Posted on September 17, 2005 at 22:49:39.
In Reply to: |Re: 'case notes| posted by Vauung
Re: 'case notes
By Doctor P
I suggest we test whether 'it' is brain damaged by trying to put this as logically as possible:
(a)Only one thing of note (ie worth getting excited about) is happening, that is the global process of schizo-delirium heading towards extropian singularity etc. (you will excuse my abbreviation here)
(b)It (the above) is happening regardless of whether one (individual human being) takes part
(c)One can take part _whilst making no difference_ by becoming a salary-drone
(d)Taking part in this way is tedious and dull and pointless
(e)A human body and nervous system has impulses which drive it
your options at this point:
(1)Carry out these impulses (e) and despise them because of their inadequate relation to (a)
or
(2)Submit to (c) because of its adequate relation to (a) and forget about (e)
(other options pending)
What I was attempting to root out previosly was of course the meaningful content of the decision to take (a) as the prior term in determining behaviour. In the end, it's surely as simple as idealism vs materialism. With a very little modulation, Baudrillard would indeed make a perfect companion here.
A fortiori - (a) is so comprehensive as to be a cypher (like that old 'brain in a vat' chestnut) and so its truth or falsity cannot reasonably be held to have any consequences for one's behaviour. So when the patient claims to be driven by some loyalty to or assimilation by (a) he is in fact being driven by some (e) which he does not wish to discuss. Hence suspicions of the patients tendency towards religion and self-mutilation.
I believe the only reason for being 'upset' (although i don't claim to speak for other interlocutors nor do I set any particular store by politeness) is an irritation (quite unbecoming to my profession of course) with vaunng's stonewalling when it comes to addressing this matter.
As to the implied slur on my profession (I cannot speak for 'the cops'), I refer you to my previous diagnosis, simply repeating: just because it's simple doesn't mean it's wrong. Yes, there is judgment. We must simply be suspicious of judgments, but nonetheless they are an inescapable fact of verbal or written communication, and objecting to the presence of the very form of logical argument is another form of prevarication in addressing the matter at hand. It is no doubt significant, this repeating trope of questioning the politics of debate and communication and depressively arguing for its futility, whilst nonetheless pursuing vehemently a very definite agenda. I have observed this also in those thinkers who in trendy circles are known as 'deconstructionists'.
As to the 'mirror' you propose, no doubt these factors are always present, since they are of the order of the archaeopsychic, but then the question is whether to use energy to invest or to disassemble them
.
I take your point as regards my presence in this place which is as I understand it dedicated to fans of so-called 'heavy metal' music and related matters. I'm sure that after all, indulging these 'black magic' fantasies in the company of friends will have no lasting ill-effects, and indeed may provide a certain comfort. I do not wish to disturb this much-deserved recuperative oasis. For myself, I shall not disturb your play any longer.
Dr. P