|
Apology (pg. 7)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Silky Johnson |
| I know someone with bipolar therefore it's TRUEFAX. |
|
|
| Alex |
I guess it really depends on what condition you suffer from.
When I was diagnosed with psychosis the psychiatrists made it pretty clear that my recovery would depend largely on the right cocktail of meds. |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
| quote: | Originally posted by AlphaStarred
It's a statement made by someone who's Bipolar. And I know people who have been depressed and got out of it by hard work and perseverance, - without meds - even if it took a few years. When one is severely depressed and contemplating suicide, he becomes a threat to himself, and should thus be placed on meds. Could I make the statement any clearer? |
Yes, it's very clear to everyone that you are trying to establish an axiom for a decidedly individual phenomenon that could not possibly abide by axioms. Every person and every case is different, despite common occurrences; it's why there are entire schools of science to address a range of different ailments, rather than your Web-MD tier social diagnosis.
It's not that it's even wrong, nor that I don't understand your statement; It's simply juvenile in its distinction of the subtleties and fragility between self-diagnosis and treatment-seeking behaviour.
How does someone know they are a threat to themselves or to society? |
|
|
| AlphaStarred |
| quote: | Originally posted by enydo
"Threat" then, whatever. Define it.
|
You don't know the meaning of threat? |
|
|
| AlphaStarred |
| quote: | Originally posted by Silky Johnson
I don't need to corroborate anything, you've already done all the work just by posting. ;) |
Indeed, so you should think before you write. |
|
|
| enydo |
"Threat to themselves/society."
PLZ, DEFINE WHAT YOU MEAN BY THAT. |
|
|
| Silky Johnson |
:stongue: :stongue:
Idiot. |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
| *pitchforks and torches* |
|
|
| AlphaStarred |
| quote: | Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
Yes, it's very clear to everyone that you are trying to establish an axiom for a decidedly individual phenomenon that could not possibly abide by axioms. Every person and every case is different, despite common occurrences; it's why there are entire schools of science to address a range of different ailments, rather than your Web-MD tier social diagnosis.
It's not that it's even wrong, nor that I don't understand your statement; It's simply juvenile in its distinction of the subtleties and fragility between self-diagnosis and treatment-seeking behaviour.
How does someone know they are a threat to themselves or to society? |
I'm not trying to establish anything. I think I made my point with the self-explanatory statement. If any person and any case involves being a threat to society or to themselves, they should be hospitalized/placed on meds, as aforementioned. There was nothing written in my statement about self-diagnosis and treatment-seeking behavior. I don't know where you get this from.
I know that I consider myself a possible threat to society, and possibly to myself, hence I was put on meds. |
|
|
| Silky Johnson |
| Ah so you've actually been diagnosed as a up? That explains it. |
|
|
| AlphaStarred |
| quote: | Originally posted by enydo
"Threat to themselves/society."
PLZ, DEFINE WHAT YOU MEAN BY THAT. |
Read my 2nd to last post on the previous page, and stop asking stupid questions. You can define 'threat' on dictionary.com. And stop using Caps Lock, I can see perfectly well with my glasses. ;) |
|
|
| AlphaStarred |
| quote: | Originally posted by Silky Johnson
Ah so you've actually been diagnosed as a up? That explains it. |
You've written nothing in this thread but bull. Try writing something intelligent for once in your life. |
|
|
|
|
