(September 25, 2014 at 9:24 pm)bennyboy Wrote: I suggested that everything she takes as an indicator of sanity is delusional. Our interview ended up with her having a philosophical crisis, and me getting a cool new doctor with crazy hair, a lazy eye, and an interest in talking about philosophy.
Its fun to mess with people like that, isn't it?
(September 25, 2014 at 9:24 pm)bennyboy Wrote: But anyway, what are the indicators of sanity? Here are a few off the top of my head.
-It's important to get out of bed in the morning, because things you do matter.
-You believe you see things essentially as they are, and act accordingly.
-You behave "morally," which means you accept that others are important, too, and that you will not interfere with their process of seeing things as they are and acting accordingly.
Where did you get these indicators? Because I don't think they are accurate.
- People suffering from depression may not believe that what they do matters. Others, such as those too old or handicapped, may rightly believe that they are not accomplishing anything significant. But these people are not necessarily insane.
- Believing that you see things as they are and actually seeing them as they are are two different things. An insane person may whole-heartedly believe that the statue is talking to him. On the other hand, having a few beliefs that don't match reality - like god talks to you - is not sufficient to declare someone insane (if only it was).
- If behaving "immorally" was a criteria for insanity then every criminal would get off on an insanity plea. Immoral people are not necessarily insane and insane people are not necessarily immoral.
(September 25, 2014 at 9:24 pm)bennyboy Wrote: But are these components of world view ACTUALLY rational? Are they founded on observation or a sensible process of drawing inferences? I don't think so. I think they are expressions of feelings ingrained in our species through the process of evolution.
What say you? Does being "crazy" really mean someone has lost their grip on reality, and does being "sane" really mean someone is interacting meaningfully with an objective reality?
While I don't agree with your indicators of sanity, I do believe that there are indicators which are rational, founded on observation and based on a sensible process of drawing inferences. Towards that end, I agree with Alfred Korzybski and his map-territory analogy.
One of the functions of human mind is to draw a mental representation of reality around it the same way map represents a particular territory. A map isn't necessarily accurate in its representation but the more accurate it is, the more useful and reliable it'll be. The purpose behind drawing an accurate representation of reality is to facilitate survivability - therefore, the more accurate mental representation means better survivability.
That is the criteria for a sound and healthy mind - one that is capable of drawing a representation of reality with a certain basic degree of accuracy. Anything below that is detrimental to one's life and therefore a sign of an unhealthy or unsound mind.
