>>16713361
>yeah most of the diagnoses there are just 'it's a disease if it interferes with normal life, otherwise it's just a personality disorder'
That does not appear accurate. It's a disorder if it interferes with function in a given environment, it's not a disorder at all if it allows you to function in that environment. Consider my example of a schizoid in solitary confinement again - all the traits that would be maladaptive in society would make them tolerate or even thrive in this new environment.

There is a clear fundamental normative bias towards maintaining the status quo through assigning blame for the person-environment mismatch on the person rather than the environment, unless the environment is the local, ingrained status quo. If one cannot tolerate a 9-5, it's their fault, a 9-5 is perfectly normal (because it's the local, ingrained status quo) and they have maladaptive traits. If they cannot tolerate solitary confinement and commit suicide, it was actually the environment's fault now, because solitary confinement isn't "normal" and the innocent person simply suffered an acute stress reaction/trauma response/etc.

Dunno about you, but i really don't want any subjective, arbitary biases in my science.

Back | Go to board

Board:

/sci/

Thread:

/med/: large body habitus edition