It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Charles Darwin was mentally ill

page: 18
50
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by LarryLove
One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter


...and "mental illness is just a label".

And "nothing is good or bad".

I`ll ask again: Is there any reason at all not to just go out and blow up regular folks cars or kill them? ANY reason at all?



Please don't cut a quote to leave it without context.

You have no reason to perform such an action unless you are given one and feel justified by doing it. Normality is a very curious concept - just the same as Darwin suggesting an alternate view to how we came about.




posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 05:28 PM
link   
reply to post by LarryLove
 


Why have you avoided answering the question twice now? Im truly curious about your answer.



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 05:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating
reply to post by LarryLove
 


Why have you avoided answering the question twice now? Im truly curious about your answer.


To answer your question, free will stops or makes you perform an action that may or may not be perceived as normal. That action and its consequences must always remain in the context of the situation it developed in.



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
Darwins theory has been reviewed and tested and found to be true. Darwins theory gave us a context to place other scientific theories in. The biological sciences of course benefited a great deal and evolution helped us understand genetic inheritance and genetic diseases. It ties together other sciences like paleontology and microbiology while helping us to understand the adaptations species undergo to survive. It even helps us to understand past climates depending upon which spcies we find within an area as they will show certain adaptations suited to the environment.

There is an entire field of medicine devoted to using the theory of evolution to both predict and cure disease, it's known as Evolutionary Medicine (yeah i know a rubbish name).

so basically evolution has given us quite a lot.


Darwins theory has been reviewed and tested and found to be true but only because challenging it in any way ruins careers. Consensus science is dangerous moreover, I haven't seen anything about evolution that hasn't already been shattered by people like Dr. James Shapiro's "a third way"

DNA just doesn't work like evolutionists wish it did.

I simply do not have that much faith in science anymore and I simply ignore talking points in lame comparisons about how faith is silly and the alternative view seems to think they have a monopoly in logic and reason using facts and evidence when we could only WISH science was that credible, that honest and objective but it isn't. Science and Scientists have so damaged their reputations engaged in so much fraud it is the single most top priority they have to deal with if they ever want the respect they once enjoyed. This idea that atheists are the philosopher kings of science and that Darwin was someone worthy of a place next to Pasteur or Einstein is as justified as Obama's NOBEL prize



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 05:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by PieKeeper
This is one of the worst threads on this particular forum in some time. The OP, a forum mod for crying out loud, obviously has no idea that science is peer reviewed. Ideas aren't just accepted, they are tested, and attempts are made to find evidence for them.


Originally posted by Skyfloating
Lets instead take a mentally ill persons word for it that humans came about as a matter of coincidence and that a humans Consciousness does not .


You do know that Alfred Russel Wallace developed the same ideas during the exact same time period, also while in the tropics?

Wallace wrote Darwin about his ideas and Darwin suddenly has the same ideas but we know he didn't. Why you think peer review is so special Ill never know.

Peer review is a joke son and I am convinced you do not work in the field of science. If you did, you would know off the record, they don't mean much and have taken a pretty bad beating from issues like climate gate and the United States Senates own investigation which concluded the corruption went all the way to the top in science circles. That peer review needs a review just to clean it up. Peer review in a consensus science adds nothing for its credibility



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 06:22 PM
link   
Pondering this it suddenly struck me how spiritually inept someone has to be to think he can electrocute himself out of depression! What the hell must have he been thinking?

Actually, electro shock therapy does work very well for extremely depressed people. He was clearly a man ahead of his time.



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 07:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by Dark Ghost
In the case of Darwin, it seems you are indirectly attempting to discredit his claims because he suffered from Depression.


The true story is this: I log on here every day and see religious and spiritual folk being labeled mentally ill, psychotic, etc. all the time.

I was in the mood for giving these people a taste of their own medicine - backed up by hard facts.


"A taste of their own medicine, huh" Sounds like a mod trolling to me.
Of course, you'll have your buddies remove this post just like the others that disagreed with you about the subject of the topic.



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 07:26 PM
link   
reply to post by SpeakerofTruth
 


Now we are splitting hairs on a subject that doesn't even matter or pertain to the situation. Did it start 25 years ago or not? Even if the concept popped up once in Taiwan 5,000 years ago, it doesn't mean Darwin heard of it, being a Catholic. He would of heard of the Genisis story.

Even if somehow in a million ot one shot he had heard the theory of being decended from angels. Not believing it like the majority of people doesn't make him non-religious. And I am still trying to figure out how skyfloating made the huge Grand Canyon sized leap that not believing we are decended from angels means he wasn't relgious. Talk about a strict criteria.



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 07:29 PM
link   
Electric shock therapy as a treatment for depression has actually taken hold again in a new form.

medicinenet


There is another therapy where a wire is ran into the brain, I forget which part, and it is attached to the outside to a little electric stimulater that consistently zaps that part of the brain at a very low level. It has been found to work wonders on severe depression and other illnesses.



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 07:58 PM
link   
I did not have a prior interest in Charles Darwin and mental health, but I have been reading of late about Robert Boyle, discoverer of Boyles Law and his relationship with his contemporaries Valentine Greatorex [ Irish faith-Healer] and Richard Lower the latter having conducted experiements in transfusion i the 1660's.

The relevance is? one may ask, well,historical medicine.

The medical treatments of the 1600's include "dog excrement" for eye infections.

A few things did stike me on reading the OP , Darwins symptoms do suggest a level of toxicological overload, and it would seem that now some research has suggested he was also lactose intolerance.

Charles Darwin had lactose intolerance

Charles Darwin was lactose intolerant, researchers deduce, adding a fresh twist to the mystery of what caused his 40-year-long illness.
This would explain the bouts of vomiting, stomach pains, severe tiredness, skin problems and depression Darwin suffered, symptoms a new report says improved when he stopped eating milk and cream.

His family also suffered in a similar way, suggesting a genetic component, researchers led by Professor Anthony Campbell from Cardiff University reports in the current issue of the Postgraduate Medical Journal.




The only time Darwin got better was by chance, after a drastic change to his diet that meant he coudn't eat custard or milk.





Medicine of choice

So apart from being a possible sufferer of lactose intolerance, the poor man was I suspect poisoned by the medicine of choice for the day..

Opium.
- Laudanum.
- Mercury.
- Strychnine.
- Bezoars
- Olive oil.
- Brown paper.
- Red cloth.
- Honey.
- Arsenic.
- Morphine.

yummy

Letter from Charles Darwin's father found in Cambridgeshire Archives


In the letter, Dr Darwin prescribed a course of arsenic as medicine for Baumgartner's complaint of "chronic inflammation." It is believed that Baumgartner died shortly afterwards.


Arsenic was widely prescribed in the 19th century as a cure for skin diseases, malaria, epilepsy, eczema and fever.

Later in life Charles Darwin himself took arsenic to treat skin problems on his hand and his lip.



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 08:17 PM
link   
Oh my! This thread is a bit stinky, no?

I'm not sure that many are aware, but creativity is an important asset in science. The ability for divergent thought is useful in making the connections between disparate chunks of evidence.


E. Jung1,2,3*, Rachael Grazioplene1, Arvind Caprihan1, Robert S. Chavez1, Richard J. Haier1

1 Mind Research Network, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, United States of America, 2 Department of Neurosurgery, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, United States of America, 3 Department of Psychology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, United States of America

Abstract

That creativity and psychopathology are somehow linked remains a popular but controversial idea in neuroscience research. Brain regions implicated in both psychosis-proneness and creative cognition include frontal projection zones and association fibers. In normal subjects, we have previously demonstrated that a composite measure of divergent thinking (DT) ability exhibited significant inverse relationships in frontal lobe areas with both cortical thickness and metabolite concentration of N-acetyl-aspartate (NAA). These findings support the idea that creativity may reside upon a continuum with psychopathology. Here we examine whether white matter integrity, assessed by Fractional Anisotropy (FA), is related to two measures of creativity (Divergent Thinking and Openness to Experience). Based on previous findings, we hypothesize inverse correlations within fronto-striatal circuits. Seventy-two healthy, young adult (18–29 years) subjects were scanned on a 3 Tesla scanner with Diffusion Tensor Imaging. DT measures were scored by four raters (α = .81) using the Consensual Assessment Technique, from which a composite creativity index (CCI) was derived. We found that the CCI was significantly inversely related to FA within the left inferior frontal white matter (t = 5.36, p = .01), and Openness was inversely related to FA within the right inferior frontal white matter (t = 4.61, p = .04). These findings demonstrate an apparent overlap in specific white matter architecture underlying the normal variance of divergent thinking, openness, and psychotic-spectrum traits, consistent with the idea of a continuum.


Likewise, the ability for enhanced convergent thinking also appears to be an asset in particular fields:


Schizotypy and mental health amongst poets, visual artists, and mathematicians

Daniel Nettlea,
aPsychology, Brain and Behaviour, University of Newcastle, Newcastle NE2 4HH, UK

Available online 27 October 2005.

Abstract
Many researchers have found evidence of an association between creativity and the predisposition to mental illness. However, a number of questions remain unanswered. First, it is not clear whether healthy creatives have a milder loading on schizotypal traits than people who suffer serious psychopathology, or whether they have an equal loading, but other mediating characteristics. Second, most of the existing research has concentrated on artistic creativity, and the position of other creative domains is not yet clear. The present study compares schizotypy profiles using the O-LIFE inventory in a large sample of poets, artists, mathematicians, the general population, and psychiatric patients. Poets and artists have levels of unusual experiences that are higher than controls, and as high as schizophrenia patients. However, they are relatively low on the dimension of introvertive anhedonia. Mathematicians are lower than controls on unusual experiences. The results suggest that artistic creatives and psychiatric patients share a tendency to unusual ideas and experiences, but creative groups are distinguished by the absence of anhedonia and avolition. Moreover, different domains of creativity require different cognitive profiles, with poetry and art associated with divergent thinking, schizophrenia and affective disorder, and mathematics associated with convergent thinking and autism.


So there is method to a little bit of 'madness'. This also applies beyond science and into the arts, of course. The more 'florid' psychopathology is associated with divergent thinking. Convergent thinkers are generally more stable (to the level of emotional blunting at times) and also tend towards the systematising elements of the autistic spectrum.

What is interesting is that it has been suggested that scientists with predominately convergent thinking tend to be great at working within paradigmatic boundaries. In contrast, those with divergent thinking are more likely to be of a revolutionary nature (cf. Darwin).

Moreover, there is a fairly long history of scientists partaking of 'chemical shortcuts' to the more creative mindset (e.g., Richard Feynman, Ralph Abraham)


And in my own more anecdotal experience, I would safely contend that academia is populated with a fair number of 'eccentrics' and the slighty autistic, lol.

[edit on 26-6-2010 by melatonin]



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 08:24 PM
link   
Mental illness is subjective at best and I expect one can meditate until the cows come home waiting for enlightenment if the ego still abounds.

Ego is the deeply ingrained, compulsive need to remain separate and superior at all times, in all places, under all circumstances.


mental illness ....hmmm define

Ego, Insecurity and the Destructive Narcissist


We are all driven, at some level, by ego. Even the most adept of spiritual masters cannot be said to operate in a wholly altruistic manner. Take, for instance, the bodhisattva. Here is a being whose sole intent is to forgo the culmination of their own enlightenment and remain on the Wheel of Life until all other beings attain enlightenment - a wholly egoless act, no? Not so much - there is investment (get everyone enlightened), no matter how altruistic and so there is ego ("I'll do it!"), no matter how good the intent.

The bully's ego is artifice. His arrogance is a hollow confidence. His condescension is a need to belittle. His rage is a need to control. This ego for him is a fragile thing, driven by fear and narcissism, not by power, nor by the power he wishes so desperately to possess. In fact, the bully is actually quite powerless, for he is only as powerful as the power we give him. He feeds on our fear, but his hunger is driven solely by his own.






posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 09:34 PM
link   
not knowing everything is just a shade of gray in the mental illness spectrum.

mental illnesses are just a side effect of thinking you need to know everything.

and somewhere inbetween the above two, we know alot.
and then we come to our shared ATS, our thoughts we jot
hoping and praying we can effectively share what we caught
hoping and praying someone will get what it is we have taught
hoping and praying someone will share their truisms they sought
and somewhere inbetween the mix of the above, we sure know alot...

:rock: &
,
ET



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 09:43 PM
link   
reply to post by melatonin
 

Darwin had Mad Cow disease. Addressing your suggestion, science should use imagination I agree but not when it is used to make a hypothesis a scientific fact much less a theory. Not when it is used to shape the way we see ourselves.

Imagination is the mother of invention but when I see imagination used for instance to place a suspect at a crime scene and imagination is often used in alibi's when what is needed is clear cut black and white facts to find out what really happened. Same is seen in science where I have seen science make some of the most inappropriate assertions based on pure fantasy or a bias that directs a lot of the ideas and conclusions they many times pass off as facts and evidence. As soon as you add this element to science in this way, you have just given life to the reasonable doubt all one needs to dismiss these as presumptuous and / or speculative.

Oh the Mad Cow, joking







[edit on 26-6-2010 by Prosecutor]



posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 10:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Prosecutor

Originally posted by PieKeeper
This is one of the worst threads on this particular forum in some time. The OP, a forum mod for crying out loud, obviously has no idea that science is peer reviewed. Ideas aren't just accepted, they are tested, and attempts are made to find evidence for them.


Originally posted by Skyfloating
Lets instead take a mentally ill persons word for it that humans came about as a matter of coincidence and that a humans Consciousness does not .


You do know that Alfred Russel Wallace developed the same ideas during the exact same time period, also while in the tropics?

Wallace wrote Darwin about his ideas and Darwin suddenly has the same ideas but we know he didn't. Why you think peer review is so special Ill never know.

Peer review is a joke son and I am convinced you do not work in the field of science. If you did, you would know off the record, they don't mean much and have taken a pretty bad beating from issues like climate gate and the United States Senates own investigation which concluded the corruption went all the way to the top in science circles. That peer review needs a review just to clean it up. Peer review in a consensus science adds nothing for its credibility


If you actually knew what you were talking about, you'd know that "Climate Gate" was actually just a misunderstanding of the language: www.newsweek.com...



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 01:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by judoka
Actually, electro shock therapy does work very well for extremely depressed people. He was clearly a man ahead of his time.


According to his contemporaries it didnt work for him.



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 02:47 AM
link   
It's "cool" to insult any religious figure, and claim anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool.

Let's be honest, it's usually those who lack a social life or happen to be completely ignorant to the outside world who insult god.

It's fine to not believe in him, but to insult something which billions of others believe publicly usually reveals how petty and insecure one is. Give it another 3 years and the younger crowd won't find it so rebellious and cool any longer. Which will result in a HUGE die off.

It's little children trying to make their own way in the world. You were there once allow them this moment.



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 03:02 AM
link   
Mentally ill or not, I will still believe in Darwins theory of evolution as opposed to a invisible magic sky fairy that is coming back to save us.

Intelligent people can't suffer from neurosis? is it limited to dumb people?



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 03:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by lifecitizen
Mentally ill or not, I will still believe in Darwins theory of evolution as opposed to a invisible magic sky fairy that is coming back to save us.


I dont believe in any sky fairy who is coming back to save us. Is that the only alternative to believing in "life is a coincidence"?




Intelligent people can't suffer from neurosis? is it limited to dumb people?


The psycho-spiritually inept suffer from neurosis.



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 04:25 AM
link   

I dont believe in any sky fairy who is coming back to save us. Is that the only alternative to believing in "life is a coincidence"?


I'm sure there are lots of alternatives to believing in a god or believing life is a coincidence .. but I noticed that god has come up quite a bit in the thread, from what I read anyway so that was where I was coming from with that comment.
I've found people most opposed to the theory of evolution are invariably religious, just my observation.



The psycho-spiritually inept suffer from neurosis.


Could you explain what you mean by psycho spritual?



new topics

top topics



 
50
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join