Mr.Samsa wrote:Cito di Pense wrote:Mr.Samsa wrote:No, nobody has claimed that. The evidence that shows that medication for ADHD is the best treatment option is, however, undeniably scientific.
'Best' is a judgment call. It depends on constructs like social conformity and efficiency in ways you seem unwilling to discuss. You're saying, it's scientific and that's that. It's scientistic, perhaps, but we can discuss that.
It's a "judgement call" in the same way that saying evolutionary processes are the best explanation for the origin of species is a judgement call.
Except that one statement is a scientific explanation, and another one is an evaluation of a proposed treatment option. u haz a konfoozed
Mr.Samsa wrote:Cito di Pense wrote:Mr.Samsa wrote:I love it when you use words and terms you don't understand, then we get wibble like this. "Come up with some inter-rater agreement" to decide what drugs to use to treat it? Viewing social problems as mental disorders requiring treatment?
Misrepresenting my position is not a way to win this argument, Mr.Samsa. Perhaps you just don't feel up to dealing with the position I have taken, which is that the act of drugging people for the classroom has the dimensions of a social problem.
Misrepresenting you? I literally quoted your words exactly as you used them. Are you denying that you said: "and even come up with some 'inter-rater agreement' on what drugs to use to treat it."?
And ADHD has nothing to do with drugging people "for the classroom". Again, read up on the topic.
You missed the satire in a forest of etiology. I'm not disputing the diagnosis, but the reasons that anyone bothers to identify it and treat it are social. Nobody agrees with me that religious faith is a response to an anxiety disorder and is treatable. Boo fucking hoo.
Mr.Samsa wrote:Cito di Pense wrote:It's true that some people want to fit in and some people don't, and I don't confuse that problem with that identified as ADHD. I think it's been mentioned that some people diagnosed with ADHD don't lack entirely for something to which they can and do devote their attention in a controlled way. The fact that society demands we concentrate on a variety of tasks is something I hardly need to point out to you.
So you agree that ADHD has nothing to do with fitting in? Good.
No, Mr.Samsa, I don't so agree, because I only said that ADHD sometimes has something to do with fitting in, so your statement above is a severe misrepresentation of my position, indicating your unwillingness to address it. I won't ask you to 'deal with it' because that is a phrase from psychobabble, and you wouldn't care to address it.
Mr.Samsa wrote:Cito di Pense wrote:Mr.Samsa wrote:Who's drugging a majority of the population? Where's your evidence that there is a better alternative?
That was a half-serious satire on the problem of religious faith which isn't considered a problem because most people have it. I guess it whooshed by.
It didn't whoosh by, it was just a stupid comment by you and you don't realise how ridiculous it is because you don't understand the topic. More simply put: a category of mental disorder, by definition, cannot affect the majority of the population. What you have done there isn't "satire", it's just pure pseudoscientific twaddle.
Way to miss the point of the satire. Some people just don't get satire. Among them are the biblical literalists, whose bible happens to be the DSM.
Mr.Samsa wrote:Cito di Pense wrote:Let's try again. Try to concentrate on what I say, rather than the conversation with me that's going on only inside your own head.
Haha big words coming from you. Hey, if that's how you want to play it, let's go back to the original comment where I pointed out that someone's comment about a lack of agreement being wrong. What did you take from my words there? That psychology is a science because of some perceived consensus that you made up in your head?
Glasshouses, buddy. More importantly, I have only criticised the words you have presented.
Ooh. Tough talk from a real he-man. Will you let me feel up your discursive muscles?
Mr.Samsa wrote:Cito di Pense wrote:Perhaps we should worry that the theist majority is going to insist on drugging the atheists so they will calm down and stop being so 'strident'. Bring on the anti-anxiety medications! Stat!
Even supposing your conspiracy theory is true (giving up on the aliens already?), it has nothing to do with this topic. It flatly contradicts all the standards of clinical psychology.
It's not a conspiracy theory, Mr.Samsa. It's a satire. Get a sense of humour.
Oh, wait. We can't address this with humour! People are suffering! With ADHD! The horror! If you're a secularist, one thing you don't worry about is whether suffering is temporary or not, because eternity is not on your radar. Instead, there's sometimes an alternative belief system, to wit, that because life is brief, we shouldn't waste it in suffering, hence the mantra of the helping professions. Justifying that is left as an exercise for the diligent reader. My solution: "It's a living."
For my next trick, I'll deconstruct 'suffering' for you. Then you can call
that a conspiracy theory, or post something from the PostModernism Generator. FTW.
by 
I love it when you use words and terms you don't understand, then we get wibble like this. "Come up with some inter-rater agreement" to decide what drugs to use to treat it? Viewing social problems as mental disorders requiring treatment? 
