Ayn Rand Smeared Again

Well at least you're not on coke...

Post 281

Thursday, September 15, 2005 - 2:11am

Michael: �(Believe it or not, you hit close to the truth, also. Still, no cigar - but much closer than most.)�

I know I�ve hit close to the truth, but thanks for the vote of confidence anyway. And no worries about the cigar � I don�t smoke anyway. Looking forward to your article.

Brendan

Post 282

Thursday, September 15, 2005 - 2:13am

Abolaji: �What do you consider an "organic malfunction"?�

I would say that something like cancer is an organic malfunction, in that the cancerous cells are multiplying at a rate that is faster than normal. A stroke is a malfunction, because the blood stops flowing as it normally does. A heart attack is a malfunction because the heart normally beats to a certain rhythm. And so on.

�Addiction is in part a result of certain hormonal imbalances. It has both a neurological basis and a cultural basis.�

I agree alcoholism seems to be more prevalent in some cultures, but I don�t know much about any connection between neurology and addiction. Can you expand on that?

Brendan

Post 283

Thursday, September 15, 2005 - 4:44am

Brendan,

"Alcoholism seems to be more prevalent in some cultures, but I don�t know much about any connection between neurology and addiction."

In cultures where children are expected to have wine or beer with meals from an early age - Jews, Chinese - there apparently was no alcoholism until modern times. Now that some parents in these cultures have come under the influence of assimilation to Christian Anglo culture, some instances of alcoholism have emerged, although still at a rate far below that of the Anglos.

There may be interactions between culture and biology at work.

Post 284

Thursday, September 15, 2005 - 9:39am

Andy Postema somehow felt compelled to write:

Kevin,

Although my beliefs about alcoholism and how to defeat it are consistent with Objectivism, they pre-date my knowledge of Miss Rand's philosophy. I leave it to you and Michael, who like to make guesses about people you don't know, to figure how I as a teenager learned what I know about alcoholism today.

As for your equation of alcoholism to suffering from cancer, if that comparison is valid, then why isn't pedophilia the same? Why shouldn't we have an outpouring of compassion for pedophiles who are driven by their "disease" to not just hurt themselves but other people too? How terrible a disease is that!

I've been sitting with this for a while and I still can't understand what you hoped to accomplished by it. Aside from securing bragging rights amongst your buds in your online club house, how does this serve you? There's a whole contingent on this site that seems far more interested in pummeling others with their prejudices (however Objectivist in flavor) than having an intellectually valid discussion. You trot out the straw man du jour, be it "therapeutic culture," or "new puritans," or what have you and bully interested individuals into silence. You latch on to that one word, "disease," and believe you know my mind. Andy, you don't impress me. Go pester someone else.

The pedophile comparison has clarified something for me, however (I always try to do the best with what I�m given). There seems to be a general consensus here that alcoholism is de facto evidence of profound evil, but I have known alcoholics, people who have damaged their own lives through isolation and financial ruin, who have hurt exactly no one other than themselves. Also, in its early stages, an alcoholic can be very high functioning, even though they've become thoroughly dependent on the drug. Like depression, people react to alcoholism in very different ways. So, again, merely believing someone to be an alcoholic, is not proof that you hate them, unless you unreasoningly hate all alcoholics as such.

-Kevin

Post 285

Thursday, September 15, 2005 - 10:16am

Kevin,

Don't let Andy bother you. He's just forcing things into another false dichotomy to be polemical (and steer this discussion away from the central topic).

But let's go to the center of the implied criticism. I want to neutralize an attempt at emotional manipulation anyway. Who in hell ever said that pedophilia is not a disease except Andy and his sympathizers? And that pedophiles do not deserve the same compassion that is bestowed on all sick people? (Andy's false attribution of a position to another again.)

I will not get sidetracked right now, but let me state that pedophilia most definitely is a disease of consciousness and there is specialized medical treatment for it. The reason people do not show as much compassion for pedophiles who try to get better as they do for recovering alcoholics is that they also have great compassion for the children who are molested and spiritually mutilated with this disease.

Generally, pedophiles who do not try to recover are treated as more evil and with more contempt than alcoholics who don't try because of their little defenseless victims. Not because pedophilia is not a disease.

Michael

Post 286

Thursday, September 15, 2005 - 11:18am

Exactly, Michael. This whole area of mental disturbance seems to be a real hot-button for Soloists. I'm still interested in the issue of disorders of the will, disorders which target volitional functioning particularly. There seems to be at least a quasi-mystical belief in "will power" floating around here; that no matter the problem, it's nothing a little boot strapping can't cure. Surely the will can be harmed, damaged, even destroyed in extreme cases. The science of addiction is still young. Clearly there are agents that hinder the proper functioning of the will. I would think that addiction would be a major subject of inquiry hereabouts as it would seem to have profound implications for Objectivism.

-Kevin

Post 287

Thursday, September 15, 2005 - 12:25pm

Michael- I will not get sidetracked right now, but let me state that pedophilia most definitely is a disease of consciousness and there is specialized medical treatment for it. The reason people do not show as much compassion for pedophiles who try to get better as they do for recovering alcoholics is that they also have great compassion for the children who are molested and spiritually mutilated with this disease.

Generally, pedophiles who do not try to recover are treated as more evil and with more contempt than alcoholics who don't try because of their little defenseless victims. Not because pedophilia is not a disease.

There are various flavors for the term, depending partly on where you are discussing things. Disease of consciousness, mental illness, spiritual sickness, etc. The problem with pedophilia is that treatment options are even more limited than those for treating alcoholism (which isn't running, but galloping through society like it usually does). Unless something very major has hit the screen very recently, as far as I know it is still nearly impossible to "cure" pedophiles. To my mind, it's not a matter of compassion, it's a matter of fear. Both chronic substance abusers and sexual predators are dangerous, just in different ways.

The disease model is difficult to accept for anything but contracted diseases. And, I'm not sure it matters if you call alcoholism or anything else that isn't contracted a disease or not. I find the disease model to be somewhat hypocritical in social practice- we prosecute alcoholics for their crimes regardless of the fact that the commonly accepted model right now for addiction is the disease model. Disease or not, you go to jail when you do dangerous things- it is criminal prosecution that you will face.

Dealing with sexual predators and chronic substance abusers are subjects that carry a lot of breadth and depth, and there are no silver bullets, obviously.

Post 288

Thursday, September 15, 2005 - 2:15pm

Rich,

Just to be clear, I call it a disease of consciousness because there is diagnosis and treatment that does improve it, even when no cure is obtainable, and consciousness is biological. If it's biological - and if it can die, it can get sick. However, I'm not making any excuse - especially not implied - for all the crazy and dangerous stuff people with these afflictions do.

You stated, "The disease model is difficult to accept for anything but contracted diseases."

Kids are born with diseases. Go to a children's cancer ward and take a look. They are also born with all kinds of diseases they did not contract. Also, one type of alcoholism can be slowly contracted over years of heavy drinking - while another is pure genetic propensity that unleashes the alcoholism right at the beginning (those of Indian descent are extremely susceptible, for instance, while Orientals are much less so - something to do with capacity for processing acetaldehyde). Hard drug addiction certainly is contracted.

As to cure for pedophilia, I'm not that intimate with the issue to discuss it, but I imagine there are cured pedophiles out there. I do know that serious treatment is available. Anyone recovering from that, who is making an honest effort to deal with the inner demons, has my compassion and my help if I can rationally provide it.

Of course, the obvious disclaimer again - I have more compassion for and interest in protecting the young innocent victims. Still, one does not cancel the other.

There was a real heated discussion on Solo a bit back on this as some Libertarians wish to use the discourse for political freedom as an excuse to give free rein to this disease and others (including myself) will have none of it.

Michael
(Edited by Michael Stuart Kelly on 9/15, 2:17pm)

Post 289

Thursday, September 15, 2005 - 2:19pm

Rich,

I am posting this because popular misinformation - of the kind you posted - will adversely affect people who could be dissuaded from seeking psychiatric help if they believe the popular myth that there is no effective treatment for pedophilia. In fact, satiation therapy is close to 100% effective, but information about its effectiveness is often suppressed because of religious objections to this mode of treatment among most Christian believers. For the same reason, satiation therapy is also usually not available in mandatory and other government-sponsored or faith-based treatment programs. Also, people with other sexual preferences - including sexual neoteny and sexual neotenism, which are harmless and otherwise completely within the range of healthy human sexuality - are at risk of being misdiagnosed as "pedophiles" by therapists who adhere to Christian religious doctrines.

A person who is afraid that he might be suffering from pedophilia needs to seek individual (NEVER group) diagnosis and treatment from a non-Christian, board-certified MD psychiatrist. Non-medical psychologists, social workers and lay psychotherapists are often ignorant of current science on sexuality.

Post 290

Thursday, September 15, 2005 - 11:50am

I don't like the "disease" model. There is not disease in what you guys are talking about insofar as I know. If we are going to discuss this then please define what a disease is.

--Brant

Post 291

Thursday, September 15, 2005 - 3:23pm

Will do, Brandt.

Article coming in the next few days.

Michael

Post 292

Thursday, September 15, 2005 - 3:32pm

Kevin,

I see that you've gotten slightly hysterical because I have challenged the loopy idea that alcoholism is a disease. I'm sorry that I upset you by being plainspoken about my beliefs instead of dressing them up with pretty circumlocutions. However, treating you like an adult instead of sensitive child who must be spoonfed a seemingly harsh idea is not "bullying". It's called respect.

You also need to recognize how you've gone out of bounds in this discussion. Nothing I have said permits you to accuse me of hating alcoholics. It is because I have compassion for others, I detest the therapeutic culture that feeds off the harm people inflict upon themselves and keeps them ensnared in their self-destruction by telling them to blame at least part of the problem on a "disease". The only way out of a psychological hell, as opposed to genuine mental disease, is to find your own will to be free of your demons.

There is nothing wrong in getting help that points the way out, but you alone must make the trek out of your self-made hell. The way you get the courage to do so is the knowledge that it was your own free will that brought you to your pit of despair in the first place. If you can get yourself in, then you get yourself out. When a so-called therapist lies to you and tells you that you have a disease, he hides that knowledge from you. He puts the mystery of a disease in its place. Thus, he becomes the witch doctor you must rely upon to be relieved of your "disease".

That's why labeling alcoholism and other addictions as diseases is a cruel sham.

Andy

Post 293

Thursday, September 15, 2005 - 3:51pm

To the kumbaya circle forming to protect pedophiles from any harsh judgment:

It simply doesn't matter what causes a pedophile to have the perverse lust he has, because he does not have to act upon it. A pedophile, like the rest of us, has no excuse for not acting morally. It may be harder for him to do so, but nothing other than his own will causes him to molest a child. That's why his act is a crime. He does it knowing it's wrong. His difficulty in resisting that wrong doesn't relieve him of responsibility for it.

One further comment: The fact that a child may attain sexual maturity before the normal age (neotony) doesn't make him fair game for a pedophile.

Andy

Post 294

Thursday, September 15, 2005 - 3:57pm

(yawn)

To the kumbaya circle forming to protect pedophiles from any harsh judgment:

Anybody around here have any idea who Andy is talking about?

I don't see in relation to reality in his grandstanding here (at least on this thread).

Michael

Post 295

Thursday, September 15, 2005 - 4:21pm

Rich,

If you want to buy into this tripe that satiation therapy is 100% effective in curing pedophiles and it is only a Christian cabal suppressing this information, go ahead. But I think you'll discover that this quackery is like a reverse "Clockwork Orange" in which you jerk off to wholesome thoughts until you're cured of what ails you. It's something like trying to cure an alcoholic by encouraging him to drink with happy thoughts in his head instead deep dark ones.

The best cure for a pedophile is to demand of him that he keeps his pants zipped no matter how much it hurts. Does that sound cruel? Well, however much it hurts him, he can respect himself for not hurting anyone else. The worst thing you can do to a pedophile is lay off his problem to a "disease" and deny him the common humanity to morally resist a dangerous and perverse desire. Reminding him of his humanity is real compassion.

Andy

Post 296

Thursday, September 15, 2005 - 4:29pm

Andy,

Not only are you wrong and completely ignorant about what you are discussing (and I'm not second-guessing you past, merely going on what you are posting), you are belligerently obnoxious about it.

Ridiculing medical treatment for the ill is not KASS. It is dumb and prejudiced.

Any reason for that?

Michael

Post 297

Thursday, September 15, 2005 - 5:20pm

It appears the only one wrong and ignorant is the brazil nut running around posturing like a religious zealot,since fanaticism is hardly being rational - indeed, more like dressing as the red queen for halloween..."Off with their heads! Off with their heads! How dare they - the affrontary of it all!!"

Post 298

Thursday, September 15, 2005 - 4:42pm

Andy Postema:

"I see that you've gotten slightly hysterical because I have challenged the loopy idea that alcoholism is a disease."

Yes. Religionists frequently become hysterical when you challenge their idiotic "ideas."

MSK:

[Quoting Andy] "To the kumbaya circle forming to protect pedophiles from any harsh judgment:"

"Anybody around here have any idea who Andy is talking about?"

Yeah. It's not hard at all to figure out, actually.

JR

Post 299

Thursday, September 15, 2005 - 4:54pm