This is the risk one takes when one agrees to see a psychiatrist! :smile:
In this case the woman's delusion might well have been a "prophesy", i.e. she might have foreseen that the psychiatrist would chase (through justice) her to confine her to an asylum. :worry:

a disturbing prospect indeed Alkis.

Perhaps we need to re-evaluate how we throw around the word "delusion" as it assumes that the person accusing another of it has "reality" under wraps themselves. And if they new what reality actually was I'd imagine they would be much more famous, distinguished and globally recognised, not just working a job in the emergency psych department.

It sounds like two separate events are being lumped together via a single explanation without much justification. The first event is response of the woman’s friends and the psychiatric community to her emotional distress. Without more information, the most likely account is that the second event is entirely independent of the first. For instance, you haven’t provided any details concerning whether the woman herself thought her initial
paranoia and her incarceration were connected. You also would need to explain how a subconscious feeling can predict an event that is not causally linked to what that feeling is about. It would be a different matter if the woman was paranoid about incarceration at a subconscious level due to her previous history with emotional illness. This would provide a context of justification. As it stands we would have to assume
the woman is clairvoyant.

This would provide a context of justification. As it stands we would have to assume
the woman is clairvoyant — Joshs

Yes it would seem to be the only logical explanation given the circumstances described, strictly without changing or factoring in more information than is available, it would seem she saw/ or felt intuitively the future somehow, or her subconscious did somehow.

Do you think clairvoyancy is possible? Given the fact that it is an idea that has persisted for many millenia in many forms without ever being fully discredited: oracles, see-ers, prophets, white witches, sages etc and many people have been noted: nostradamus, baba vanga etc.

Is it reasonable to consider clairvoyancy as being equivalent to "having a predictive capacity/ability to reduce variables to such a degree that situations that have not yet occurred can be deemed almost 100% likely to occur through accurate calculation".

Is it reasonable perhaps that clairvoyance could represent the cognitive dissonance between two different levels of self-awareness?

As in if someone is more aware of themselves and how their environment works they could predict something that someone else that is not so aware of themselves or their environment would deem as "impossible" and therefore "mystical."

For example if I was not aware of meteorological technology and someone told me there would be a storm in one week. And then sure enough there was, I would imagine this person as a "prophet of the clime". Because my Level of awareness and their greater one have cognitive dissonance.

I have no rational explanation as to how they could predict the weather other than to see them as a mystic with special abilities.

It seems then that some people's awarenesses of what is real/true are greater than other peoples. What then, would be the ultimate awareness one could possess? What would be the whole truth?

She believed she would be unjustly detained, but she wasn't. She was justly detained. She was wrong.

It"s close to a Gettier case, but not quite.(https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gettier_problem#:~:text=The%20Gettier%20problem%2C%20in%20the,(JTB)%20account%20of%20knowledge.) In your example, the justification was insufficient as it was not founded on fact, but only in hunch. A Gettier case would only be implicated if she had an uncorrelated justified belief.

In your example, the false belief was perfomative of making the belief true, resulting in a Pinocchio like paradox. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinocchio_paradox

When Pinocchio lies and says "my nose grows," it grows and he's not lying so it doesn't grow.

So, when the lady in your example says "I will be detained," she won't until uttered and then she will.

I'd say she's no more clairvoyant than Pinocchio when he said his nose grows when it didn't.

It's somewhere between Gettier and Pinocchio I think, but as my first comment says, I do think her assertion suffers from some vagueness in that it she believed herself being subject to unjust detention, when in fact her detention was just.

↪Benj96 She believed she would be unjustly detained, but she wasn't. She was justly detained. She was wrong. — Hanover

Justly detained according to who? Her?
She, and her family and friends and work collegues - a whole group of people - can all still think she was unjustly detained, whilst the psychiatrists/nurses etc think it was just based on what they believe is a "delusion".

But really, it is only just when she is a threat to herself or others. Can you point out, without speculating, just based on the information given in the situation, why she was so dangerous to others or herself?

Secondly can you explain how a psychiatrist knows what all delusions are in order to diagnose someone, without having any delusions of their own? Are psychiatrists infallible in that case? Or are they flawed like the rest of us (have delusions about actual reality).

, I do think her assertion suffers from some vagueness — Hanover

It is vague for sure. I agree with you on that.

But if she is a very kind, warm, caring person, both for herself and her friends, that has this sudden intense fear/anxiety regarding her liberties/freedom, I still fail to see how detaining her is Just. When in this case she is not a harm to herself or others is she? Unless having full freedom of thought is harmful to some others.

It would seem at most that she is a bit erratic and panicky and the most sensible thing would be to sit her down and talk through her concerns so maybe they would surface from the vaguery?
Hardly a case for forced medication.

But you're addressing something entirely different from me. I thought the thought experiment raised interesting epistemological questions and that's what I addressed.

You're just focusing on the medical ethics question. Whether the detainment were justified will turn upon unavailable subtleties in the hypothetical you posed that would be available to a judge in an actual case, whose decision would be reviewable on appeal.

This seems an uninteresting hypothetical as you're confining it.

But to address it. I'd think the administration of justice in actual such cases will follow the trend they always do. That is, the system generally works, with some celebrated instances of injustice, with injustice typically more common among the poor and inadequately represented.

But to address it. I'd think the administration of justice in actual such cases will follow the trend they always do. That is, the system generally works, with some celebrated instances of injustice, with injustice typically more common among the poor and inadequately represented. — Hanover

Agreed Hanover. I do believe the judiciary system gets it right more often than it doesn't. It is afterall generated out of rigorous thought and "trial and error" (excuse the pun). They are just trying to do their best.

Injustices do occur and are celebrated - pointed to in arguments proposing the justice system is not flawless. I think this is important, as to lead the judiciary to believe they cannot be wrong would be dangerous indeed.

A healthy judicial system is one that can adapt when faced with unintentional injustice. Judges are elected (hopefully) by the people in their wisdom, to speak on behalf of the collective. But must be open to cases when the public disapproves of a sentencing and demands an appeal.

In otherwords, judges decisions must only be final if not contested by the majority or further evidence to the contrary. To reject that is to well... Make Gods out of judges - which are only men/women.

Indeed so.

;)

What is ones truth if no one asks? Is that learnable? I am no teacher...

Then who is asking? Why?

You could be fully aware without having to spread or share any knowings. Are you aware or becoming aware? Is it happening simultaneously? Are you always becoming aware of new things or can you turn it on and off? or both? Are you aware of when you are being unaware? I feel like an "ultimate awareness" could be reached after self awareness is mastered but the end of awareness is unforeseen...certain attributes can make you better at being aware of things, surroundings, scenarios or being able to become aware of certain or even specific things but ultimate awareness.. its like using the body and mind together to learn about its own self.

Awareness could also be a reminder of a truth one has known to be true all along, despite all possible outcomes and oppositions faced. Like one can "spread awareness" while being unaware at the same time. Examples: surroundings arent fit to be receptive of information, dangerous conditions, bad audience "read the room", a person could have a hidden agenda maybe while promoting a promising message thinking people cant see through the lies etc. The "Ultimate Awareness" one can have doesnt have anything to do with a whole truth, I dont think... because it is up to the aware person to let the unaware know how aware they really are. Or however they want to be perceived. Ultimate awareness requires knowing who is listening and who is just talking or asking things to just say something because they want to engage in general, despite the topic of discussion, despite the answers...unaware people sometimes dont know what they want to hear. Or they ask the person that will give them the answer they know they will give and want to hear. Thats awareness but If they want to hear one answer, one they already know to be true to them and arent willing to see things differently, then why even ask? Maybe thats the point. No stupid questions, i guess.

But really...Who asked? Whose truth do you seek and who are you to them? That says a lot. Ask yourself what it may take to be reach "ultimate awareness"...and if you think you are capable of getting there, that is it. I dont think you could find a better answer, are you really looking for whole truth? Why do you deserve any sort of truth, when you dont even know who to ask? When you dont know who to ask, the truth might not then be true at all because of such unawareness of the self who is seeking answers to baseless questions they didnt even want to know answers to in the first place. Make it make sense...for you with the help of others whoms answers actually matter to you, and with good reason as to why they should.... Or accept your own answer. Ask yourself and accept it. Or dont and wait for the answer that fits best in your reality. Thats valid enough.


At least look at this as spreading awareness about how people are so unaware of who they are and who they are seeking answers from, yet somehow thinking they can handle or are deserving of any sort of truth? If you dont have self awareness you are lucky to end up with a psychiatrist. If you arent capable of putting the trust in anyones hands to tell you what is best for YOU when YOU should know the answer or how to get to the answer....Being that unaware that you cant explain what you are doing and why you do what you do is dangerous, and there are cases like the one presented above in the OP where the woman needs to be institutionalized and deserves to be heard but can she explain herself and feelings are they reasonable? Who is she asking to validate? Is she helpless? I think not...she didnt get put there automatically. It takes $$$, family, whatever, someone is taking your burden of life and adding it to their own burdens, trying to help the best they know but you can only help yourself, we know this already and this is a "What if" scenario that takes more context and details to make it make sense...We only know what YOU tell us. Who are you? Why do we know you more than you? That shouldnt be true, you can make it not true. Also, I am delusional.

of course they will sit her down and talk through concerns, they soon may realize there are bigger issues hidden below the surface and this outburst was a sign for help....plus they need to figure out which medication is best for her and whoever is paying for that help so obviously they will start to figure her out one way or another. She doesnt know the answer, shes the only person that should.....how can she learn then? Has she always been slow at communicating feelings and explaining her actions? No rush if so.........but lessons to be learned. Stay out of trouble, especially trouble that your own body cant seem to handle? Self awareness, lack there of. Know your limits, know your boundaries, and if you cant act right then you better be able to explain eventually. Or dont. And be held against your will taking forced meds? It doesnt happen like that. To get to the point of being put on meds, takes more than a few unjustified encounters with people who were concerned. Meds might not even help. Maybe they will? Whats the problem? You can be delusional without acting out. Explain yourself or someone will do it for you. Whats worse?

How do you go from feeling a feeling to being detained and forced medication.....something happened in between to get to that point.

What is ones truth if no one asks? Is that learnable? I am no teacher... — Kizzy

Everyone is both a teacher and a student. To deny the role of the teacher is avoiding responsibility. To deny the role of the student is arrogance and short-sightedness, both.

Then who is asking? Why? — Kizzy

Why is hard to judge. People spend their whole lives together and only see what touches them in a pattern they are willing to admit.

I am not sure about the who part of this. I only read the OP and your answering posts and nothing in between.

You could be fully aware without having to spread or share any knowings. — Kizzy

That is very normal for type 5. They seek awareness and then they hoard it. Our D&D group got to the point with one of our players that we would get into a middle part of a story and torture his character to tell us what he knew. He had all the divination magic and stealth and recon skills but savored not telling anyone to preserve his value and superiority as a feeling. We actually caused the player, the man himself, to mature some. He realized he did that in real life as well.

In real life this is a major issue. Super smart and observant 5s are the way science progresses. And they KEEP thier findings secret. 'I taught him everything he knows, just not everything I know.' They take their discoveries to the grave often enough. The exception usually are the 5-3 types that make a business of it and SELL their ideas back to humanity. Society needs to be aware of first and fight second this tendency in our observers. But we need to welcome these quiet brainy types into the fun social scene first to make them feel appreciated.

Are you aware or becoming aware? Is it happening simultaneously? Are you always becoming aware of new things or can you turn it on and off? or both? Are you aware of when you are being unaware? — Kizzy

Most people are dangerously unaware of almost everything. They maintain awareness and YES awareness takes maintenance, on just enough to be moderately happy in their estimation. Type 5 is anger infused fear. That is withdrawn and lazy about its thing, as a regular sin.

All virtues properly expressed are properly described as suffering. Awareness is a form of suffering. The more you maintain awareness, the more you realize how little most people do this. They are not soldiers on that front. They cannot and will not hold the line. They collapse and let the thinkers do it.

I feel like an "ultimate awareness" could be reached after self awareness is mastered but the end of awareness is unforeseen...certain attributes can make you better at being aware of things, surroundings, scenarios or being able to become aware of certain or even specific things but ultimate awareness.. its like using the body and mind together to learn about its own self. — Kizzy

Wow that was very well said. Just so. Fear, anger, and desire must work together for wisdom. Any virtue is placed on an exponent in one and only one (objective) case. That case is the case of wisdom, of the GOOD. If we intend towards the GOOD, only, can we approach perfection. Perfection is the GOOD.

But each path has over-expressed immorality that occludes this unity, this integration of wisdom. In this case that means the path of fear, type 5, shrinks and does not feel comfortable being exposed. The 5 likes to be mind only. They deny their body and their desires. They tend towards minimal highbrow Nihilism.

But the way you say this implies the temporal refutation the OP was expressing. Is time a delusion? Do some people suffer the ability, the skill, to see past that delusion in part? Does this awareness make them too odd to deal with?

As I mention all the time, old wisdom IS NOT WISDOM at all. It's anti-wisdom (now and always was). That is to say, as they say, 'The one-eyed man is king in the land of the blind', IS NOT true at all. Instead that person is deemed insane and put in prison or medical prison (OP) and thus kept out of credible society. This is why credible society is a lie, always. Progress becomes harder and harder, because we cordon off odd behavior instead of keeping it in plain sight (where it belongs).

I have a whole chapter in my upcoming book on 'Defeating the mainstream tyranny'

Awareness could also be a reminder of a truth one has known to be true all along, despite all possible outcomes and oppositions faced. Like one can "spread awareness" while being unaware at the same time. Examples: surroundings arent fit to be receptive of information, dangerous conditions, bad audience "read the room", a person could have a hidden agenda maybe while promoting a promising message thinking people cant see through the lies etc. The "Ultimate Awareness" one can have doesnt have anything to do with a whole truth, I dont think... because it is up to the aware person to let the unaware know how aware they really are. Or however they want to be perceived. Ultimate awareness requires knowing who is listening and who is just talking or asking things to just say something because they want to engage in general, despite the topic of discussion, despite the answers...unaware people sometimes dont know what they want to hear. Or they ask the person that will give them the answer they know they will give and want to hear. Thats awareness but If they want to hear one answer, one they already know to be true to them and arent willing to see things differently, then why even ask? Maybe thats the point. No stupid questions, i guess. — Kizzy

Ok wow! That was a lot of detail. But you are on to the right tack to me.

We need to define more properly all aspects of each motivation. And awareness is only a motivation, type 5 motivation. The anger infusion of type 5 is relevant. Anger IS intuition. Anger is Gestalt. It transcends the senses we normally consider the brain's sensory input. That means the body is guessing ahead of time, what it 'knows' that is not conscious. This is instinct. The pattern is already known in the body. It's muscle memory. And we can and do develop this further every day. That is a HUGE part of what evolution is. It is relegating to the body, the patterns needed to survive that are GOOD. And evolution is a million parts making choices. We all know choices can be wrong or immoral. Evolution is the same. It can fail. But that is a self-correcting issue. Keep shooting people and you will be shot. Grow a giraffe nick and when the trees die, you probably don't have time to adapt back. Bad choice.

But really...Who asked? Whose truth do you seek and who are you to them? That says a lot. — Kizzy

Truth is objective, the same truth to all. There is no 'your truth'. There is only objective truth, and everyone's MISTAKES about what truth is.

Morality is truth also. So that same pattern applies to morality.

Ask yourself what it may take to be reach "ultimate awareness"...and if you think you are capable of getting there, that is it. — Kizzy

No one can arrive at perfection, ever. It is probably that that is the purpose of the universe, to eternally seek it and yet not be able to arrive at it. But, like, entertaining the notion of self-mastery is horrid. Self-mastering, implying the ongoing process, is a BETTER term.

So settle for BETTER awareness and not 'ultimate awareness'. But I agree entirely that to properly seek BETTER awareness you must aim at perfect, or ultimate awareness. Any other aim is intending to fail.

Choice is tricky business.

I dont think you could find a better answer, are you really looking for whole truth? Why do you deserve any sort of truth, when you dont even know who to ask? — Kizzy

Who is not important, finally.

We are all embedded within truth. Its parts are universally and omni presently available to all. That does not mean that one is not well served by seeking out wise and smart exemplars to learn from. That is certainly a good idea. But the final chooser, authority, is only you.

When you dont know who to ask, the truth might not then be true at all because of such unawareness of the self who is seeking answers to baseless questions they didnt even want to know answers to in the first place. — Kizzy

Exactly! When faced with moral truth, with a glimpse of perfection, many and most will trun aside and claim to be 'only human'. Sorry, 'the heart wants what the heat wants!' It is not wise. But it is normal and expected. Horse, water. RIGHT desire is objective, not subjective. Most people will rankle at that truth.

Make it make sense...for you with the help of others whoms answers actually matter to you, and with good reason as to why they should.... Or accept your own answer. Ask yourself and accept it. Or dont and wait for the answer that fits best in your reality. Thats valid enough. — Kizzy

I would disagree. Accepting delusion is not wise. And accepting anything, becoming satisfied in any way, is immoral. My quote is 'Satisfaction is death!' This is why orgasm is called the 'little death' because it is so satisfying. All desire (to live even) recedes temporarily. The right chooser 'gets ready' again quickly. Do not wallow in death!

At least look at this as spreading awareness about how people are so unaware of who they are and who they are seeking answers from, yet somehow thinking they can handle or are deserving of any sort of truth? — Kizzy

Now I agree.

Laziness is not moral. No one deserves truth who does not work their ass off for it. All morality is that way. The primary sin of anger is laziness. That is the sin of BEING wrong. Not pulling your weight. Not trying. Not suffering the maintenance of virtue. Not caring. Denying meaning. Denying connection. I can go on and on. Truth is exalted in all cases. The juice of truth is ALWAYS worth the squeeze.

If you dont have self awareness you are lucky to end up with a psychiatrist. If you arent capable of putting the trust in anyones hands to tell you what is best for YOU when YOU should know the answer or how to get to the answer....Being that unaware that you cant explain what you are doing and why you do what you do is dangerous, and there are cases like the one presented above in the OP where the woman needs to be institutionalized and deserves to be heard but can she explain herself and feelings are they reasonable? Who is she asking to validate? Is she helpless? I think not...she didnt get put there automatically. It takes $$$, family, whatever, someone is taking your burden of life and adding it to their own burdens, trying to help the best they know but you can only help yourself, we know this already and this is a "What if" scenario that takes more context and details to make it make sense...We only know what YOU tell us. Who are you? Why do we know you more than you? That shouldnt be true, you can make it not true. Also, I am delusional. — Kizzy

Lol, the final sentence.

So, all forms of punishment need to be better understood and avoided in life as punishment is immoral. Love, the system, the law of the universe, already is set up to empower the punisher. The punisher though is not love. The punisher is you. Your choice is the only possible wrong. And also you are me and I am you, the unity concept. So all choices in the universe are yours.

That means we need to be very careful judging the lady in the op. And we should let her do her normal life but make normal life more and more 'safe' for someone like her, or someone with any other affliction. For example I love the movie 'The Last Samurai, because the bad actor or possible bad actor is followed around by an old Samurai who has nothing better to do to guard the Gaijin. THAT is how to do prison properly. Freedom is maximized, not minimized. And yes with some huge dangerous types that service would require several large escorts per offender. But, I think we can do it and we should.

So, in the OPs case a psychologist would escort this person and they could come in shifts. There could be a lighter touch intern doing the night work. And all the time the assumption is that she is abnormal and that that is not a bad thing in and of itself. If we do this we learn how to tweak things to make them ok, even if they are not normal. The small ant climbs the leaf and acts as a scout for the big leaf cutter ant. The abnormal becomes normal. The lady works her way into being a seer or she trains her brain via neuroplasticity not to break temporal stability in imagination.

Everyone is both a teacher and a student. To deny the role of the teacher is avoiding responsibility. To deny the role of the student is arrogance and short-sightedness, both — Chet Hawkins

Chet, When I said I am no teacher it was sarcastic and almost like I was saying "im no teacher to YOU (whoever reads this) because I dont want to be" not because i couldnt and or dismiss that role in general. Its more than important, its how people learn! Everyone involved, yes! Learning styles and teaching styles vary for each and every one of us, and I think some can be most/more compatible with one and the other. A good match exists in this the teacher and student roles. I meant to highlight that importance by making it a starting "question" I was asking the audience, the readers, the peeps of TFP.

Teachers do it though all the time, influence students. The problem is, when they dont know how much or how in what ways.

I just think learning from another should be easily done by all. Accommodations can be made and should be if "learning" is the goal and if also "teaching" is the goal. I dont think its a problem, but problems can come when learning and teaching happen without the teacher and student knowing whats being taken, given, and used...its not always a problem, and if one at all nothing that communication cant clear up in minutes time...but When both happen sometimes without any goals to learn or teach ever even made or intended can cause problematic stances to be built from. Nothing majorly important or an issue im thinking of lately, education is a whole other topic for another thread...
but I agree with your statement that i quoted and the rest of your comment pretty much (i will add quotes if i find anything worth further discussion HERE)...

In my original comment in here, My tone was to be read with a bit of angst, and I remember being irritated while interested enough contribute the day I commented. You are right I should not judge the lady in the op but sometimes thats what happens when I put myself in position to understand her.

I was moved to respond, but its almost as if I just gave shady ass reaction rather than a response now that I re-read the post and my comment...ha! It was thoughtful but without much thought, I just remember replying to this upon first read. I have funny notes from that day actually, I was moved by this thread!

see below for my random notes from that day after reading and engaging in this post when it was originally shared...

"If a christian believes the bible commits them to believe god created the world [??? quote from philforum]


THE MAGICIAN DEC21

A magician shall never reveal his tricks. Yet, they eventually do. But whats so wrong with that? Is it actually a good thing not for any good reason a magician should disown the one sharing the tricks. If you teach someone to also perfect and perform a magic trick for an amused enough audience then awareness was gained in the new magician because he was too once an idiot in the crowd clapping, smiling, engaged and impressed at the skills this man has to deceive and now he holds the power to deceive and teach another the same tricks But we all know deep down that he, who cant really be magic for real thats crazy thats delusional. But If we are all magicians no one comes to the Magic Show. Is there no more delusion? Do you have tricks up your sleeve or rabbits in your hat? I dont like the word clairvoyant. That word to me is in a realm of those not having these feelings or shall i say reactions to feelings occur naturally because it isnt natural....but they maybe manifested or conjured the possibility of powers to take action through their body. For example the woman of the OP not being able to physically, psychically handle her "clairvoyant powers" makes sense because it cant be a normal occurrence that she experiences often, if she is so unfamiliar to her bodys reaction to these unexplainable feelings. If She wouldnt be anxious or scared of her natural clairvoyant powers if it were real. She isnt anxious because she cant understand whats happening to make her feel this? Thats like taking a pot brownie for the first or 15th time and end up calling an ambulance to take you to the er because you think you are passing away when its a panic attack. Or shall I say, a buzz kill. Ha ha..
Also, its not that she is necessarily dangerous but was she acting out of control in public? Otherwise why was she detained again? Fighting at that point is useless once in the hands of those legally in authority to do so. If running from people doing their job is reasonable, keep going. Who knows? I cant explain if shes dangerous if you cant either? I can make up a scenerio and let my mind take off with it, I dont need an answer really. There is a greater risk she could cause harm by not having control of what I think should be considered as instinctive actions. Why couldnt meds and therapy guide her to becoming familiar and not to be scared. Why is she running? Was she asking for something she could never receive and being taught a lesson? I dont think real clairvoyance is real here.. when the body the truth comes from is not in sync or aware of what is happening. You dont get taken over, you need to recieve not run. She wouldnt run from giver of such magic....Who is chasing her again? A clown?"

I really am just a clown, but, Joan Jett said it best, 'Don't like lookin like no clown!'

Are Chet and Kizzy the same guy responding to each other? Constant conjunction and all that...