The Disorder in Mental Disorder
What exactly is the disorder in mental disorder…is there one at all?
1. NEURODIVERSITY
Illness, disorder, dysfunction…to avoid misattributing mental disorders in ways that are demeaning, offensive, or cruel, I will from this point on refer to group of mental idiopathic diseases as neurodivergence’s to account for the neurodiversity among all.
Though these terms are used interchangeably in common use speak, and even in professional medical use, they fall short of encompassing all the ubiquities of neurodivergence’s. For if one were to start using any specific term to describe the difference in mental functionality, one would find the scope of their language limited by exceptions and definitions.
Neurodivergence avoids this problem by acknowledging the unique psychology each individual possesses. This must be the case. The public readily accepts that color and body shape is unique and out of control; therefore, it isn’t too far-fetched to believe that one’s mental faculties are similarly unique and out of control.
Neurodivergence also accounts for the conditions that deprive individuals of leading mentally sound, healthy, socially functioning lives. I am of the opinion that if individuals are wholly individual then each possess a condition. These conditions can be externally or internally influenced. Just as one is born flat-footed, one may be born bipolar. Just as one breaks a bone, one may become depressed.
2. PHILOSOPHY OF MIND
So, what do we make of these strange conditions that afflict all? Where does it fit in a philosophy of cognitive science and mind?
We’re in no position to call them abnormalities nor afflictions for that matter. These afflictions only prevent us from functioning as others deem fit — by socially accepted standards. The solution isn’t as simple as being more accepting. The stigma is already being reduced by a new wave of mental health awareness.
These conditions, whether it be bipolarity, schizophrenia, addiction, so on and forth, all affect perception and by extension impressions. Here, I am using perception in the most literal sense. Perception is a description of the external world. Impression is a description of internal world, namely, mental content.
Neurodivergence’s act as an intermediary between perception and impression. This may account for the unique mental world each naturally possess. A philosophy of mind has hitherto attempted to generalize mental content so as to bring a foundation to the mind; however, if neurodivergence’s exist then each person differs in mental ability and faculty, thus preventing any such philosophy of mind truly capable of capturing the human mind.
3. DISORDER AS A SOCIAL CIRCUMSTANCE
Why is it then that the public is quick to confuse certain conditions with disorder? What exactly is the disorderin a mental disorder…is there one at all?
Certain neurodivergent conditions prevent one from leading a normal life. But normal is relative to the societal expectations and common conduct. The disorder, if there is one at all, is falling out of this societal order. These conditions are exacerbated by the very same societal order that marginalizes neurodivergent people. The stresses and stigma of being neurodivergent worsens the condition. The disorder in mental disorder does not have a mental origin. The disorder is a social one.
John Lachs writes in Cost of Comfort
Paradoxically yet naturally, an increase in the integration of the social act brings with it a corresponding growth in psychic fragmentation. Simply put, social integration leads to psychological fragmentation.
My interpretation is perhaps an extrapolation of what he was getting at, but if we take a deeper dive, we’d find that it isn’t such an exaggeration.
Taking the world as a massive, interconnected society, it’s hard to refute that its grown remarkable in ambition and size. We’re able to order products at the tip of our phones, communicate across vast distances, and thanks to improved healthcare the human lifespan is lengthier than ever before. Yet, all these feats come at a price. As Lachs believes, the increase in these socially mediated acts brings about unparalleled comfort — security, conduct, and dependency on society.
This dependency is both satisfying and detrimental to the human psyche.
This dependency is the root circumstance of psychic distance and disorder.
This dependency is what promotes the idea that people with neurodivergent conditions have a disorder
As one grows accustomed to participating in the social act, so too does one grow accustomed into believing the social narrative.
There is no such thing as a mental disorder. It is a narrative fabricated by society at large to inhibit individuality and keep one dependent on pharmaceutical drugs and a plethora of medical visits.
I’m not denying that there are certain neurodivergence’s that are debilitating, but we must ask ourselves why they are so. Where is the origin of disorder in mental disorder? Are they inherently debilitating or the does origin lie in certain social circumstances?
