reveal or conceal a great deal of information about themselves, so that it can either affect or not affect others.
Granted, if I preface my comment with:
"I am an emotionally crippled sufferer of aspergers' and was raped by a catholic priest when I was 2. I hate donuts. Please take that into account when you read anything I write..."
I suppose it's been promoted to relevance. But if I don't put any of that out there, it might be that I'm a poor, humble brain in a box artificial intelligence, who is working very hard to appear to be human, and to make some friends - you'd be "rude" to try to peek behind the curtain and start treating me like the perl script that I am. Indeed, if you start factoring what you know about another person into your treatment of them in an anonymous medium, you may be being quite unfair in the opposite direction: perhaps my feelings would be deeply hurt if someone revealed that I'm a brain in a box, in an attempt to garner unwanted sympathy for my views.
Race and gender and class issues only enter into the picture of the internet society of the mind if they are injected into it, in which case it's appropriate to challenge their relevance to the topic at hand. And, yes, "is that a plea for pity?" is not an inappropriate challenge.
The nice thing about the internet is that you live and die primarily by your ideas and your ability to communicate them. That's also the bad thing, but on the whole I think it's better this way.
Posted by: PaulG | November 8, 2009 10:52 AM
In Ms Jensen's defense, I get emails all the time from a woman who doesn't know when to use "affect" and when to use "effect". At least Ms. Jensen doesn't make that mistake.
Posted by: A. Noyd
|
November 8, 2009 10:58 AM
Greta Christina (#168)
You're relating it to this woman about whom we have no sufficient information to say she's mentally ill. The point is, after all, there are clinically sane people who do this sort of shit because religion makes them crazy. And you seem to be assuming that a double standard is warranted if someone is mentally ill. It's the massive generalization that I despise. If, as you explain later, you meant compassion should be an individual thing, then that's great. But you framed it as mentally ill people acting out automatically need compassion.
Like I said initially, your motives (like anyone touting compassion) may be pure gold. I never doubted that, but I don't think you understand how, if you generalize compassion for mentally ill people, you end up stereotyping us, making us fragile dolls, etc. I do apologize for singling you out, though, since it wasn't just your call for "compassion" that ticked me off.
However, given your quoting of me and others down in #175, it's obvious you don't see what I'm getting at and that my accusation of pious compassion against you holds. In my comments, I'm talking about not assuming that wacky ideas in mentally ill people are due to their illness or further assuming that mockery will be worse for them than for a "sane" person. And if you think that what Elaine said supported mocking mentally ill people it's only because you assumed this woman is mentally ill whereas she did not. And you sure seemed to overlook Ken Cope's nuance in his approach to mockery.
I don't recall anyone saying that, specifically. I think most people have a nuanced enough understanding of the irrationality of delusion. Thing is, every mentally ill person has delusions because all people have delusions. If we want to talk about delusions specific to their mental illness, then that's something else (and something we need way more information for in the case of this woman). Sometimes mockery will work as well with a mentally ill person as a mentally healthy one, sometimes it will be needlessly cruel.
Trying to show "sane" fundamentalists that evolution is true works about as well, actually. Are all of them clinically insane or can religion make sane people as intractably delusional as some types of mental illness?
Disagree all you want, but, as a mentally ill person, I find your reasons condescending.
Posted by: A. Noyd
|
November 8, 2009 11:05 AM
Bruce Gorton (#184)
Fuck you, I'm not the equivalent of a child. There are very specific things that I have little to no control over, but I'm accountable enough that I'm obliged to work on those areas and I can be held 100% accountable for all of my actions otherwise. And if no one ever laughed at me or mocked me or teased me again, then I'd consider my life seriously diminished.
(#186)
Like saying mentally ill people are the equivalent of children? Yeah, that's assholish.
(Sorry if this double posts.)
Posted by: aratina cage
|
November 8, 2009 11:13 AM
Bruce Gorton,
You are saying that intelligence inversely correlates with mental illness. There is certainly an entire spectrum of mental illnesses that are being pushed aside by that assumption. For instance, mentally ill adults I have known were very intelligent and did not want to be treated like children (I more or less agree with A. Noyd), leaving aside reasonable room and understanding to deal with expressions of their illness. The more I think about it, the more complex it seems, though. Perhaps the simplest rules to follow are don't judge people by their mental illnesses and context, context, context.I think people who are diagnosing mental illnesses based on single stories, newspaper clippings, or other tiny bits of information need to take a step back. You do not have enough evidence (or knowledge in most cases) to make a correct diagnosis, and neither does PZ. The moon-bomb-bible letter in particular isn't so different from what anyone in the Rapture Ready crowd would say or do.
I wish Sam Harris had gone further and differentiated between theistic beliefs in mentally healthy and mentally ill people to see if it would differ from the results he got between atheists and theists. There is just so much we don't understand about extremely strong, absurd, and aggressive theistic beliefs.
Posted by: strangest brew | November 8, 2009 11:21 AM
#198
"And your evidence for this unspoken attitude is that no-one's bothered to respond to what looks like a driveby troll?
Anyway, FWIW, I think most "abductees" are nuts, the rest simple liars, and that your posting style needs work, badly:"
What is badly amiss and obviously needs work is that you still do not get it!
How come Sonia gets away with nonsense because it is nonsense
And Dan can boogie cos he is Dan....cos he looks like a drive by troll ?
Posted by: Phodopus
|
November 8, 2009 11:36 AM
After all, he hasn't sent it to Nancy Pelosi ... I hope ...
Posted by: Martin Brock | November 8, 2009 11:46 AM
I don't think your posts are cruel, and I don't care who you pick on, but you don't demonstrate your own cleverness by finding errors in the thinking of a moron. Morons are a dime a dozen, and so are their detractors. Picking on them only demonstrates the absence of more challenging and potentially useful debate.
Posted by: Ken Cope | November 8, 2009 12:05 PM
strangest brew @192
So either a good Poe...or a genuine 'belief' that he was abducted?
The point of the fact that Poes exist is that it's impossible to tell. It's safest to address the ideas on their own merits while trying to work out the intentions of the poster.
The point is not the story told but the reaction of the community here...
There is no barbed comment..there is no derision or laughing and no mockery...?
Saved by the hanging question mark. I thought my quote from the film excerpt linked to @169 was some industrial strength mockery, courtesy of The Firesign Theatre and their Secret Govt. Film. Have they no compassion? Also, click on my name and you'll see my self-portrait as an alien gray, which you'd know about already if you were in on the conspiracy.
Thanks, A. Noyd, for grasping what nuance might be gleaned from my posts; the excerpts Greta Christina selected clearly state the opposite of the meaning she seems to have taken from them. If I hear a crazy statement, I'm going to mock it, I'm going to say it's crazy to believe something like that, presuming that the person can be reasoned with until I learn more--anything else would be patronizing, worse, humouring them while acting as if they were a crazy person.
Posted by: kopd | November 8, 2009 12:07 PM
A person is not their ideas. This has been stated. I feel Jensen's ideas need to be criticized. And furthermore, how do we know they originated with her? She could be weaving and distilling batshittery that she got from the interwebs. There are some damned crazy sites out there. Do we give those ideas a pass because the person who brought them to our attention is perceived by some (justly or unjustly) to be mentally ill?
Posted by: Cruithne
|
November 8, 2009 1:53 PM
Morons are a dime a dozen, and so are their detractors.
I'd also add that the two are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Whether or not the person who sent the email to PZ is mentally ill, a moron or anything else I cannot say.
I can say that she comes across as unhappy and suffering to some degree, and for that I feel sorry for her.
Posted by: Martin Brock | November 8, 2009 2:14 PM
Cruithne: Maybe "moron" is not the best choice of a word. Sonya's email is grammatical, and if one accepts her premise, that every statement in her Bible is literally true, and limits their reading of the Bible to her verses, then maybe her email even makes an odd sort of sense, but I can't make sense of it in terms of my assumptions. Here's an astrologer who claims to be a MENSA member, and I suppose she is. Her blog seems to me as informative than this one, not very informative at all that is. Telling me that it's not very informative doesn't tell me very much. That's my only point.
Posted by: Jim Thomrson | November 8, 2009 2:16 PM
One day the guys from my water utility showed up and used dowsing rods to quickly find the water lines. I just watched quietly, and refrained from telling them they were delusional fools.
Posted by: Andreas Johansson | November 8, 2009 2:39 PM
strangest brew wrote:
PZ dedicating two posts to mocking her counts as "gets away"? What are we supposed do, break into her house and pelt her with tomatoes?
You're suggesting I ought feed trolls? I'm starting to believe I'm doing that right now ...
Posted by: IaMoL | November 8, 2009 3:15 PM
FAIL. Obviously your information comes via television/movies and we know how accurate screenwriters and directors are with facts. Can you say verisimilitude?Posted by: Caustic Gnostic | November 8, 2009 3:55 PM
We deal with ideas and information here on the 'net. We don't have sufficient personal context in general, but we are almost obligated to draw conclusions about the person. If anyone took the time and made the effort to present their idea to the world, and the idea is patently ridiculous, the consequent negative reactions are quite valid.
Some people will do or say just about anything for the attention. Politicians do this constantly for votes, con-men for money, extortionists for influence. The issue takes on a different complexion when an individual expresses Large Weird. They want attention, and should be gratified that they have it.
Personal context: chronic depressive, but don't fucking need a Waaaambulance.
Posted by: Meathead | November 8, 2009 8:26 PM
So there's a Scientology style e-meter for bombs now? Sir, you have many body thetans, you may well explode. I can remove them - but it'll cost you.
Posted by: John Hill | November 8, 2009 10:03 PM
Whatever her motives are, I sympathize with the kindergarten teacher.
As recently as 20 years ago there was a fear that letting the government build a vast database of information about any and every citizen would be a violation of their first amendment rights.
I don't know if it's still true, but at that time the British government did not keep extensive fingerprint files on its citizens. Police, when investigating crimes, could collect whatever prints they wanted, but had to destroy their files after the case had been resolved.
In the U.S., it has become difficult to find anybody who hasn't been fingerprinted for some reason. Everybody who's been in the military has been fingerprinted, which is
justifiable. So has anybody who has applied for a federal job, which is slightly less so. But it devolves from there. Want a taxi license in Memphis? Fingerprints. Want to work in any hotel or casino in Las Vegas? Fingerprints and ID cards that border on the old USSR system of internal passports.
You have to ask yourself, "Is it really necessary to fingerprint a Texas kindergarten teacher of 22 years, and keep her prints on file until she's likely dead of old age or the software become obsolete and unreadable, or is it a silly and trivial violation of her rights?"
John Hill
Posted by: Ken Cope | November 8, 2009 11:54 PM
That's nearly a valid question in an age where your very DNA may determine your access to health insurance, but you can't seriously graft reason onto the teacher's post-hoc rationale for objecting to fingerprints, which consist of some batshit crazy, late 60's, early 70's fundagelical dispensationalist paranoid interpretation of random Bible passages in search of support for the thesis that we are, indeed, living in the foretold end-times, cited solely for the purpose of inciting dystopian paranoia.Posted by: kermit | November 9, 2009 12:45 AM
Well, clearly this thread is too dull, so I'll offer a few comments to fuel the fire. I was raised fundamentalist, and Sonia / Tanja didn't say anything crazier than I heard every day of my life growing up. These folks were literate, sometimes professional, and believed in batshit crazy things. They represent tens of millions of people in the US. Surely they aren't all clinically insane? They showed a disdain for evidence, and their internal reality was socially constructed of mutual affirmations, one reassurance at a time. What is it, 20% of the US population that thinks that President Obama is not the real president? I didn't see anything to suggest that Sonia is either crazy or a Poe.
Even if she *does have a malfunctioning brain, she is supporting a set of delusional beliefs held by millions. Myself, I'd rather point out that the emperor has no clothes, and help someone free herself from a set of beliefs that she may never have heard challenged.
As for folks getting upset at A Noyd's take on this, remember that she has had to deal with other folks' discomfort and arrogance posing as compassion, and maybe has a sore spot on the subject. Show a little compassion...
Posted by: Bruce Gorton | November 9, 2009 1:25 AM
: A. Noyd Author Profile Page | November 8, 2009 11:05 AM
Look, I used the wrong words - the words I should have used are legally insane. The two are not equivelants and I appologise for what I said.
Posted by: aratina cage Author Profile Page | November 8, 2009 11:13 AM
This isn't about intelligence - its about responsibility over one's actions.
If for example, someone is a schizophrenic with violent tendencies we don't treat that someone exactly the same way as someone who is not, we make allowances.
If that schizophrenic is being successfully treated however, the condition is no longer insanity, it is a mental disability which is being coped with.
There have been historic examples of schizophrenic geniuses, heck it is even a bit of a cliche.
A kleptomaniac is not held as being quite as responsible for stealing stuff as the rest of us would be - because we recognise that it is a form of insanity.
We treat these people, on a legal basis, as being like children when it comes to their disability. We don't slap a 6 year old behind bars because it hit its mother - we try to correct the behaviour.
This same ethos translates to civil society - we aren't really comfortable with mocking a dyslexic's spelling, or a person who suffers from clinical depression's listlessness. A person who is bipolar is granted an excuse for their moodswings.
In all cases we do try to correct it - we have learning programmes designed to help people cope with dyslexia, depression is treatable and so is bipolar disorder - but we try to make allowances at the same time.
Posted by: Bruce Gorton | November 9, 2009 1:58 AM
Posted by: Bruce Gorton | November 9, 2009 1:25 AM
Actually, you know what, I can argue all I like but the fact of the matter is I was just plain wrong in a douchebaggy sort of a way.
And, having found myself in a hole I just plain proceded to dig it deeper - I have a habit of doing that sometimes.
Anyway, I appologise for what I said, I can't really take it back because it is what I thought at the time, but I can try to learn from it.
Thanks again hey.
Posted by: ellenjanuary | November 9, 2009 2:12 AM
Wow, I get to be the expert! xp I'm a certified nutbag (unspecified psychosis), officially disabled; and my file probably kicks her file's ass. I mean, it's bigger than the phone book, and Phoenix ain't exactly small-town. Now, then; when I get all "spun up and start to spout religious nonsense," and it happens; let's be clear - if you accept my BS out of misplaced compassion, you are an idiot. As for "coming to my senses," well; gee willikers, I'm the sane one here! Honestly, I'm not possessed by demons; all I got is a non-standard signal processing unit. I'm not sure how I rate as not quite genius, yet often regarded as a polymath, can do basically anything, can learn it in a fraction of the time... yada, yada... but rather than have to work for a living, I'm paid by this great country to obsess over Gwyneth Paltrow. Pity me? Come on, now. I'm sure the most excellent PZ is aware of the connections between genius, talent, and insanity. It's not about rational behavior, or about acting solely from a desire to draw sympathy; its about transcription error, signal processing, and having a childhood full of bad things. Shit happens. I seem to know one thing, however; that no one else here seems to realize. The existence of magic. I'm not asking all of you to believe; I'm asking you to stop believing. I'm dumb like that, I read crap like "freedom of speech," I take it literally. Do the research, dang it! Giving power to language is straight witchcraft. There's this "philosophy" that word use is dehumanizing - that's dumb. I like this blog for its intelligence, humor, and straight talk; but people talk about "racism, communism, dictatorship;" making judgments without even understanding what the words mean. Witchcraft. There is not enough genetic drift for race other than human. I don't get communism, but I do get dictatorship. I mean, you might have to go all the way back to Cincinnatus to find a decent example of a perfectly legitimate government policy; but I hate politics. I mean, just cause I'm crazy; that ain't no excuse to sit around talking crazy talk. So, I'm looking into the mathematics to see why quantum theory is so dang complicated; because if science keeps trying to ignore god, some religious wingnut will pull an ID out of QM - and we really don't need that. God ain't no big deal, it's how life does self-awareness without telepathy; but as soon as some fool claims to know god - butterfly nets. But the dusty old codger has been lurking in the math since Pythagoras; but don't listen to me, listen to Cantor. ;)
Oh, and I'm a guy who has used the name ellen since '95 because I'm a moody bitch. Don't get offended, contextualize... if it sounds like playground name-calling, someone needs a time-out. But the witchcraft really needs to end.
Posted by: aratina cage
|
November 9, 2009 2:24 AM
Bruce Gorton, I didn't understand what you meant in #184. Thanks for clarifying your thoughts; I agree. Indeed, some mentally ill people can be dangerous and hurtful during hallucinations or episodes. So what you said isn't about interacting with people with mental illnesses as if they were children, but about being able and willing to put things in the proper context regarding the illness.
Posted by: melior | November 9, 2009 2:41 AM
Speaking of eggcorns, I've always been amused by "smilin' mighty jesus" (spinal meningitis).
Posted by: Scary Girl | November 9, 2009 4:37 AM
My sides are splitting.
That's it, I'm making a PZ MEYERS IS MY HOMEBOY t-shirt.
Posted by: Steve in Dublin | November 9, 2009 8:02 AM
Heh heh. We're onto that ADE 651 explosives 'divining' device over at randi.org. Randi himself has even thrown down the gauntlet and directly offered the company that manufactures it the Million Dollar Challenge:
A Direct, Specific, Challenge From James Randi and the JREF
Posted by: Dianne | November 9, 2009 8:13 AM
Fingerprints and ID cards that border on the old USSR system of internal passports.
I've been fingerprinted twice for jobs now. As far as internal passports go, I do need a passport for most intra-US travel: I don't drive so my only government issued ID is a passport and you can't get on a plane without a government issued ID. Or Amtrak for that matter. I use my passport less in Europe than in the US, despite being a US-American. Funny how in the name of protecting freedom we've come to reproduce so many totalitarian habits.
Posted by: A. Noyd
|
November 9, 2009 11:11 AM
kermit (#231)
Hah! I'm going to beat you with my big drawer full o' pills, I am...
~*~*~*~*~
Bruce Gorton (#232)
Very, very true, and thanks.
Posted by: spiny norman | November 9, 2009 11:33 AM
Point of order, but if they're genuinely concerned they may or may not be idiots, but they're definitely not concern trolls. Like the term "politically correct", that epithet has been overused and abused to the point of meaninglessness, and when someone uses it instead of making a real argument, I usually stop reading.
Posted by: astrounit | November 9, 2009 5:04 PM
Well done PZ. Excellent.
On your comment #109 in the previous related thread: Quite correct!
Forgive me for quoting your last paragraph here again, but they beg repeating:
"I guess I'm one of those people who will continue to say that stupidity, ignorance, and even mental illness do not demand that people stand silent when victims of those afflictions thrust themselves forward and demand respect for their views. Polite silence and encouraging words of reassurance is how we got to Idiot America in the first place."
Those are great words.
I am still optimistic that the Non-Idiot part of America will perservere...and it will only be done by calling the bastards out.
The trouble is, they are like an infestation of mice: finding just one immediately tells you their are hundreds. They're everywhere.
Those imbeciles (likewise, I define the word in THIS context as "LIAR BY CHOICE" - and, oh yeah, they're "able" and competent enough)cannot be given free reign any more than a low-level swindler schmuck who breaks written laws.
People NEED to fight for an authentic sense of right over wrong which laws do not accommodate.
That requires some decent moral foundation that is instilled from childhood.
WHERE IS IT?
Why, for example, do religious institutions place their ministry so heavily on the welfare of CONVICTED CRIMINALS (especially politicians, wealthy corporate CEOs and market hijinkers)those who have already been legally demonstrated (within some margin of error, it must be said) to have broken the law with an attitude that doesn't give a rat's ass about ethics or the distinction between right and wrong, WHATEVER the fucking law suppoosedly says?
Because if you can "get away with it" it must be not only okay, but revered as some sort of indication of personal initiative and aptitude.
Because whatever the rules are, there are ways around them. And the way to WIN is to figure ways to flout the rules.
In a word: "CHEAT".
That's the "Idiot American Way" that has come to bight us all on the backside. It's NOT the means to the American Dream, which sought sufficient comfort in living and raising a family. It got rapidly more sinister than that, courtesy of a steady bombardment of inane entertainment fare, force fed down the throats of the public as if they were set up to be served as pate: there's always a way to cheat yourself around an obstacle. Even if it's the law. Winning is everything: when it comes to #1, there is no law.
The LAW??? WHAT LAW?!! Check out any 5 vintage western films at random, and you will likely find that line in one of them. Of course, there are MANY HUNDREDS of such films.
And if you are sufficiently wealthy, then you can not only purchase the legislation that gives you an appropriate (profitable) advantage, you can pay off efforts that attempt to convict you of "wrongdoing" based on the existing laws.
RIGHT?
So much for the great influence religion has exerted on society's mores and manners, which has obviously performed so poorly at investing any sense of moral obligation in their own members, let alone anybody else.
Who are they trying to impress? THEIR OWN?
With stuff that obviously doesn't work?
It will never get done by saying it's all okay.
It's NOT okay. It's NOT acceptable.
There is no way that anybody can
Either that, or LEAVE AMERICA ALONE!!!
Heh.
As a citizen who has witnessed his country decline precipitously every time assholes buy or cheat or steal their way into it, I've had quite enough of the mild way of handling it.
Dammit, it IS appropriate to express outrage whenever one is personally being robbed or conned OR ANY NATION ONE CALLS THEIR OWN suffers by exactly the same.
The assholes don't care a fig about wrecking it, yet we are supposed to remain polite and conveniently permissive.
Those of you over 50 years of age will well recall that last word: it was one of the early "hot button" words the Republicans used with impunity in order to chastise parents for raising hoodlums. Other words such as "nigger" didn't quite work out...maybe because people decided it was absolutely positively unacceptable...
(The following isn't addressed to regulars, so don't give me a hard time - it is to young folks): It's time more of us started getting serious - and that means beating the crap back into many of those assholes who post on Huffington too.
An ideology is a ROTTEN way to base one's life.
Anybody who declares with some pride that they are "Conservative" or "Liberal" or "Democratic" or "Republican" or "Moderate" or even "Religious" or "Atheist" - or any stupidity in between is as lamed as one can possibly get: that is an ignoreant American Slob who cannot work out their own world view without the help of con-artists.
THOSE FUCKING LABELS NEED SEVERE AND SUSTAINED ATTACK and they need to be torn to shreds.
The WHOLE IDEA of an INDIVIDUAL identifying with any popularly monolithic world view is a DISGRACE to the Original American Ideal and the ORIGINAL "AMERICAN DREAM".
Posted by: gaypaganunitarianagnostic | November 10, 2009 1:46 AM
Some US police got taken in by dousing rods disguised as hight tech drug or bomb or whatever dectectors. They were very expensive and so were the 'plug in modules' to detect this that or the other item.
I have seen workers use dousing rods of highway construction sites.
Posted by: Ryan Egesdahl | November 10, 2009 4:27 PM
What amazes me about this story the most is that NPR had a story about this months ago. Literally, months. Interestingly, this suddenly appeared in the New York Times about a week after I sent an email to the show concerning a segment she did on supposed insider help in that bombing in Baghdad not long ago.
I pointed out the NPR article showing that stupidity could also explain the event, and it shows up in another news agency's paper a week later? That makes me wonder how many people sent emails about it.
Posted by: Jim Thomerson | November 10, 2009 9:26 PM
Dianne, if you live in Illinois, you can get around the country without a passport. 9/11 occurred not too long after I moved to Texas from Illinois. My wife and I flew not long after 9/11. I still had a valid Illinois gun owner card in my billfold. I presented it as my form of government issued picture identification. No problem, except that my wife severely criticized me afterwards. To get the card, one fills out a short form, encloses a picture and $5 and mails it in. Card is good for five years.
Posted by: Vacation | November 14, 2009 10:07 AM
Sound great.
I am planning on taking a trip this december, but im not sure where yet.
Anny suggestions?
Vacation All Inclusive Resorts