|
|
Hey guys,
As a budding psychiatrist, I'm afraid I'm going to have to put out some of the fires spreading here in terms of nomenclature. Psychosis is a really specific term, and to use it in this context not only demeans those who truly suffer from psychosis, but more dangerously, disengages us from the very real and very important issues raised by Yatima.
I'd like to address first your comparison of mid-American hatred of Islam to psychosis based on a Wikipedia definition. Wikipedia is a wonderful resource that is a kind of peer-reviewed journal of everything, and can greatly help understanding of the broad gist of a topic. Sadly, this is inevitably tempered by a potential for misuse if used as a definitive academic resource. I'm not saying that you're out and out "wrong," - sometimes I think the world truly has "gone mad" - but I'm afraid you used the three features of psychosis mentioned in the wiki very differently from the way in which psychiatry uses them.
Formal thought disorder (FTD) refers to an inability to form coherent thought structures. So, for example, if a psychotic person was asked what they did for a job, they might start talking about when they were, say a salesman, then shift onto talking about the car they drove, then shift to talking about NASCAR, then onto football, and so on. It is a persistent deficit in thought structure (not content) that is not causally related to intelligence or education.
Whilst it was important to me to clear up the issue of FTDs, it adds little to the debate, whilst subtracting much (by further debunking the use of "psychosis").
However, I think that when we consider delusional beliefs we arrive at the real crux of this issue. A delusion is defined as " a false unshakable belief which is out of keeping with the patient’s social and cultural background" (Oxford Textbook of Psychiatry) and here we find the insidious difference between the spreading hatred and mass psychosis - it is a social and cultural construct.
Like the rise of power of the Nazi party in early 1930s Germany, the rising racism is a cultural phenomenon, in which people are required only to take innocuous little baby steps towards a conclusion that is horrific, yet sufficiently veiled that each may make their next step on the path whilst denying their destination.
The question is, of course, what can we do to shatter this sociocultural edifice? Should we try to change the minds of radicals (religious or secular), or just attempt to foster an environment in which hatred cannot flourish? Any thoughts? |
|
|