(May 25, 2015 at 1:25 pm)Aractus Wrote: You have misrepresented/misunderstood my post. A cognitive psychologist will claim that a mental illness is the result of a cognitive disorder. A behavioural psychologist will claim that a mental illness is the result of disordered behaviour. Most now think both contribute; however they haven't been able to advance the theory to the point where they're able to effectively treat people with consistent results. If I give disordered gambling as an example - it's perfectly true to say that a minimal intervention session (a targeted advice session delivered once lasting between 15 minutes to 1 hour) is just as effective as other longer treatment options and therefore they have indeed found a way to create a more efficient treatment option - certainly much more efficient than the 12-step program - but it fails to deliver better results than the 12-step program.
My argument is not that mental illness is not a valid thing - of course it is. It's just over what it is, how it's caused, how it should be treated, and finally how should it be defined in the first place. As I mentioned in my previous post, it's no secret that mental illnesses themselves are generally defined as being categorised by abnormal behaviour. Although in the DSM-5 they did attempt to re-frame it. In the interest of transparency here's the official definitions...
Well it was a bit difficult not to misinterpret your post with the whole 'is mental illness a sham' thing
as for the rest, I'm not in any way qualified to argue over any of it as I don't know shit and all that...sorry
