Train thought;
With regard to psychiatric diagnosis, such aetiological parameters of illness may be so diverse that any categorisation can only be referred to as a working model, enough to indicate a sphere of treatment but ultimately nothing wholly prescriptive or curative...
With regard to psychiatric diagnosis, such aetiological parameters of illness may be so diverse that any categorisation can only be referred to as a working model, enough to indicate a sphere of treatment but ultimately nothing wholly prescriptive or curative...
from outside the individual, defined in distance by its relative reductionism.
From a darwinian standpoint we can deduce a subset of approximately homogenous approaches, later defined as psychostasis, defences or, in extremis, psychosis, that by inheritance derive survival..
From a darwinian standpoint we can deduce a subset of approximately homogenous approaches, later defined as psychostasis, defences or, in extremis, psychosis, that by inheritance derive survival..
within the subject or local genus, but can only be known by either their behavioural overlays or phylogenetic overlaps. As such, even psychological explanations rely on the same approximations of faith in explanation, but nature is far wiser.
What we consider illness, disregarding clear organic pathology, may simply be idiosyncratic derivations of adaptations, with our perspective leading to such a dismissive label, rather than the truth that pain and suffering, in this area atleast, may be motivational.
Albeit unpleasant.
*nature is not that wise, remember how poorly the brain is supplied with blood.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
