Paranoia or Awareness?

I´d like to re-examine the age old questions...

1. Is Paranoia a form of higher awareness?

2. When does Paranoia become a psychological illness?

3. How can we discern between suspicion fueled by fear/broken-trust and suspicion fueled by a detective-like intelligence?

4. Does Paranoia make us see things that arent there or does it allow us to see things others dont see?

5. Did I just think the neighbours are talking about me because I have skilled extrasensory and intuitive abilities or because Im stark raving mad?

I dont have the final answers to these questions. Your input is appreciated.

Originally posted by Skyfloating
I´d like to re-examine the age old questions...

1. Is Paranoia a form of higher awareness?

Only in the sense that paranoia can be the result of being aware of an angle to something that most people (on a day to day basis) would not consider. This extra awareness could be the result of training, inborn in the individual, or something acquired due to having experienced a situation in a particular fashion.

Looking at it like that I suppose you could say that someone is more aware of the potential ramifications of something... ergo Higher awareness (of a sort)

2. When does Paranoia become a psychological illness?

I suppose once it stops an individual from seeing wood for the trees. If an individual becomes so obsessed with a situation and it's possible impact, to the exclusion of rational thought, then paranoia (which of itself can be healthy) has slipped into blinkered obsession.

3. How can we discern between suspicion fueled by fear/broken-trust and suspicion fueled by a detective-like intelligence?

Sometimes it's impossible... Other times, by taking a close look at how an individual is behaving with regard to other things. If the individual exhibits the same behaviour with more 'normal, everyday things, it's more likely that the individual's capacity to think rationally might be impaired. That's not to say that the original object of the individual's paranoia doesn't deserve to be feared... but one has to take a closer look than just accept it at face value.

4. Does Paranoia make us see things that arent there or does it allow us to see things others dont see?

5. Did I just think the neighbours are talking about me because I have skilled extrasensory and intuitive abilities or because Im stark raving mad?

I think my comments above more or less cover both 4 & 5... The answer is potentially both!

quote
I dont have the final answers to these questions.

If I'm honest, neither do I

Hope my comments help a bit... Good thread

Well, if you are smart, aware and observant chances are you notice more and you get noticed more. A shrewd eye sometimes makes others nervous or uncomfortable. So yeah, your neighbors might be talking about you but that doesn't make it a conspiracy.

IMO, when one's objective search for truth and reality becomes obsessive, ego-driven or discounts the well-being of those around him/her, then it becomes paranoia. In addition, when one starts to assign ulterior motives to even his/her closest friend and family, it's time to take a step back and get a reality check.

reply to post by Skyfloating

Well uh, I think that paranoia means beliefs that are based on false or very thin assumption. Therefore I think that paranoia is not awareness, but I might've misinterpret your thoughts.

[edit on 18-2-2008 by v01i0]

Alright. Good answers here.

I was always fascinated by this, especially on ATS. Somebody will post something. Person A will say "You need help. Get some counseling". Others will say "You´ve seen the truth".

It seems that contemporary mental health and doctors lack a clear definition of the limits between awareness and paranoia.

The Encyclopedia defines paranoia and even "connected the dots" as an illness.

More to the point:

Person A is jealous. In some cases he/she is jealous because she can sense something going on beyond her immediate field of awareness.
In other cases she´s just paranoid and her suspicions have no basis in reality.

How to discern?

Originally posted by Skyfloating


I was always fascinated by this, especially on ATS.

Well, by my definition, any member who disagrees with me is clearly off his rocker delusional!

Just kidding.

But seriously, one need only read the Secret Society, 9/11 or UFO forums to see that there seems to be some sort of sliding scale definition. It seems that unless a post without hard evidence is planted firmly in skunk works, then it is deemed paranoid by some and brilliant by others.

I have also often observed that the more coherent and well-written a post is, the more likely it will be well received, whether or not there is any evidence. I guess there is a certain intellectual discrimination that goes on, just like in society at large, the more functional and socially acceptable you are, the more likely people will give merit to your ideas. Even if the idea is controversial or conspriratorial, the level of debate is likely to be more civil and the counter-arguments better constructed.

Originally posted by Skyfloating
More to the point:

Person A is jealous. In some cases he/she is jealous because she can sense something going on beyond her immediate field of awareness.
In other cases she´s just paranoid and her suspicions have no basis in reality.

How to discern?

It would seem that only time can tell. Facts and circumstances need to be revealed. Often it is only in retrospect that one can be sure. Also the history of the person may be telling. Do they frequently have conflict or exhibit this type of behavior? Also, how well you know/trust this person can play a part in your assessment.

[edit on 18/2/08 by kosmicjack]

In order to effectively answer these questions(Which are very good and extremely pointed) we need the aid of a professional. It's just one of those things where the opinion of the general populace isn't worth anything. We need facts to answer this...Are there any Psycho-analysts?

reply to post by kosmicjack



You say we can discern by who is talking. In other words: Lets not only examine the message, but also the messenger. Thats sound advice.

Projectvxn: Since Psychologists themselves dont have a clear definition for this yet, I dont know if they can shed any light on this.

What I do know is that when you cross a certain line in conspiracy-theory, you even start accusing those you learned conspiracy-theory from of conspiracy-theory.

Examples:

"Alex Jones is a disinfo agent!"

"Ron Paul is NWO"

"Bill Cooper is a disinfo agent!"

"ATS is a CIA outfit!"

While most of us have a good laugh about this...maybe its more sad than funny.

hahaha that is funny, Ron Paul NWO, hhaha ATS CIA

That is why I stick only to evidence and documents that can be verified. I don't like conspiracy theory because most of them are hardly theories. They are hypotheses at best, and usually have little to no evidence or data supporting the hypothesis. Then there's the paranoia(Which can be unhealthy) of others which is detrimental to the research project. I understand that people are indeed threatened by the government over many things. But one must understand that alot of the people that make these claims are not under any undue duress, or direct threat, they are mentally unstable, and delving into the murky world of conspiracy can exacerbate said instability.

For me, it has been healthier to stick to the facts. FOIA documents, news articles, witness testimony, scientific data(telemetry, radar detections, weather conditions, astronomical events, scientific journals, space mission data, military exercise data etc... ). This actually sheds more light on things than one gives credit for. This process is scientific and removes alot of the muck that allows for wild speculations, and paranoid musings. It is easy to lose perspective when researching conspiratorial topics. That loss of perspective tends to get the better of many people within the field of Alien and UFO research.

I always think people are talking to me when I'm on the bus or something. Do I think I have some sort of gift? No... I think I simply have some disease that I am unaware of and have been blinded not to see it by my parents.

Some might call that mad!

Honestly, I think it's a matter of perspective. If you know something that most others don't, to those who don't know, you're going to seem very "paranoid." What most people label "paranoia" is a higher awareness, yes...

In my humble, and very paranoid opinion
There is a healthy paranoia and an unhealthy one.
Just like those obsessed with eating can cause themselves an early and ugly death, so can paranoia.

It depends on how you handle it.
Honestly some days I really do want to go off the deep end. Today was one of those days. Some drifting piece of neighborhood garbage backed my car door down the side of my neighbors sedan and then took off. I was trying to sell my other car!

So yes, I'm fostering a very deep hatred for the human race at the moment, It's not even my car. It was my parents!

But I still must decide whether or not to give in to my anger and dish it out on society (as richly deserved as it is...).

In the end, logic wins over emotion and I calm down. Some people are not willing to take the step to think through their suspicions. It is simply much easier to categorize all humans as worthless scum, instead of taking the time to correct ones mind to blame only the parties responsible for wrong.

reply to post by Skyfloating


I'd prefer to consider paranoia a higher form of awareness.

I'd prefer to think that others are not seeing what I'm seeing due to their own perceptions and not my insanity.

I'd prefer to think I'm stable.

How do you answer any of these questions on your own?

Its all a matter of perception.

I don't think I'm crazy, but maybe I am. Who knows .

Great questions Sky Floating.

To quote an old cliche....

"Just because you are paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get you"

If you aren't paranoid, you probably aren't paying attention or are comfortable living in what I view as an unrealistic belief structure; comforted by either a religious belief or an ideology.

Needless to say, I don't think man is intrinsically "good" and civilization is just a thin veneer on barbarism, tribalism and chaos.

Originally posted by projectvxn
That is why I stick only to evidence and documents that can be verified.

But....and here´s the big BUT: If you stick only to what is already known it´ll be difficult to uncover the unknown.

Originally posted by sickleye
In the end, logic wins over emotion and I calm down. Some people are not willing to take the step to think through their suspicions. It is simply much easier to categorize all humans as worthless scum, instead of taking the time to correct ones mind to blame only the parties responsible for wrong.

Very true.

In conspiracy-literature, I find it disturbing how many people are accused of the most horrible things without any indicators of it being so.

Originally posted by biggie smalls

How do you answer any of these questions on your own?

Im not sure. Thats why I opened this thread.