<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Links for Octember</title>
	<atom:link href="http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/09/30/links-for-octember/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/09/30/links-for-octember/</link>
	<description>In a mad world, all blogging is psychiatry blogging</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Jul 2015 06:30:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nestor</title>
		<link>http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/09/30/links-for-octember/#comment-17972</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nestor]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Oct 2013 15:02:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=1031#comment-17972</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I took the whole thing as a joke, a performance piece that treats it as a dystopian novel, not an actual critique of the &lt;i&gt;actual&lt;/i&gt; DSM-V

Obviously one of us needs his sense of humour tuned up. Maybe it&#039;s me!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I took the whole thing as a joke, a performance piece that treats it as a dystopian novel, not an actual critique of the <i>actual</i> DSM-V</p>
<p>Obviously one of us needs his sense of humour tuned up. Maybe it&#8217;s me!</p>
<p><a href="javascript:void(0)" onclick="report_comments_flag(this, '17972', '4b33b77030')" class="report-comment">Report comment</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ozymandias</title>
		<link>http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/09/30/links-for-octember/#comment-17651</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[ozymandias]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Oct 2013 03:53:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=1031#comment-17651</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What an awful article. 

For one thing the author seems to object to the fact that the DSM categorizes mental illnesses. Like, the DSM isn&#039;t supposed to have deep insight into the human soul; it&#039;s supposed to classify typical ways that people are dysfunctional into categories so that doctors know how to treat them and so treatment can be billed on insurance. I dunno, does the author complain when biologists describe the traits of a Botaurus stellaris and contrast it with a Botaurus lentiginosis? When a classicist lists out the different ways that Latin uses the ablative?

I also think that the essay shows a stunning lack of awareness that mental illness is a real actual thing that really actually exists. Mania is different from happiness, unless I&#039;ve been wrong this whole time and happiness is typically characterized by only having to sleep for three hours at a time or racking up tens of thousands of dollars in debt. I have a personality disorder; my occupational and social functioning is not impaired by my Awesome Rebelliousness and Nonconformity, it is impaired by the fact that sometimes my reaction to people mildly criticizing me is to curl in a ball sobbing for twelve hours and then punish myself for being Worse Than Hitler. Like... treating mental illness and &quot;art, literature, love, and humanity&quot; are not opposed to each other. I assure you I would be so much better at art, literature, love, and humanity if I could leave the house on a regular basis.

The thing is that... mental illness definitions sometimes sound like they refer to normal behavior. Like people often think that depression means being sad, and then are like &quot;if the DSM gets its way then people will never be sad anymore!&quot; But depression isn&#039;t the same thing. &quot;Sad&quot; doesn&#039;t leave you unable to leave your bed for days at a time, or losing ten pounds because eating seems like it would take too much energy, or thinking &quot;man, the only reason I&#039;m still alive is that killing myself is too much work.&quot; We can eliminate that feeling and still have LOTS of sad feelings left.  Grand passions, even! 

This is not to say that the DSM isn&#039;t fucked in some ways (it is) or that mental illness is never used to pathologize deviant-but-functional behavior (it is) or that social factors don&#039;t play a role in the development of mental illness (they do). It is not even to say that we should always cure mental illnesses; I think that cure for disability is a complicated question. But that article is a pile of denialist bullshit.  

I am a huge fan of the social model of disability. But the thing I don&#039;t think people get is that impairment is a real thing. It is possible *both* that I am impaired by the fact that my brain doesn&#039;t regulate emotions as well as normal people&#039;s does, and that society constructs this impairment as a mental illness and worsens my situation by not accommodating me. Similarly, a person in a wheelchair is impaired because they can&#039;t walk, but the fact that a ton of sidewalks aren&#039;t wheelchair-compatible plays a pretty key role in the situation. To pretend that it&#039;s all social, that no one has brains that don&#039;t work as well as others, is to throw mentally ill people under the bus for Rebellion Points.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What an awful article. </p>
<p>For one thing the author seems to object to the fact that the DSM categorizes mental illnesses. Like, the DSM isn&#8217;t supposed to have deep insight into the human soul; it&#8217;s supposed to classify typical ways that people are dysfunctional into categories so that doctors know how to treat them and so treatment can be billed on insurance. I dunno, does the author complain when biologists describe the traits of a Botaurus stellaris and contrast it with a Botaurus lentiginosis? When a classicist lists out the different ways that Latin uses the ablative?</p>
<p>I also think that the essay shows a stunning lack of awareness that mental illness is a real actual thing that really actually exists. Mania is different from happiness, unless I&#8217;ve been wrong this whole time and happiness is typically characterized by only having to sleep for three hours at a time or racking up tens of thousands of dollars in debt. I have a personality disorder; my occupational and social functioning is not impaired by my Awesome Rebelliousness and Nonconformity, it is impaired by the fact that sometimes my reaction to people mildly criticizing me is to curl in a ball sobbing for twelve hours and then punish myself for being Worse Than Hitler. Like&#8230; treating mental illness and &#8220;art, literature, love, and humanity&#8221; are not opposed to each other. I assure you I would be so much better at art, literature, love, and humanity if I could leave the house on a regular basis.</p>
<p>The thing is that&#8230; mental illness definitions sometimes sound like they refer to normal behavior. Like people often think that depression means being sad, and then are like &#8220;if the DSM gets its way then people will never be sad anymore!&#8221; But depression isn&#8217;t the same thing. &#8220;Sad&#8221; doesn&#8217;t leave you unable to leave your bed for days at a time, or losing ten pounds because eating seems like it would take too much energy, or thinking &#8220;man, the only reason I&#8217;m still alive is that killing myself is too much work.&#8221; We can eliminate that feeling and still have LOTS of sad feelings left.  Grand passions, even! </p>
<p>This is not to say that the DSM isn&#8217;t fucked in some ways (it is) or that mental illness is never used to pathologize deviant-but-functional behavior (it is) or that social factors don&#8217;t play a role in the development of mental illness (they do). It is not even to say that we should always cure mental illnesses; I think that cure for disability is a complicated question. But that article is a pile of denialist bullshit.  </p>
<p>I am a huge fan of the social model of disability. But the thing I don&#8217;t think people get is that impairment is a real thing. It is possible *both* that I am impaired by the fact that my brain doesn&#8217;t regulate emotions as well as normal people&#8217;s does, and that society constructs this impairment as a mental illness and worsens my situation by not accommodating me. Similarly, a person in a wheelchair is impaired because they can&#8217;t walk, but the fact that a ton of sidewalks aren&#8217;t wheelchair-compatible plays a pretty key role in the situation. To pretend that it&#8217;s all social, that no one has brains that don&#8217;t work as well as others, is to throw mentally ill people under the bus for Rebellion Points.</p>
<p><a href="javascript:void(0)" onclick="report_comments_flag(this, '17651', '4b33b77030')" class="report-comment">Report comment</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nestor</title>
		<link>http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/09/30/links-for-octember/#comment-17649</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nestor]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Oct 2013 21:06:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=1031#comment-17649</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A link for you
http://thenewinquiry.com/essays/book-of-lamentations/
A review of a new novel called... DSM-V]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A link for you<br />
<a href="http://thenewinquiry.com/essays/book-of-lamentations/" rel="nofollow">http://thenewinquiry.com/essays/book-of-lamentations/</a><br />
A review of a new novel called&#8230; DSM-V</p>
<p><a href="javascript:void(0)" onclick="report_comments_flag(this, '17649', '4b33b77030')" class="report-comment">Report comment</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Katie Hartman</title>
		<link>http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/09/30/links-for-octember/#comment-17596</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Katie Hartman]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Oct 2013 21:45:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=1031#comment-17596</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Look at the corporate sponsors.

Aquafina is owned by PepsiCo. Arrowhead, Poland Springs, Ice Mountain, and Purelife are Nestlé. Dasani? Coca-Cola. These are not companies that stand to gain by getting people to replace their soda consumption with a product that can be bought bottled *or* drawn from the tap for (essentially) nothing.

These parent companies are well aware of how much success the food industry has had increasing the overall level of consumption. I would be very surprised if they weren&#039;t very diligent in the way they approached the leverage they have with this sort of campaign.

The key takeaways of the video ad seem to be &quot;drink when you feel slow/tired/blah-ish&quot; and &quot;water is a very good choice.&quot; I wouldn&#039;t be surprised if the campaign caused an increase in consumption of a wide variety of beverages.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Look at the corporate sponsors.</p>
<p>Aquafina is owned by PepsiCo. Arrowhead, Poland Springs, Ice Mountain, and Purelife are Nestlé. Dasani? Coca-Cola. These are not companies that stand to gain by getting people to replace their soda consumption with a product that can be bought bottled *or* drawn from the tap for (essentially) nothing.</p>
<p>These parent companies are well aware of how much success the food industry has had increasing the overall level of consumption. I would be very surprised if they weren&#8217;t very diligent in the way they approached the leverage they have with this sort of campaign.</p>
<p>The key takeaways of the video ad seem to be &#8220;drink when you feel slow/tired/blah-ish&#8221; and &#8220;water is a very good choice.&#8221; I wouldn&#8217;t be surprised if the campaign caused an increase in consumption of a wide variety of beverages.</p>
<p><a href="javascript:void(0)" onclick="report_comments_flag(this, '17596', '4b33b77030')" class="report-comment">Report comment</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Phil Goetz</title>
		<link>http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/09/30/links-for-octember/#comment-17487</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Phil Goetz]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Oct 2013 23:42:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=1031#comment-17487</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Re. &quot;disposable income among the poor and middle class is probably at an all-time high&quot; -- that article is based on /household/ income. Most households had one wage-earner in 1970; most have two today. The author dismissed this factor by observing that most households had the same number of workers in 2007 as in 2012; but 2007 is not 1970. Redo the analysis on a per-worker basis and compare 2012 to 1973. Then recall that the total (CPI-adjusted) wealth of the United States has grown by a factor of perhaps 10 since 1973 (hard to compute since derivatives have taken on financial importance). Government benefits would have to be over 1000% of income for you to say that the poor benefitted as much from growth as did the rich after taking benefits into account.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re. &#8220;disposable income among the poor and middle class is probably at an all-time high&#8221; &#8212; that article is based on /household/ income. Most households had one wage-earner in 1970; most have two today. The author dismissed this factor by observing that most households had the same number of workers in 2007 as in 2012; but 2007 is not 1970. Redo the analysis on a per-worker basis and compare 2012 to 1973. Then recall that the total (CPI-adjusted) wealth of the United States has grown by a factor of perhaps 10 since 1973 (hard to compute since derivatives have taken on financial importance). Government benefits would have to be over 1000% of income for you to say that the poor benefitted as much from growth as did the rich after taking benefits into account.</p>
<p><a href="javascript:void(0)" onclick="report_comments_flag(this, '17487', '4b33b77030')" class="report-comment">Report comment</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: von Kalifornen</title>
		<link>http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/09/30/links-for-octember/#comment-17452</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[von Kalifornen]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Oct 2013 22:07:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=1031#comment-17452</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Or, worse, &quot;partons&quot;.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Or, worse, &#8220;partons&#8221;.</p>
<p><a href="javascript:void(0)" onclick="report_comments_flag(this, '17452', '4b33b77030')" class="report-comment">Report comment</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul Torek</title>
		<link>http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/09/30/links-for-octember/#comment-17450</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Paul Torek]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Oct 2013 19:02:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=1031#comment-17450</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;blockquote&gt;evolutionary role of making the mother avoid toxins dangerous to the developing fetus.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

When my wife was pregnant, she could smell a half-rotten potato wrapped in a bag and sitting in the back of a closed kitchen cupboard, from the upper floor!  (And vociferously demand that I remove that horrible smell from the house.  Naturally I couldn&#039;t smell it, nor find it.)  And now I know why.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>evolutionary role of making the mother avoid toxins dangerous to the developing fetus.</p></blockquote>
<p>When my wife was pregnant, she could smell a half-rotten potato wrapped in a bag and sitting in the back of a closed kitchen cupboard, from the upper floor!  (And vociferously demand that I remove that horrible smell from the house.  Naturally I couldn&#8217;t smell it, nor find it.)  And now I know why.</p>
<p><a href="javascript:void(0)" onclick="report_comments_flag(this, '17450', '4b33b77030')" class="report-comment">Report comment</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Gerard</title>
		<link>http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/09/30/links-for-octember/#comment-17432</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[David Gerard]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Oct 2013 15:43:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=1031#comment-17432</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The mindhacks article is a mild rewrite of &lt;a href=&quot;http://adequacy.org/public/stories/2001.9.12.102423.271.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;the Adequacy classic&lt;/a&gt; of the genre. I&#039;m sure there are predecessors aplenty (I&#039;m not aware of Twain having written one, but he &lt;i&gt;should&lt;/i&gt; have).]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The mindhacks article is a mild rewrite of <a href="http://adequacy.org/public/stories/2001.9.12.102423.271.html" rel="nofollow">the Adequacy classic</a> of the genre. I&#8217;m sure there are predecessors aplenty (I&#8217;m not aware of Twain having written one, but he <i>should</i> have).</p>
<p><a href="javascript:void(0)" onclick="report_comments_flag(this, '17432', '4b33b77030')" class="report-comment">Report comment</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Creutzer</title>
		<link>http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/09/30/links-for-octember/#comment-17429</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Creutzer]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Oct 2013 05:21:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=1031#comment-17429</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Well, Kant wanted to say that behaving immoral is irrational, so that, once one has seen his argument, one should be compelled to behave morally in the same way one feels compelled by instrumental rationality considerations. That, at least, is the joke here.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, Kant wanted to say that behaving immoral is irrational, so that, once one has seen his argument, one should be compelled to behave morally in the same way one feels compelled by instrumental rationality considerations. That, at least, is the joke here.</p>
<p><a href="javascript:void(0)" onclick="report_comments_flag(this, '17429', '4b33b77030')" class="report-comment">Report comment</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian (not the same one)</title>
		<link>http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/09/30/links-for-octember/#comment-17419</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Brian (not the same one)]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Oct 2013 18:50:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=1031#comment-17419</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As best I can tell, it&#039;s an invention of the site, not anything grounded in real physics.  There are some (mostly historical) models that include quark subcomponents, but they&#039;re usually called &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preon&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;preons&lt;/a&gt;.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As best I can tell, it&#8217;s an invention of the site, not anything grounded in real physics.  There are some (mostly historical) models that include quark subcomponents, but they&#8217;re usually called <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preon" rel="nofollow">preons</a>.</p>
<p><a href="javascript:void(0)" onclick="report_comments_flag(this, '17419', '4b33b77030')" class="report-comment">Report comment</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
