And Now It Is Pre-cradle To The Grave, And, Beyond?

[moralist]

Even right now your body is fighting a constant war against microscopic invaders. Health is the ability to prevail in that war. Sickness is the lack of that ability. Since we're all going to eventually die from something, that's just part of life.

Greg,

In other words, the real cause of all disease is being alive?

No.

The real cause of all disease is how we live. And it is how we live that gives rise to all of the external compensations to eliminate symptoms... but not their causes.

Greg

Like the little boy with cancer?

--Brant

I'm speaking about adults who are personally responsible for how they live. As children we all inherit physical weaknesses from our parents.

Greg

[moralist]

Greg, I must reiterate: all you speak of is part of one's self - i.e. it has IDENTITY.

If that is true, Tony, then how can you choose to act contrary to your thoughts and emotions?

You talk now, and have previously, of cognition and emotion as something divorced from the reality of you, happening of their own accord, to be severely controlled by some kind of 'moral overseer'.

In reality, it is not severe at all as you are suggesting. Self control is totally a matter of our free choice. There is absolutely no coercion at all. Each of us is completely free to indiscriminately act upon every thought and emotion that passes through our heads as if they were the totality of our being and nothing else... although I need to add that choice can inflict untold damage upon those who are closest to us.

"Thought about thought" and "thought about emotions" (way I see it) is an invaluable, volitional exercise.

Absolutely.

Just as it's good for us to observe thought and emotion, it is also good for us to observe our reaction to thought. Even as you read this, you art thinking about thought. But if you pause even for a moment, you may realize that you are actually looking at your thoughts about thought.

However, both thought and emotion have their referents in existence. e.g. An emotion is a consequence of *something*- it's always an occurrence in reality,

Yes, but realize that emotion can also be a reaction to imagination which has no basis in reality.

which you considered, then acted upon, and experienced an emotion according to how well you acted. "How well" being the automatic emotional judgement of the effectiveness of your moral code relating to reality, and how truly you acted on that code.

Yes. That feedback is our reaction to what we initially observe. That self evaluation is a beneficial learning process.

'The better self' as it is called metaphorically, is exactly that - a meaningless metaphor. You are all self, and your self is all you.

Our thoughts and emotions are ours, not happenstances, and they need to be taken ownership of, and taken responsibility for.

I agree. And each of us has the opportunity to choose between acting upon the thoughts and emotions of the "the better self"... or acting upon the thoughts of "the worse self". I submit to you that the real you is the one who silently makes that choice.

"From primordial mysticism to this, its climax, the attack on man's consciousness and particularly on his conceptual faculty has rested on the unchallenged premise that any knowledge [including morality] acquired by a PROCESS of consciousness is necessarily subjective and cannot correspond to the facts of reality, since it is "PROCESSED knowledge".

My personal response to that quote is to offer that there is another additional component to "processed knowledge".

Understanding

And understanding is not merely a product which is ground out by the process of thinking. It is an insightful flash... an instant of epiphany from seeing thought and emotion for what they truly are in the objective moral light provided by the reality of our Conscience. After that flash of insight, we are free to reflect upon it and to respond to it with thought and emotion... but realize that those all come after the fact.

Greg

[moralist]

A distinction, Brant - without contradicting your main thrust.

ADD, ADHD indeed exists, while I won't argue that it has become over-diagnosed/misdiagnosed.

An effective drug like Ritalin et al that eases a young person's passage through socialization and education - and the later, long-term problems - has to have merits.

That's all well and good as long as you realize up front that when drugs are used to suppress symptoms, personal emotional problems remain unaddressed and unresolved and their consequences are only postponed... sometimes with disastrous results. This can be akin to stretching a rubber band until it snaps.

This is an inherent assumed risk when using chemicals to control emotion.

Greg

[anthony]

Greg, I must reiterate: all you speak of is part of one's self - i.e. it has IDENTITY.

If that is true, Tony, then how can you choose to act contrary to your thoughts and emotions?

You talk now, and have previously, of cognition and emotion as something divorced from the reality of you, happening of their own accord, to be severely controlled by some kind of 'moral overseer'.

In reality, it is not severe at all as you are suggesting. Self control is totally a matter of our free choice. There is absolutely no coercion at all. Each of us is completely free to indiscriminately act upon every thought and emotion that passes through our heads as if they were the totality of our being and nothing else... although I need to add that choice can inflict untold damage upon those who are closest to us.

Greg

"...how can you choose to act contrary to your thoughts and emotions?" (Greg)

By choosing. One thought over many other another possible thoughts. By selecting that course you judge is most moral, or completely moral. Therefore, thinking on principle according to the situational context, and for a rationally selfish outcome. (Which ~implicitly~ contains not inflicting damage on an innocent party.)

This is which makes free will so important, and a moral code so critical. And like consciousness, those two existents have identity too: they're also knowable and sustainable.

If, as Rand had it, emotion is a consequence, not a cause, then to put it ahead of cognition would result in subjective actions, by whim - harmful to oneself and probably anyone else. This is not to say one doesn't react immediately and instinctively to say, danger, with relevant fear, since our animal instincts are wholly different to emotions. Or to say one doesn't bear in mind emotional consequences, from past experience, while choosing which act to take.

Ultimately I'm trying to say that there may not often be a "contrary" to thoughts and acts (specifically) - with a well-established (rationally selfish) morality. Many of those other possibilities can be recognized as null and void from the get-go.

[moralist]

"...how can you choose to act contrary to your thoughts and emotions?" (Greg)

By choosing. One thought over many other another possible thoughts.

Even more specific... by choosing to act on one thought, and to let the rest of the thoughts go unresponded.

And we are the chooser, not the thought. For if we were both the thought and the chooser, how could we choose to act contrary to ourselves if it was all just us? And if we were the thought alone, we could not choose.

By selecting that course you judge is most moral, or completely moral. Therefore, thinking on principle according to the situational context, and for a rationally selfish outcome. (Which ~implicitly~ contains not inflicting damage on an innocent party.)

While that process you just described does work for what it is... I submit to you that there is another experience which is infinitely faster than shuffling through reams of wordy thoughts like a bureaucrat trying to arrive at a decision to act morally. And that is to silently and calmly see in the present moment what is morally right course of action. That is an instantaneous experience upon which you can act immediately. You can always think about it later after the fact how it was the right thing to do.

Greg

[Brant Gaede]

Even right now your body is fighting a constant war against microscopic invaders. Health is the ability to prevail in that war. Sickness is the lack of that ability. Since we're all going to eventually die from something, that's just part of life.

Greg,

In other words, the real cause of all disease is being alive?

No.

The real cause of all disease is how we live. And it is how we live that gives rise to all of the external compensations to eliminate symptoms... but not their causes.

Greg

Like the little boy with cancer?

--Brant

I'm speaking about adults who are personally responsible for how they live. As children we all inherit physical weaknesses from our parents.

Greg

So when does this kick in and how do you know it? 13, 18, 21, 26, 33?

--Brant

it'd be nice to know the inherited weaknesses wash out with the Bar/Bat Mitzvah

[Brant Gaede]

Putting the thought horse behind the choice cart.

--Brant

confused by the confused

[moralist]

Even right now your body is fighting a constant war against microscopic invaders. Health is the ability to prevail in that war. Sickness is the lack of that ability. Since we're all going to eventually die from something, that's just part of life.

Greg,

In other words, the real cause of all disease is being alive?

No.

The real cause of all disease is how we live. And it is how we live that gives rise to all of the external compensations to eliminate symptoms... but not their causes.

Greg

Like the little boy with cancer?

--Brant

I'm speaking about adults who are personally responsible for how they live. As children we all inherit physical weaknesses from our parents.

Greg

So when does this kick in and how do you know it? 13, 18, 21, 26, 33?

Can you clarify your question? When does what "kick in"?

[Brant Gaede]

Can you clarify your question? When does what "kick in"?

The you-are-responsible-for-your-disease adulthood (vs you-are-not-responsible childhood)

--Brant

[moralist]

Can you clarify your question? When does what "kick in"?

The you-are-responsible-for-your-disease adulthood (vs you are not responsible childhood)

--Brant

Ok I see. It's not when... it's what.

Many diseases are behavioral in nature, and for those we are personally responsible for the logical consequences of our own irresponsible actions. So to address that issue, medical technology has devised all manner of compensations, but they do not address the cause which is how we live.

Greg

[Selene]

Can you clarify your question? When does what "kick in"?

The personal responsibility of the child.

Basically, the Haitian child on the garbage heap that PDS referred to.

[Brant Gaede]

Many diseases are behavioral in nature, and for those we are personally responsible for the logical consequences of our own irresponsible actions. So to address that issue, medical technology has devised all manner of compensations, but they do not address the cause which is how we live.

Greg

Many are not.

--Brant

[moralist]

Many diseases are behavioral in nature, and for those we are personally responsible for the logical consequences of our own irresponsible actions. So to address that issue, medical technology has devised all manner of compensations, but they do not address the cause which is how we live.

Greg

Many are not.

--Brant

Sure. Many aren't...

...but I'm only referring to the major behaviorally caused diseases that affect huge portions of the population, like high blood pressure, high cholesterol, heart disease, arthritis, and diabetes, which arise from bad eating habits, obesity, consuming alcohol, smoking, being upset and angry, and doing dope.

Greg

[moralist]

Can you clarify your question? When does what "kick in"?

The personal responsibility of the child.

Basically, the Haitian child on the garbage heap that PDS referred to.

Don't you remember? We've already been to that garbage heap before.

...so the answer is the same as it was the last time we went to the dump. Parents are personally responsible for their children who are too young to be responsible for themselves. I can't believe you don't already know this. Don't you have any kids?

Greg

[Brant Gaede]

Many diseases are behavioral in nature, and for those we are personally responsible for the logical consequences of our own irresponsible actions. So to address that issue, medical technology has devised all manner of compensations, but they do not address the cause which is how we live.

Greg

Many are not.

--Brant

Sure. Many aren't...

...but I'm only referring to the major behaviorally caused diseases that affect huge portions of the population, like high blood pressure, high cholesterol, heart disease, arthritis, and diabetes, which arise from bad eating habits, obesity, consuming alcohol, smoking, being upset and angry, and doing dope.

Greg

Not interested in arguing this, but you've reduced the basic position by half. I object to over-generalizations.

--Brant

cigarette smoking is bad for you? Had no idea

lack of exercise

lack of sleep

bad diet

[Selene]

Can you clarify your question? When does what "kick in"?

The personal responsibility of the child.

Basically, the Haitian child on the garbage heap that PDS referred to.

Don't you remember? We've already been to that garbage heap before.

...so the answer is the same as it was the last time we went to the dump. Parents are personally responsible for their children who are too young to be responsible for themselves. I can't believe you don't already know this. Don't you have any kids?

Greg

Greg:

Of course I remember and I also remember how you evaded Brant's queestion.

Secondly your effete condescending style in your post above, supplimented by your categorical generalizations make you unpersuasive and ugly at a moral level.

A...

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Sure. Many aren't...

...but I'm only referring to the major behaviorally caused diseases that affect huge portions of the population, like high blood pressure, high cholesterol, heart disease, arthritis, and diabetes, which arise from bad eating habits, obesity, consuming alcohol, smoking, being upset and angry, and doing dope.

Finally the qualifications are coming instead of dogma.

It's about time...

Michael

[moralist]

Sure. Many aren't...

...but I'm only referring to the major behaviorally caused diseases that affect huge portions of the population, like high blood pressure, high cholesterol, heart disease, arthritis, and diabetes, which arise from bad eating habits, obesity, consuming alcohol, smoking, being upset and angry, and doing dope.

Finally the qualifications are coming instead of dogma.

It's about time...

Michael

My dogma still isn't house trained... but he's getting better.

So much of people's health problems are behaviorally self inflicted. And that's one reason why the pharmaceutical sector is so huge. There is a constant voracious insatiable demand for more and more compensations.

Greg

[Brant Gaede]

Sure. Many aren't...

...but I'm only referring to the major behaviorally caused diseases that affect huge portions of the population, like high blood pressure, high cholesterol, heart disease, arthritis, and diabetes, which arise from bad eating habits, obesity, consuming alcohol, smoking, being upset and angry, and doing dope.

Finally the qualifications are coming instead of dogma.

It's about time...

Michael

My dogma still isn't house trained... but he's getting better.

So much of people's health problems are behaviorally self inflicted. And that's one reason why the pharmaceutical sector is so huge. There is a constant voracious insatiable demand for more and more compensations.

Greg

It doesn't matter how insatiable the demand is or for what. What matters is your own best judgment and what you can afford.

--Brant

insatiable demand for mo money, mo money, mo money (but I can only afford mo money)

[dldelancey]

Many diseases are behavioral in nature, and for those we are personally responsible for the logical consequences of our own irresponsible actions. So to address that issue, medical technology has devised all manner of compensations, but they do not address the cause which is how we live.

Greg

Many are not.

--Brant

Sure. Many aren't...

...but I'm only referring to the major behaviorally caused diseases that affect huge portions of the population, like high blood pressure, high cholesterol, heart disease, arthritis, and diabetes, which arise from bad eating habits, obesity, consuming alcohol, smoking, being upset and angry, and doing dope.

Greg

Returning then to the content of the original post.... the woman has bipolar disorder. Which behavior causes that?

[Brant Gaede]

I don't know the cause of bi-polar disorder. Who really does? Does it pre-date medical intervention? By that I mean could it be drug caused? Genetics? Bad thinking? Combo causes? A food allergy? Sugar? Is it really real? Something's happening.

--Brant

"behavior" is an empty vessel so it's a good question

[moralist]

Sure. Many aren't...

...but I'm only referring to the major behaviorally caused diseases that affect huge portions of the population, like high blood pressure, high cholesterol, heart disease, arthritis, and diabetes, which arise from bad eating habits, obesity, consuming alcohol, smoking, being upset and angry, and doing dope.

Finally the qualifications are coming instead of dogma.

It's about time...

Michael

My dogma still isn't house trained... but he's getting better.

So much of people's health problems are behaviorally self inflicted. And that's one reason why the pharmaceutical sector is so huge. There is a constant voracious insatiable demand for more and more compensations.

Greg

It doesn't matter how insatiable the demand is or for what.

It only matters to the pharmaceutical industry that constantly grows to meet that insatiable demand.

The US is totally marinated in drugs.

--Brant

insatiable demand for mo money, mo money, mo money (but I can only afford mo money)

The secret to financial prosperity is to love goodness more than money. But it only works if you truly mean it. It can't be faked. It has to be real. And when you truly do mean it, God's blessings pour out of Heaven and into your life until your cup runs over.

Heck, you don't even have to believe in God. Loving what's good and right enough to do it is sufficient... because loving goodness is loving God.

Greg

[moralist]

Returning then to the content of the original post.... the woman has bipolar disorder. Which behavior causes that?

The failure to properly deal with your own thoughts and emotions. The failure to become the master of your own mind.

Greg

[anthony]

Substitute the "God" in there with "Reality" and you have Objectivism.

I'll go on claiming that O'ists have something to learn from some of the religious - especially when it comes to money: its making, its deserving, and its "rewards".

(We got the principles, they got the convictions that come with long experience.) ;)

[dldelancey]

Returning then to the content of the original post.... the woman has bipolar disorder. Which behavior causes that?

The failure to properly deal with your own thoughts and emotions. The failure to become the master of your own mind.

Greg

And if there is a biological component to this failure? Or do you not believe that mental illness has a biological component?