May 2, 2012
DSM-5 and a real philosopher: George Carlin
My readers seem to
have liked the videos or the text of the
previous Nederlog. Below are some more, all by George Carlin,
about whom I shall say a little more, on the lines of my title and in
the last Wikipedia link.
But first I have one more remark about the DSM-5:
(If you only want the link
to the videos of Carlin and skip my grumbling you're welcome: Videos.)
The main reason is that I have found in 2009 and later (*), when ME/CFS got in the news after a paper about it was published in Science, that an important part of the explanation that I can get no help whatsoever, while I am diagnosed with what is a serious neurological disease that is explicitly not psychiatric, according to the World Health Organization and four qualified medical doctors in my case, a disease that I have now for 34 years, during which time I also got a very good M.A. in psychology and a very good B.A. in philosophy, but could not make any money with these degrees because I am ill, and got much worse after ten years, and ever since - is that a group of psychiatrists has consistently been slandering and defaming persons with my disease as people who are insane (in dishonest euphemisms, but that is what it legally means and implies).
psychiatric frauds like professor
Wessely, who has been also implying since 1988 that thousands of
competent medical researchers who say that people with ME/CFS have a
serious invalidating disease are as insane as I am and as millions of others
with my disease are: they and I must have
"dysfunctional belief systems" is how the sick fraud puts it.
I think that is plain insanity or plain fraud on the part of psychiatrists, and in the latter case is motivated by the twin financial facts that this policy towards the physically ill (1) provides psychiatrists with millions of nominal patients they can (mis)treat for money, because they claim, against real medical scientists, that persons with ME/CFS are not physically ill but insane, and (2) this allows governments to deny any help to hundreds of thousands of patients, so that the money that gets saved by slandering and defaming these ill patients, after having paid the psychiatrists their slice, can be used to pay off the debts piled up to save the banks and bankmanagers.
So that is why the last 20 years millions of people with the physical, neurological, serious and non-psychiatric disease, according to the World Health Organization and thousands of non-psychiatric medical scientists, that I have been diagnosed with, have been intentionally mistreated by denying them and me any help whatsoever, based on the slander, defamation and pseudo-science of a several tens of psychiatrists and clinical psychologists, who have played the media and politicians like public relations pros, and whose pseudo-therapies, while profitable to them, are less costly than proper human care and help for the ill.
Next, since I do have the necessary knowledge and backgrounds in philosophy, psychology and as a patient with decades of discrimination and denials of help, I can see and explain what is wrong with psychiatry, and have tried to do so.
Third and last, while I do not expect a great readership of files of over 500 Kb of text of psychiatrist's prose with refutations, corrections, qualifications and occasional satire by me, at least it is there to provide e.g. lawyers with the arguments to take down psychiatric arguments in court-cases, which are bound to come as soon as the DSM-5 is introduced, not only about and around ME/CFS but many other illnesses that the DSM-5 declares, on what seem to be always intellectual fallacious, morally dishonest, and medically quire immoral arguments, to be psychiatric disorders or to be so in part, and to be subject to their meddling, rulings, "medical recommendations", and eventual sectionings of protesters against and disbelievers in their pseudoscience.
So that's why: To
refute and rationally contradict, qualify and criticize psychiatric
pseudoscience and weasel words,
so as to provide others, and notably lawyers, who must lack my
background and qualifications, with arguments and ammunition.
As it happens, I have seen quite a lot of academic philosophers, since I studied the subject - ill with ME/CFS since the very beginning, for my ex-wife and I both fell ill in the first months of our first year of studying with Epstein-Barr Virus, and that (or what that caused or was caused by that) never went away since 1.1.1979 - at the University of Amsterdam, until I was removed there briefly before taking my M.A. in it, because I asked questions, in public also, which was impossible in Holland at the University of Amsterdam:
one may not ask in the University of Amsterdam (UvA)
If you ask - what
the Board of its Directors holds are - the wrong questions in the
University of Amsterdam, the careerists who prosper there will call you
"a fascist" and scream at you that you are "a terrorist" if they loose
their discussions with you, and
then kick you from the university, for which reason it must be
considered very lucky for many careers of persons much more stupid and
dishonest than I am, that no one else
dared such a thing, and that no one
else in Holland, since the end of World War II, has been removed from any Dutch university
because of his or her opinions (though tens of thousands of
students and staff for decades swore personal allegiance to Marx, Che,
Mao or Lenin: that was the fashion I questioned). Only I had the
courage, and I had ME/CFS, so my conclusion is that it is very probably
Since I hail from a
really communist family, with
a father, mother and grandfather in the communist resistance against
Nazism, in a country were the majority collaborated with the Nazis
while they could, only
to claim immediately after the war to have been all leading heroes of
the resistance, as happened in fact (**),
I did not believe in the equal
value of my father and grandfather with the SS who tortured them, which
is what I and everybody else who studied in the UvA was taught:
and so I - initially
quite politely - protested, only to be met with years of discrimination
and scolding (since I also
was 'a student leader' in totally politicized university ruled by
bureaucrats and students who were nearly all members of Dutch Labour or
the Dutch Communist Party) that whoever denied all human beings are
of equal value "therefore" is a fascist, in Holland and the University
of Amsterdam, and "therefore" is to be removed from the university as a student of
philosophy, simply because I refused to believe that Einstein and
Eichmann are human beings of equal value (Dutch: "gelijkwaardig"),
something nearly everybody else in the University of Amsterdam
considered - or
at least: publicly pretended
- to be a necessary truth, from
1971-1995, when the marxists, communists, feminists and the degenerates
from Dutch Labour ruled and totally ruined the Dutch university and the
Dutch preparatory school education.
And I did not only
see and hear Dutch academic
philosophers in droves, who
were all totally incompetent, all posturing, all lying, and were all
fundamentally academic careerists
rather than honest and intelligent persons who were really interested in philosophy,
science, truth, beauty, or in the giving of good education and the
preservation of real universities, which indeed did not happen, mostly because what
these academic careerists all really
wanted were money, status, and a soft and easy job, while they all were
willing to take any public pose whatsoever to reach these much coveted
goods for themselves - I also saw and heard some famous foreign
philosophers, who indeed were not as stupid and incompetent, but mostly
not more inspiring.
This happened because ca. 1970 there was some sort of Dutch TV-series involving well-known philosophers from outside Holland, and I went and saw some of these lecture, and indeed got thoroughly disgusted, for reasons the intellectually gifted may infer from a British series with some of the same, that has been preserved on Youtube. You'll find it by searching Youtube with "philosophy Bryan Magee".
That series is all about what is really academic philosophy, which is not necessarily bad in itself, but which tends not to be done by persons who are in any major way comparable to the great minds that were real philosophers, who rarely were careerists and who often risked their lives by publicly stating their opinions.
In any case: Academic
philosophers are rarely if ever the real thing as far as philosophy
is concerned, if only because they tend not to seriously and sensibly
discuss real human problems and tend to formulate whatever ideas they
have in stilted, obscure, jargon
ridden, pretentious academic prose whence most liveliness, style,
personality and all firm personal moral stances have been carefully
weeded out and whittled away, all in the interest of continued tenure
and of acceptance by one's nominal academic peers (who often do not
like greater minds or greater personalities than they are).
George Carlin, although he never
got any university degree, was a real
philosopher who discussed real
philosophical problems in ways that are accessible, amusing and
instructive to real people who are not blessed by academic tenure for
knowing how to perform some academic tricks passably well and without
giving offense to the authorities or the public at large, and who call
themselves "philosophers" because they teach it, and maybe also write
about it in journals that are only read by their own kind.
Then again, in order
to reach the public Carlin had to adopt the stance of a comedian - as
few will pay to hear a talk about philosophy - a subject which he
excelled in thanks to a combination of courage, individualism,
intelligence and verbal wit.
He seems to me to be
one of the very few Americans of his and my generation who dared to
speak the truth about many
accepted idiocies and injustices in an intelligent and intelligible
way, and who also managed to get away with it, and indeed to make money
by it, because he was genuinely witty, which is another talent academic
philosophers rarely have, even if they believe they do (see Magee's
interviews, if you were inclined to think otherwise: compare the verbal
agility of these supposedly major 20th Century philosophers with the
verbal agility, ready wit and logical clarity that Carlin displayed,
also in direct discussion, as can be seen on YouTube).
Here are the links to a four part series of - what are claimed to be - George Carlin's best monologues. It seems a good choice, though there are more fine things by him. In any case, here you have some candid truth-speaking most people neither dare to articulate nor want to hear, and that is acceptable to most only because these often very bitter truths about human failings are presented as comedy, indeed with great wit and considerable moral courage.
(And while you enjoy, realize this was no ordinary fool: He was one of the very few who dared to speak the truth about average mankind to average mankind, and who survived that and made money from it by sheer wit.)
(*) Mostly because until 2009 I had a slow telephone modem that didn't allow much internet, which got changed in the summer of 2009, and because of the interest in ME/CFS sparked by the paper in Science of 2009, that was since withdrawn, when I also had fast internet access.
Since then I have
read a lot about and around ME/CFS and have learned a lot that I didn't
know, also because next to having until 2009 no fast internet I was misinformed by biased and partial
As reported a few years ago by one of Holland's former Prime Ministers,
who had captained a Dutch submarine that fought with the Allies in WW
II, and "learned" that "fact" about some 90% of the Dutch having been
Leaders in The Resistance against Nazism, by their own honest
testimony, when he returned to Holland in 1945: See - for Dutch
readers - "En alweer '68". Also for
Dutchies: "In Nederland regeert de leugen".
But Dutchies - most
of whose ancestors, unlike my own, were collaborators of the Nazis, if
not gassed by them - do not want to hear such things, even though I am
saying nothing that is false or opposed to Calvinism, which is the
traditional Dutch religion, that is not optimistic about the qualities
of average humans (which for the Dutch
also was a major reason to freight slaves from the 17th C till well in
the 19th, and to be very proud of that ever since: True Dutch
bussiness-mentality, according to our
last Prime Minister but one).
Instead, nearly all
of Dutchies publicly maintained for some three decades - inspired by the parliamentary leader of the Dutch
Communist Party Marcus Bakker - that "all human beings" - you, me,
Einstein, Eichmann, Mandela, Hitler, Da Vinci, Pol Pot etc. - "are all
of equal value", i.e. in Dutch "Alle mensen zijn gelijkwaardig."
One reason I protested this is that my family got locked up and murdered in German concentration-camps for belonging to the small minority of Dutchmen who dared to resist Nazism; another is that I think the stated moral claim about humanity, if not stark raving insane relativism, is sick and degenerate leveling that no sane person believes, since all humans hold their own great selves, their families, their loved ones and their leaders in religion and politics to be better than others, perhaps sometimes even quite justifiedly so, for while the communist leader Marcus Bakker may have quite enjoyed declaring himself the human equivalent of Stalin, Beria and Mao, some human beings, including their murdered victims, where a lot better and more intelligent than these mass-murdering dictators, or so it seems to me... but this was publicly a thought-crime in Holland between 1970 and 2000: Then and there nearly everyone declared everyone equivalent to everyone, and sorely discriminated the rare exception who protested as "fascist" and "terrorist".
It's bitterly ironical, isn't it?
It taught me a lot about the causes of dictatorships like those of Hitler and Stalin: Ordinary men and women, including the vast majority of those with university degrees, take naturally and as if born to the manner to groupthinking, to conformist collaborating in hordes, to totalitarianism, to authoritarianism and to adoring leaders for the excellent reason they are Our Leaders.
The philosophers, while some of them are smart, are all of them
academic careerists, and clearly not great personalities (except
perhaps in their own academic environment) and the whole presentation
is mostly impression-management and posturing. And for proper
understanding: If you can stand the boredom and the often stilted, vain
and artificial prose, you might even learn some of the series, though
my judgment is that reading some books of some of the great
philosophers discussed by these academic ones will very probably be
more profitable. And George Carlin seems worth the lot of them in terms of ready wit and
personal courage, and looks and talks like an living person instead of
an inauthentic academic posturer and careerist: Compare
and judge for yourself!
As to ME/CFS (that I prefer to call ME):
Short descriptions of the above:
1. Ten reasons why ME/CFS is a real disease by a professor of medicine of Harvard.
2. Long essay by a professor emeritus of medical chemistry about maltreatment of ME.
3. Explanation of what's happening around ME by an investigative journalist.
4. Report to Canadian Government on ME, by many medical experts.
5. Advice to psychiatrist by a psychiatrist who understa, but nds ME is an organic disease
6. English mathematical genius on one's responsibilities in the matter of one's beliefs:
7. A space-
and computer-scientist takes a look at psychology.
See also: ME -Documentation and ME - Resources
The last has many files, all on my site to keep them accessible.
|home - index - summaries - top - mail|