• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

1 in 5 americans have a mental illiness (or so I read on FB)

NobleSavage said:
skepticalbip said:
All evolution requires is survival and reproduction. It doesn't create perfection.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't schizophrenics have a harder time reproducing and raising a child. Seems like there would be selective pressure against it.
Click to expand...

Perhaps; but nothing exists in isolation. Maybe schizophrenia is caused by a combination of genes that, when not all expressed at once, are beneficial. Or perhaps it isn't genetic at all.

Anyway, I rather doubt that 1 in 5 Americans are schizophrenic; Depression and anxiety are far more common, and these are not necessarily genetic disorders - clearly there is more to many mental disorders than genes alone.
 
Isn't is possible that more mental illnesses have labels and definitions than in previous years?

To clarify, people were institutionalised as being hysterical - which would encompass any number of psychiatric disorders currently labelled.

I do not think that more people are suffering from mental illness, rather that we, as a society, are beginning to recognise that mental illness is just that - an illness, and so we are seeking to understand it.
 
gmbteach said:
Isn't is possible that more mental illnesses have labels and definitions than in previous years?

To clarify, people were institutionalised as being hysterical - which would encompass any number of psychiatric disorders currently labelled.

I do not think that more people are suffering from mental illness, rather that we, as a society, are beginning to recognise that mental illness is just that - an illness, and so we are seeking to understand it.
Click to expand...

I never meant to imply that it is increasing (However, that is an interesting conjecture). Most definitely, we are able to diagnose it better.
 
NobleSavage said:
Most definitely, we are able to diagnose it better.
Click to expand...
I don't know if 'better diagnosis' is entirely accurate. There are certainly a lot more labels, which makes it look to the layman like they're making progress in the diagnosis of discrete problems, which implies equal progress in the treatment, but in reality we're just desperately using the trappings of science in our denial, and in our attempt to hide from the fact of demonic possession.
Or so my cousin tells me. And you just can't ignore a man who's personally fought Beelzebub for control of the TV remote.
 
NobleSavage said:
Wouldn't schizophrenics have a harder time reproducing and raising a child. Seems like there would be selective pressure against it.
Click to expand...
Assuming that schizophrenia is even partially based on genetics, the individual with that gene sequence does not have to successfully reproduce in order for the genes to be retained in the gene pool.

As long as the parents who produce the schizophrenic individual also produce kids that are mentally healthy (or at least, their flavor of mental illness is not as markedly antisocial), then their genes will continue to show up in future generations.
 
I would argue that mental illness *is* in fact increasing (though by what degree I don't presume to know); there are some elements of modern society that are certainly known to put the kind of stress on people that can lead to the development of various psychological disorders, elements that didn't exist in pre-modern times. Certain disorders may well be an entirely modern phenomenon.

That said, towards answering the OP; it should be noted that mental illnesses are not necessarily a drawback that leads to its sufferers not passing the evolutionary fitness test. Take depression for instance; if you get this when you already have kids, then why the fuck would it impact your evolutionary fitness? Some illnesses can even be an advantage; psychopathy for instance could give you an edge in almost any time period. Or what about a combination of illnesses that would lead to someone becoming a rapist? It's hard to argue that a mental illness that causes someone to impregnate lots of women (with or without their consent) would hurt their evolutionary chances to procreate.
 
NobleSavage said:
Why has evolution not corrected this problem?
Click to expand...
That's obviously because this isn't a problem!

It's not a problem for evolution.

It's an individual problem for the many individuals affected by an illness and a problem for the familly and society. Not for the reproduction of enough healthy human beings to ensure the continuation of the species.


Beside, most mental illnesses are not as serious as schyzophrenia.

Also, 1 in 5 is possibly the result of a recent increase in the ratio of people with a mental illness, so evolution wouldn't have had the time to step in so to speak.

Further, this recent increase in the ratio of people with a mental illness may be the result of the newly found abilities of society first to help people survive with their illness and second to cope with a higher ratio of people with a mental illness. In which case, there would be no case for evolution to step in.

Finally, for it to make a difference, there would have to be a competitor species, which the human species doesn't have just yet.
EB
 
Speakpigeon said:
NobleSavage said:
Why has evolution not corrected this problem?
Click to expand...

It's not a problem for evolution.

It's a individual problem for the many individuals affected by an illness and a problem for the familly and society. Not for the reproduction of enough healthy human beings to ensure the continuation of the species.


Beside, most mental illnesses are not as serious as schyzophrenia.

Also, 1 in 5 is possibly the result of a recent increase in the ratio of people with a mental illness, so evolution wouldn't have had the time to step in so to speak.

Further, this recent increase in the ratio of people with a mental illness may be the result of a newly found ability of society first to help people survive with thier illness and second to cope with a higher ration of people with a mental illnesses. In which case, there would be no case for evolution to step in.

Finally, for it to make a difference, there would have to be a competitor species, which the human species doesn't have just yet.
EB
Click to expand...

Oui.

Every genetically transmitted condition can be, within time, place, and conditions, an evolutionary situation (fitness cleaver) in the broad sense, not the current social sense.

As for competitor species the species solution assures competition if there is any form of isolation and limitation of resources.

As to NobleSavage, evolution doesn't solve problems it provides the mechanisms to permit selection through fitness.

FDI :)
 
dystopian said:
skepticalbip said:
And then "mental illness" is deviation from the norm. If the norm was people living in a constent state of depression, then anyone who wasn't depressed would be said to have a mental illness.
Click to expand...

God, you're so happy all the time, off to the asylum with you.
Click to expand...
:D

http://viewpointsonline.org/2014/05/01/happiness-easily-overlooked/

This month is Mental Health Awareness and there’s a health issue that needs its turn to be addressed as well.

With the all-good attention of telling people who are afflicted with depression and anxiety to be positive, we tend to overlook the opposite with those who are too happy.

Can happiness be an actual disorder? How can something that makes us feel good and have positive physical results be bad?

We all too easily notice when someone is depressed and make encouragements for them to seek help but what if you saw someone who was overjoyed? Too happy?

That excessive happiness could be an underlying medical condition that shouldn’t be overlooked.
Click to expand...
 
skepticalbip said:
And then "mental illness" is deviation from the norm. If the norm was people living in a constent state of depression, then anyone who wasn't depressed would be said to have a mental illness.
Click to expand...

Mental Illness diagnosis is very much about the norms of society. Homosexuality was once regarded as a mental illness.
 
skepticalbip said:
And then "mental illness" is deviation from the norm. If the norm was people living in a constent state of depression, then anyone who wasn't depressed would be said to have a mental illness.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Most people have the innate tendencies to believe in woo and get horribly anxious because slight fatness (or whatever else) is not in style.

Most people are fcked up. The "mentally disturbed" are those who are so colorful the other think they should be treated, go figure.
 
dystopian said:
That said, towards answering the OP; it should be noted that mental illnesses are not necessarily a drawback that leads to its sufferers not passing the evolutionary fitness test. Take depression for instance; if you get this when you already have kids, then why the fuck would it impact your evolutionary fitness? Some illnesses can even be an advantage; psychopathy for instance could give you an edge in almost any time period. Or what about a combination of illnesses that would lead to someone becoming a rapist? It's hard to argue that a mental illness that causes someone to impregnate lots of women (with or without their consent) would hurt their evolutionary chances to procreate.
Click to expand...

That's the answer that makes sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom