What IS Insanity?
- Thread starter Arsen
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Its usually extremely difficult to prove insanity. Every now and then you will have an entire jury without any functioning brains that lets someone abuse the insanity defense, but its the exception rather than the rule.Daye.04 said:
No. The actual definition is in my quoted post above.Grimm91 said:
I'd say insanity is when you can't tell the difference between reality and the fantasies you make up in your head, seeing things that aren't there, thinking that you're in the Matrix, etc. Sadly, it's hard to define what 'real' really is, but I think that if the majority on Earth experiences reality different from you then you're likely to be in trouble... Like if you're convinced that the Earth is flat or that it's a big pancake might mean you're a little loony.
Why I sure hope so.kawligia said:
THe problem is that in Norway there's been several courts were the suspect has said "Oh dear, I happen to have been insane in the moment of action", then they'll be like "Oh. Poor chap. Let's make sure he and his awfully unpredictable behavior get back out on the street as soon as possible". ANd that's just ridicioulus.
I always say, "If you think everyone else is crazy, chances are you're the insane one." But I'm not always sure that applies. I know I often think the majority of society is nuts, and that's enough to drive a person bonkers. So yes, society can make you lose your mind.
What i meant is that insanity is a state of mind that doesn't fit in with the "normal" majority.Abedeus said:
For a percise defination of insanity, read the first wall of text, for an inpercise but simple to understand defination, go to the bottom of the post.
I would define insanity in two as a partial disability of perception (perception = the 5 senses and/or how the mind processes info (which orginate from the 5 senses)). Sorry for the fancy words, it's kind of hard to describe with normal words.
By partial disability of perception I don't mean a person is deaf, blind, etc. but rather than he sees things which aren't there. In fact, the 5 senses are ussualy not the cause of this sort of insanity, although they can be. It's ussually the mind's thought process which interpets these senses which is somehow messed up (meaning he interpets something objective in a way which is simply not true to the objective fact). These insanties can range from subtle (that Einstein example) to dangerous for the man with the insanity or his fellow man (random attacks due to the illusions cast by the mind and/or the senses).
A full disablity in thought process and/or senses is not considired insanity. Being blind is not insane, not being able to think is not insanity, because that means one is either dead, or a vegetable (which doesn't happen due to experiences of a person, but rather through failure of the body, making it a disease, or a condition, but not insanity, which always orginates in the person's mind).
The "irreguluar-mind thinking" defination is too ambiguous. Athiests are a minority in the world - and they are thus to be considered insane because their thought process dictates that there is no god?
Excuse my spelling, I haven't written in fancy english, or in grammartically correct english for quite some time.
And if I confused you, let me say that shit in simple english. Insanity is what happens when your mind gets fudged up because of some weird voodoo shit (can't explain in simple englsih) which makes it self destruct on itself. This self destruction makes you unable to tell reality aport from your imgination, and that is insanity.
I would define insanity in two as a partial disability of perception (perception = the 5 senses and/or how the mind processes info (which orginate from the 5 senses)). Sorry for the fancy words, it's kind of hard to describe with normal words.
By partial disability of perception I don't mean a person is deaf, blind, etc. but rather than he sees things which aren't there. In fact, the 5 senses are ussualy not the cause of this sort of insanity, although they can be. It's ussually the mind's thought process which interpets these senses which is somehow messed up (meaning he interpets something objective in a way which is simply not true to the objective fact). These insanties can range from subtle (that Einstein example) to dangerous for the man with the insanity or his fellow man (random attacks due to the illusions cast by the mind and/or the senses).
A full disablity in thought process and/or senses is not considired insanity. Being blind is not insane, not being able to think is not insanity, because that means one is either dead, or a vegetable (which doesn't happen due to experiences of a person, but rather through failure of the body, making it a disease, or a condition, but not insanity, which always orginates in the person's mind).
The "irreguluar-mind thinking" defination is too ambiguous. Athiests are a minority in the world - and they are thus to be considered insane because their thought process dictates that there is no god?
Excuse my spelling, I haven't written in fancy english, or in grammartically correct english for quite some time.
And if I confused you, let me say that shit in simple english. Insanity is what happens when your mind gets fudged up because of some weird voodoo shit (can't explain in simple englsih) which makes it self destruct on itself. This self destruction makes you unable to tell reality aport from your imgination, and that is insanity.
But his most important equations (from a chemistry perspective) do apply. Equations explaining the Photoelectric Effect, the heat capacities of solids and the relation of mass to energy helped to create the field of Quantum Mechanics. He just didn't 'believe' in it, and felt that it was but a gateway to a more 'understandable' theory at the subatomic level. It's only really his General Relativity theory that doesn't apply; Special Relativity was used by Dirac to infer 'spin', an abstract property that was later experimentally verified.baggyn said:
Einstein said: Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome.
And he is correct, in one sense. However, my definition of insanity is the inability to differentiate between logic and illogic.
And he is correct, in one sense. However, my definition of insanity is the inability to differentiate between logic and illogic.