You are right, John, and I severely simplified the definition to save
time for me and the readers who might not be interested. Insanity
takes many forms just as physical dysfunction takes many forms, some
of which are not harmful and can be interesting under certain
conditions. The challenge is to be able to identify the harmful
versions and take appropriate action. And yes, a large fraction of
the population is insane by even the conventional definition. These
people are only kept in check by the actions of normal society. As we
have seen in some countries, these people are set loose to do their
damage when normal society breaks down or is led by the insane. This
has nothing to do with politics of the left or right. Both versions
can be used by the insane to do their damage. The essential skill is
to recognize when the message is being delivered by a dysfunctional
individual and avoid believing anything the person says no matter
whether you agree or not. This is hard to do especially when the
insane person expounds a religious or political belief you also
believe. You need to separate the message from the messenger because
sooner or later the message will take a path away from reality into
insanity. You don't want to be on board when this happens.
Ed
On Jun 14, 2009, at 8:05 AM, John Berry wrote:
Erm, I think by that definition of insanity the world would have
more insane than sane.
At least reason/evidence seems to dictate how a minority view reality.
Of course there are differing levels I suppose, grok was outside of
"normal" not in his logic but in his hostility.
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 1:53 AM, Edmund Storms
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Jun 14, 2009, at 7:01 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
[email protected] wrote:
I miss Jed. I hope he comes back.
You know, when things didn't go his way at Infinite Energy, he never
came back.
And it may come to pass that Grok's purpose will be fulfilled: He
will
have succeeded in totally disrupting the forum.
For, remember, Jed's banning, and Thomas Malloy's banning, were both
the
indirect result of Grok's actions here. If Grok had not been spewing
his toxic waste here Bill would never have resorted to such drastic
action, which was taken at least in part because of a number of
complaints by members, which were in turn triggered by Grok.
Aren't trolls wonderful?
Indeed. However, the real fault is the reaction of normal people to
the insane. If the people in this group had recognized the nature
of Grok and responded in an appropriate way, i.e. ignored him, his
effects would have been nil. Instead, efforts were made to engage
him as if he were a normal, rational person. This same approach to
the dysfunctional individual plays out on a national scale when
responding to leaders and spokesman who suffer from the same mental
dysfunction. Yes, I agree people can have differences of opinion
without being insane. The indication of insanity is in how these
differences are expressed. Another indication is the impossibility
of changing such a person's attitude by rational discussion. Unless
people can learn how to make this distinction and ignore people who
cannot understand reality because their brains are not wired
properly, society will continue to be led into destructive
conditions, and this forum will suffer the same damage again.
Ed
