from Sam Jordison, author of the recent The Joy Of Sects – An A-Z of Cults, Cranks and Religious Eccentrics. The list starts out with Mark Twain’s neglected Roughing It, with its portrait of the early Mormon Church. (Anyone interested in the topic has either already read, or is obliged to, Jon Krakauer’s Under the Banner of Heaven, which is not on Jordison’s list.) A couple of these caught my eye and have to go on my to-read list:

(Parenthetically, I don’t think The Da Vinci Code really belongs on the Top 10 anything list! Jordison includes it, even though he says, “I hate this book almost as much as I love it. It’s literary crack cocaine – reading it does you no good at all, but you just can’t stop.”.) (Guardian.UK via walker)

“The practice does more than just make you feel good, it makes you perform better – and alters the structure of your brain.” (New Scientist)

And: “The drug ecstasy reduces the brain’s defences, reveals a new study of rats, leaving it vulnerable to invasion by viruses and other pathogens.” (New Scientist)

The double standard that underlies our torture policies. David Cole, a professor at Georgetown University Law Center writing in Slate, succinctly dissects the mockery Bush & Co. make of human rights with the U.S.’ policy on detention of foreign combatants without protection of law. Even torture apart, the central ploy, holding foreign nationals abroad so as to claim theat the U.S. constitution does not apply, makes no sense. We find humanity through the encounter with the alien, who deserves our consideration simply because he or she is human, nthing more. If we dehumanize the alien, we cannot be anything but, in the literal sense of the word, inhuman ourselves. The Republican ethos, I am convinced, is incapable of embracing humanity because it is fundamentally an appeal to tribal identity which is deeply encoded, I am convinced, in the neuroevolution of our social brains. Progressive ecumenism represents a moral imperative transcending our tribal xenophobia and the demonization of the Other. The culture war being waged now is literally one between our finer and our baser natures, and Guantanamo and the other extrajudicial detention facilities of the Bush administration are the frontlines of our battle to remain human, in all that that may potentially mean in the 21st century.

Digby agrees:

Follow Me Here… is six years old today.

Update: Thanks to Blogger; publishing didn’t work today, preventing me from publishing this post in time for the anniversary. “001 java.net.SocketTimeoutException: Read timed out.” And thanks to all my readers for putting up with, among other things, six years of intermittent Blogger crump-outs! Many happy returns.

The double standard that underlies our torture policies. David Cole, a professor at Georgetown University Law Center writing in Slate, succinctly dissects the mockery Bush & Co. make of human rights with the U.S.’ policy on detention of foreign combatants without protection of law. Even torture apart, the central ploy, holding foreign nationals abroad so as to claim theat the U.S. constitution does not apply, makes no sense. We find humanity through the encounter with the alien, who deserves our consideration simply because he or she is human, nthing more. If we dehumanize the alien, we cannot be anything but, in the literal sense of the word, inhuman ourselves. The Republican ethos, I am convinced, is incapable of embracing humanity because it is fundamentally an appeal to tribal identity which is deeply encoded, I am convinced, in the neuroevolution of our social brains. Progressive ecumenism represents a moral imperative transcending our tribal xenophobia and the demonization of the Other. The culture war being waged now is literally one between our finer and our baser natures, and Guantanamo and the other extrajudicial detention facilities of the Bush administration are the frontlines of our battle to remain human, in all that that may potentially mean in the 21st century.

Digby agrees:

A Marine inquires about ordering in bulk, describing how spraying fluorescent silly string into a darkened room lets you spot tripwires on boobytraps with ease. (Cockeyed)

And: How much silly string can you get out of a can?

Another in the occasional series of articles to which I link about the execrable penetration of reductionism, popularization, pseudoscience, marketing and profiteering into what I do, the care of urgently ill and suffering psychiatric patients. Let me emphasize, however, that I don’t post this stuff to call into the question the enterprise of treating depression, but rather our explanations for what we are doing when we do so. Others have written that antidepressants are no better than placebo, and (believe me) I know fervently that the placebo effect plays a great role in any healer’s repertoire. But it is also indubitably clear that medication treatment makes a great deal of difference — sometimes, literally, a life-or-death difference — in severely mentally ill patients. As readers of FmH know, I think claims to the contrary often relate to the expansion of the definition of medication-responsive conditions in the past few decades, driven by market pressures rather than empirical evidence.

In observance of Kurt Vonnegut’s 83rd birthday, a consummate collection of tidbits from the master modern aphorist by a consummate fan. Thanks, Ed, for introducing me to this apocryphal (but likely from Vonnegut) notion that we should more properly think of the year as having six seasons instead of four.

Nature Neuroscience has a new weblog which promises to be more interactive and speculative than its companion peer-reviewed scientific print journal. One of the interesting early posts is about natalizumab. Seemingly the most effective drug ever developed against multiple sclerosis, the drug has been pulled from the market because of an indubitable but inexplicable link to the development of the devastating brain disease PML. For those of you interested in such things, the post discusses an intriguing hypothesis about how matalizumab might potentiate PML.

Not a bad day at the polls. Despite Ken Mehlman’s attempt to spin them off, the two Democratic gubernatorial wins do seem like a rebuke to the Bushites, especially Virginia, where Bush made a last-minute campaign stop. Kilgore might have been thinking of that as the kiss of death when he woke up a loser this morning.

Perhaps more enjoyable was that the pro-‘Intelligent’ Design Dover, PA school board was roundly turned out of office. (CBS News) And I was very entertained watching all the Schwarzenegger ballot initiatives getting shot down. I share Rafe Coburn‘s disappointment, however, that the ballot question in support of taking legislative redistricting out of the hands of the politicians was rejected, notwithstanding the fact that Democrats opposed it. In my book, gerrymandering is a central challenge to the claim that the U.S. is a democratic state at all, and it has reached epic proportions.

Should all right-minded liberals give generously to the Scooter Libby Defense Fund? Perhaps a vigorous and spirited defense of Libby might go after the real culprits for whom he might have no love lost after being compelled to take the fall? (New York Times )

And:

“Even if the vice president himself is not indicted, imagine the questions he might be asked, under oath, in Libby’s case.” — Sidney Blumenthal (Salon)

Since this advocacy is a searing indictment of the Bush administration’s fiddling-while-Rome-burns, the IRS had better investigate pulling these evangelicals’ tax-exempt status!

If the Guardian‘s rendition is accurate, this sounds absurd. The inventor, after all, is a “Harvard University medic who also studied electrical engineering at (M.I.T.)…” (“I’m not a physicist, I just play one for the venture capitalists…”) The fact that his ‘hydrino’ violates basic tenets about the alllowable quantum states of electrons sugggests to Mills that quantum theory must be wrong. Although I would not think this would find many advocates, Mills claims to have independent confirmation of his theory and the invective is flying. What fun; I think we have just seen the beginnings of a monumental pissing contest between supporters and detractors in the physics community.

Of course the investors Mills claims to have interested are a different matter — all weighing in on just one side of the controversy. Money certainly shapes wishful thinking in the oddest, most tortured ways. I predict those who supported Mills’ claims are going to be massively chagrined people one day in the not too far distant future… and with far less in their bank accounts than otherwise.

“All Saints Episcopal Church in Pasadena risks losing its tax-exempt status because of a former rector’s remarks in 2004.” First of all, this takes outrageous and egregious license with the tax regulations prohibiting tax-exempt organizations’ advocacy for particular candidates or involvement in political campaigns. The sermon, just before the 2004 election, told no parishioner whom to vote for but clearly asserted that opposition to the war in Iraq was a Christian value that Jesus would have espoused. Second, of course, the church is singled out from among the multitudes in which antiwar sentiments are preached, perhaps because the sermon received conspicuous coverage in the Los Angeles Times at the time? Finally, I daresay that the IRS has not gone after the tax-exempt status of the myriad fundamentalist, evangelical and other conservative churches which have far fewer compunctions against direct solicitation of their congregants’ votes for Bush than liberal churches have against soliciting votes for his opponents. (Los Angeles )Times

‘Surprising’ results of a survey presented at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Chest Physicians this week in Montreal indicate that there is a widespread misconception that nicotine causes cancer and that this interferes with efforts to stop smoking.

The investigator asserts that switching to “light” cigarettes on the basis of the belief that it will lower nicotine intake and thus reduce cancer risk is specious reasoning, since the carcinogens and other toxins are in the cigarette smoke and not the nicotine. But I don’t get it; it seems to me smokers switching to “light” cigarettes are doing the right thing even if it is for the wrong reason. Despite the mistaken belief that “light” means low-nicotine, doesn’t it indicate low tar and thus less carcinogens? Or is that just a marketing ploy without scientific basis?

In any case, the current study authors point out a more pertinent problem with the mistaken belief that it is the nicotine that causes cancer risk — smokers trying to quit will not use the nicotine patch. And it occurs to me that there is yet another reason why smoking “light” cigarettes would probably backfire. In the psychology of addiction, the belief that you have switched to a more benign product paradoxically encourages increased consumption, often to an extent that more than counteracts the risk reduction of having switched. This happens with food (“It’s ‘lo-cal’, I can have a little bit more…”) and alcohol (“I don’t drink the hard stuff anymore, just beer, so I’m okay…”) as well.

[thanks, Marla]

`

…(I)n the world of performance art, where transience was an integral part of some of the best-known work from the 1960’s and 70’s, “the idea of replaying pieces as if from an orchestral score has usually been seen, if at all, as heresy.” (New York Times )

Although this turns out to be about something more proasic, upon seeing the title I thought the Times Magazine was proclaiming the overthrow of the theory that literary works are ‘intelligently designed.’ But, oh, postmodernism has already dismantled that notion, I guess.

`

…(I)n the world of performance art, where transience was an integral part of some of the best-known work from the 1960’s and 70’s, “the idea of replaying pieces as if from an orchestral score has usually been seen, if at all, as heresy.” (New York Times )

British Medical Journal article on the anatomy and medical complications of sword swallowing. [via boing boing]

Why thank you, Daniel…so flattered!

[Two male professors, it should be noted!]

Related:

Beauty is Not in the Eye of the Beholder

And:

Questioning Beauty

Related?

From /. pointers to a radio remake of the famous H.G. Wells Mercury Theatre show from 1938, performed by members of the Star Trek Cast. The server is overwhelmed, but for this week only the show is apparently being streamed at http://www.scpr.org/programs/latw/. (via walker)

Do we know when others think that we are difficult? (Conscious Cogn.) [Well, I’m sure I would know if anyone thought I was difficult — not that anyone does, of course — but the problem is that nobody I think is difficult seems to recognize that the problem is them, not me!]

A Review of Why We Lie: The Evolutionary Roots of Deception and the Unconscious Mind by David Livingstone Smith” (Human Nature)

Vatican disdains anti-scientific ‘fundamentalism’?? (Yahoo! News)

Thank you, George Bush, for nearly six years of unremitting contempt.

Perhaps Bush is too embarrassed…or is that an emotion in his repertoire?

But is an all-out fight over Alito going to be good for the Democrats? Ed Fitzgerald has a good discussion of the concerns that the Republicans may circle the wagons around this issue. He quotes Publius: “Court fights are necessarily culture war fights, and polarization along culture war lines are usually better for conservatives.” Has current Republican fractiousness and vulnerability been overestimated? Are Democrats now well-situated to rout the Republicans in the 2006 mid-term elections and how does that weigh in the balance against the damning legacy of stacking the Supreme Court with the stuff of Bush’s wet dreams and our worst nightmares? Fitzgerald reassures us that most people don’t pay much attention to the Supreme Court and the far-off Washington battle would not be likely to have any effect on the elections. I tend to agree; when has the American electorate ever made an informed choice based on the truly important issues? On the other hand, both the nature and the timing of the nomination suggest it may not have as much to do with leaving a legacy of conservative pain for future generations — Bush has, after all, not been one with much capacity for deferred gratification or a vision that extends beyond the confines of his paltry field of view — as it does beginning his comeback, reuniting Republicans (who are uniformly laudatory about the nomination, rightwingnut or not) and diverting attention from Plamegate and the Iraq debacle.

New York Times editorial (goes without saying):

Der Spiegel examines the online obituaries of numerous suicide bombers now available at Islamist “martyr sites.”

A reprise of my Hallowe’en post of past years:

It is that time of year again. What has become a time of disinhibited hijinx and mayhem, and a growing marketing bonanza for the kitsch-manufacturers and -importers, has primeval origins as the Celtic New Year’s Eve, Samhain (pronounced “sow-en”). The harvest is over, summer ends and winter begins, the Old God dies and returns to the Land of the Dead to await his rebirth at Yule, and the land is cast into darkness. The veil separating the worlds of the living and the dead becomes frayed and thin, and dispossessed dead mingle with the living, perhaps seeking a body to possess for the next year as their only chance to remain connected with the living, who hope to scare them away with ghoulish costumes and behavior, escape their menace by masquerading as one of them, or placate them with offerings of food, in hopes that they will go away before the new year comes. For those prepared, a journey to the other side could be made at this time. It is fortunate that Hallowe’en falls on a Monday this year, as there is evidence that the pagan festival was celebrated for three days.

With Christianity, perhaps because with calendar reform it was no longer the last day of the year, All Hallows’ Eve became decathected, a day for innocent masquerading and fun, taking its name Hallowe’en as a contraction and corruption of All Hallows’ Eve. All Saints’ Day may have originated in its modern form with the 8th century Pope Gregory III. Hallowe’en customs reputedly came to the New World with the Irish immigrants of the 1840’s. The prominence of trick-or-treating has a slightly different origin, however.

The custom of trick-or-treating is thought to have originated not with the Irish Celts, but with a ninth-century European custom called souling. On November 2, All Souls Day, early Christians would walk from village to village begging for “soul cakes,” made out of square pieces of bread with currants. The more soul cakes the beggars would receive, the more prayers they would promise to say on behalf of the dead relatives of the donors. At the time, it was believed that the dead remained in limbo for a time after death, and that prayer, even by strangers, could expedite a soul’s passage to heaven.

Jack-o’-lanterns were reportedly originally turnips; the Irish began using pumpkins after they immigrated to North AMerica, given how plentiful they were here.

The Jack-o-lantern custom probably comes from Irish folklore. As the tale is told, a man named Jack, who was notorious as a drunkard and trickster, tricked Satan into climbing a tree. Jack then carved an image of a cross in the tree’s trunk, trapping the devil up the tree. Jack made a deal with the devil that, if he would never tempt him again, he would promise to let him down the tree.

According to the folk tale, after Jack died, he was denied entrance to Heaven because of his evil ways, but he was also denied access to Hell because he had tricked the devil. Instead, the devil gave him a single ember to light his way through the frigid darkness. The ember was placed inside a hollowed-out turnip to keep it glowing longer.

Folk traditions that were in the past associated wtih All Hallows’ Eve took much of their power, as with the New Year’s customs about which I write here every Dec. 31st, from the magic of boundary states, transition and liminality.

The idea behind ducking, dooking or bobbing for apples seems to have been that snatching a bite from the apple enables the person to grasp good fortune. Samhain is a time for getting rid of weakness, as pagans once slaughtered weak animals which were unlikely to survive the winter. A common ritual calls for writing down weaknesses on a piece of paper or parchment, and tossing it into the fire. There used to be a custom of placing a stone in the hot ashes of the bonfire. If in the morning a person found that the stone had been removed or had cracked, it was a sign of bad fortune. Nuts have been used for divination: whether they burned quietly or exploded indicated good or bad luck. Peeling an apple and throwing the peel over one’s shoulder was supposed to reveal the initial of one’s future spouse. One way of looking for omens of death was for peope to visit churchyards

The Witches’ Sabbath aspect of Hallowe’en seems to result from Germanic influence, and fusion with the notion of Walpurgisnacht. (Familiar with the magnificent musical evocation of this, Mussorgsky’s Night on Bare Mountain?) Although probably not yet in a position to shape mainstream American Hallowe’en traditions, Mexican Dia de los Muertos observances have started to contribute some delightful and whimsical iconography to our encounter with the eerie and unearthly as well.

What was Hallowe’en like forty or fifty years ago in the U.S. when, bastardized as it has become with respect to its pagan origins, it retained a much more traditional flair? For my purposes, suffice it to say that it was before the era of the pay-per-view ‘spooky-world’ type haunted attractions and its Martha Stewart yuppification with, as this irreverent Salon article from several years ago [via walker] puts it, monogrammed jack-o’-lanterns and the like. Related, a 1984 essay by Richard Seltzer, frequently referenced in other sources, entitled “Why Bother to Save Hallowe’en?”, argues as I do that reverence for Hallowe’en is good for the soul.

That would be anathema to certain segments of society, however. Hallowe’en certainly inspires a backlash by fundamentalists who consider it a blasphemous abomination. ‘Amateur scholar’ Isaac Bonewits details academically the Hallowe’en errors and lies he feels contribute to its being reviled. Some of the panic over Hallowe’en is akin to the hysteria, fortunately now debunked, over the supposed epidemic of ‘ritual Satanic abuse’ that swept the Western world in the ’90’s.

The horror film has become inextricably linked to Hallowe’en tradition, although the holiday itself did not figure in the movies until John Carpenter took the slasher genre singlehandedly by storm. Googling “scariest films”, you will, grimly, reap a mother lode of opinions about how to pierce the veil to journey to the netherworld and reconnect with that magical, eerie creepiness in the dark (if not the over-the-top blood and gore that has largely replaced the subtlety of earlier horror films).

In any case: trick or treat!

The real one, near Darmstadt, Germany, said to be the inspiration for Mary Shelley’s 1818 novel, including photos. And here you can listen (Real Player) to the famous 1952 ‘Frankenstein prank’ in which something was waiting for an Armed Forces reporter who visited the crypt under the castle on Halloween night. [via boing boing]

Renaissance paintings photoshopp’d to add monsters (Worth1000.com via boing boing)

Der Spiegel examines the online obituaries of numerous suicide bombers now available at Islamist “martyr sites.”

Same-day service.
Unplug after use.
Slippery when wet.
Ignore this notice.
Use only as directed.
Consume in moderation.
Lather, rinse, repeat.
Your mileage may vary.
For external use only.
Don’t try this at home.
No purchase is necessary.
You must be present to win.
Do not think of an elephant.
Other restrictions may apply.
Apply only to affected areas.
Part of a daily balanced diet.
No shirt, no shoes, no service.
You need not be present to win.
No user-serviceable parts inside.
Do not exceed recommended dosage.
Offer void where prohibited by law.
Do not remove under penalty of law.
You have the right to remain silent.
If swallowed, do not induce vomiting.
Valid only at participating locations.
Freshest if used before date specified.
Prices subject to change without notice.
Do not fold, staple, spindle or mutilate.
Contents may have settled during shipment.
Caution! The edge is closer than you think.
In emergency, break glass, pull down handle.
Product is sold by weight and not by volume.
Do not use if safety seal is torn or missing.
If condition persists, consult your physician.
Detach and include upper portion with payment.
Nutritional need is not established in humans.
Objects on screen are closer than they appear.
Satisfaction guaranteed; return for full refund.
Names have been changed to protect the innocent.
Anything you say can and will be used against you.
May be used as flotation device in case of emergency.
Please note locations of emergency exits upon arrival.
No animals were harmed in the production of this page.
Caution: Dates on calendar are closer than they appear.
Please leave as clean on leaving as you would like to find on entering.
Any resemblance to actual persons living or dead is purely coincidental.
Do not use if you have ever had an allergic reaction to this product or any of its ingredients.

The Guardian calls it “a new low” in Bush’s presidency as he “reluctantly” accepts Miers’ withdrawal from consideration for the Supreme Court in the face of overwhelming pressure from within the Republican Party. And it is the week of the 2000th US military casualty in Iraq… and of Hurricane Fitzgerald! But let us put a stop right here to this being characterized as a surprise or Washington being stunned. You didn’t have to be a rocket scientist to see this coming, and I blinked to the rumor that Miers’ nomination would tank awhile ago.

The dysadministration presented the Miers withdrawal as a way of avoiding a looming constitutional crisis over Senatorial demands for papers on Mier’s work as White House counsel that the president considers privileged — documents senior members of the Senate Judiciary Committee said no one had requested. A transparent lie if we have ever seen one from this cabal.

Bush will likely hurry to name a new candidate to distract attention as rapidly as possible from expected Treasongate indictments, and of course he already has a thoroughly vetted shortlist left over from the Roberts and Miers deliberations. If Bush was scraping the bottom of the barrel with Miers, what lies ahead? Although many progressives are jubilant, that old saw about being careful what you wish for may apply, and Bush’s troubles with the Right are likely to be far easier to fix than our contempt for him from the Left. As someone said, the next nominee may make “Robert Bork look like Thurgood Marshall,” especially if Bush bows to the pressure to pander this time to the Reactionary Right that did the Miers bid in. Some are suggesting that the Miers nomination was a Machiavellian plot engineered by Rove to fail so that he could push through someone further to the Right with less of a fight. It has also been speculated that, with Rove distracted by his own difficulties, the Miers nomination is what you get when Bush runs the show himself, a caricature of pure cronyism divorced from qualifications.

As far as the reactionary bona fides of the next nominee go, Bush may be a little damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t. Tim Grieve, considering to whom the president might turn next, opbserves that he can’t nominate Gonzales, who has the same privilege problem that Miers had from his legal work for the White House. He cannot turn to a middle-of-the-roader who would infuriate the Right wingnuts further. Has Bush exhausted his stock of women willing to fall on their swords for the man they love? Does he have the political capital to push through someone contentious? The dysadministration strategy in its last few nominations has been to both select candidates on the basis of opacity about their personal stances on partisan issues and to train them intensively to stonewall in the face of confirmation scrutiny. This obviously backfired with Miers, who was such a cipher that those concerned about her ideology could imagine the worst and those concerned about her qualifications would surely come up wanting. Legal analysts suggest Bush will abandon the search for someone who is not already a judge, and that he is looking for lightning to strike twice with another John Roberts clone, equally prepared to stonewall in front of the Judiciary Committee.

Any Bush signals to the Right that he has finally found the cojones to advance an ideologue and risk the fight he has not had the stomach for recently will give the Democrats the ammunition to raise principled objections… if they have the stomach for the fight. If the Democrats are emboldened enough by the freefall in Presidential fortune, perhaps the “nuclear option” lies ahead after all! One crafty way Bush might just squeak past this would be to appoint a current or former Senator, who might mobilize whatever vestiges of bipartisanship and civility remain in the Senate toward a colleague.(How about Orrin Hatch? At least it would get him out of the Senate…)

In any case, the Left can breathe a momentary sigh of relief that the Right scuttled Miers’ chances. It is now likely that Sandra Day O’Connor will still be on the bench when the Supreme Court considers three abortion-related cases on Nov. 30th.

Related: the New York Times summarizes other webloggers’ reactions to Miers’ withdrawal here.

The Village Voice turns fifty, and here is a gallery of memorable front pages from its lifespan. I started reading the Voice almost forty years ago, so this is the gallery of my coming of age.

Addendum: [thanks, Charles]

Are you interested in the nature and meaning of psychosis? This is an abstract of a study which compared the frequency, distress and intrusiveness of anomalous perceptual experiences in 336 subjects from the general population and 20 psychotic inpatients. 11% of the population sample scored above the mean of the psychotic patients’ sample. A factor analysis of the population data suggested three clusters — one involving “clinically psychotic-like” phenomena; one attributable to temporal lobe epilepsy and other seizure-like processes; and a third “chemosensation” cluster largely involving olfactory and gustatory anomalous experiences. This suggested to the authors ‘that there are multiple contributory factors underlying anomalous perceptual experience and the “psychosis continuum.” ‘

I beg to differ. They are really not demonstrating any “psychosis continuum,” since they use ‘psychosis’ as a wastebasket term synonymous with anomalous perceptual experience. All they are demonstrating is how virtually meaningless it is to talk about psychosis in that way, and that is why their headline finding — that a proportion of the general population score higher on their measure than those hospitalized for psychosis — is less surprising than it sounds. If you lump together a heterogeneous grouping of patients with ‘psychosis’, only some of them will be off the charts in terms of anomalous perceptual experiences, because having anomalous perceptual experiences is only one way of being psychotic. Yes, some psychotics have hallucinations, in which they cannot assess the reality or meaning of various perceptual experiences they are having. But others’ psychoses consist primarily of a disturbance in the content of their thought, i.e. so-called delusional thinking. Finally, some people are considered psychotic because of a disturbance in the form, not the content, of their thought processes, with profoundly disorganized, fractured, incoherent and illogical reasoning.

Patients with diverse disturbances of their mental processes and brain function may be given the same psychotic diagnosis despite the fact that they are probably undergoing very distinct disease processes, psychological or neurophysiological alterations. For example, considering the quintessential psychotic disorder, schizophrenia, different thinkers have defined it differently based on different clusters of core symptoms (among them Kurt Schneider, responsible for the so-called “Schneiderian signs” alluded to in this article). They are all talking about schizophrenia but probably pointing at different schizophrenics.

Moreover, we have come to realize that none of these supposedly defining core symptom clusters are pathognomonic of schizophrenia per se and they can occur in many other psychotic illnesses — mania, psychotic depression, organic psychotic disorders including those arising in epilepsy, toxic and metabolic psychoses, etc. — as well.

Now we reach the next juncture, in which it is suggested that the same anomalous experiences occur in a population without psychiatric diagnosis as well. First of all, that may not be strictly true. Most epidemiological studies have found a significant incidence of psychiatric illness, undiagnosed, in a randomly selected population at large. It is a truism that only the mental health profession thinks that it treats most of the mental illness in the population.

If the authors are suggesting that what really distinguishes a psychiatric patient from a member of the general population undergoing anomalous perceptual experience is how much distress the experience causes and what sort of sense the person can make of their experience, they are coming closer to my notion of what the core deficits are in psychotic experience. As I see it, these embody fundamental disturbances in the sense of the self, its boundaries, and its relationship to the world beyond those boundaries. Such disturbances render anomalous experiences utterly incomprehensible and terrifying, literally unendurable. Even perceptual experiences which others of us might consider not the least bit anomalous but rather ordinary cannot be made sense of if you do not know if they are coming from within you or outside yourself, whether they are providing information about your internal or the external environment, whether they are shared by others or uniquely experienced by yourself, etc. etc.

In a sense, this study is illustrative of all that is wrong with modern psychiatry. Yes, psychiatry is supposed to inhabit the province of subjective experience. But a descriptive focus on symptoms alone defines nothing when the self is written out of the equation.

Explore, if you will, the world of E-Prime. Arising from the thinking of Alfred Korzybski and the International Society for General Semantics which he founded, E-Prime consists of the subset of the English language left after expunging it of the use of the verb ‘to be’ in its two major functions of connoting identity (“I am a weblogger”) and predication (“I am nice”). Proponents feel that these uses of ‘to be’ cause major confusion of thought and consequent social problems. To start with, consider how the use of the same verb for identity and predication readily obscures the distinction between opinion and fact. Moreover, it readily lends itself to stereotypy and inflexibility.

This paper claims that using “E-Prime in Negotiation and Therapy” can challenge dogmatic viewpoints, clarify confusion, and defuse conflict in daily life. I don’t conduct myself as a strong proponent of E-Prime in my life; awkward circumlocutory constructions arise whenever I try to write in that way. But the difficulty in using it perhaps speaks to how early in our lives the associated thought patterns were ingrained. Language doesn’t determine what we can and can’t think, but it does readily shape what can be thought with ease as opposed to with difficulty, IMHO. Does the challenge involved in thinking ‘outside this box’ perhaps indicate the importance of doing so? The blinks above have plenty of further links if you want to explore your identifications and predications more thoroughly.

In the great tradition of US covert combat violating international boundaries and trampling the rights of neutral parties, US forces in Iraq are increasingly engaging Syrian border forces. We have “pursued insugents” into Syrian territory; there have been Syrian casualties. Although this will never be admitted, I am sure this is by design and not an inadvertent blunder by MBM (Man’s Best Military ®). It is likely US special forces are involved in covert operations in Syrian territory.

It is said that the US dysadministration will not commit itself to toppling Bashir Assad for fear of who might replace him. That is certainly more likely to be a surmise — or wishful thinking? — by the press than a clear indication of dysadministration thinking, though, which doesn’t usually involve such foresight or acumen and which has ongoingly demonstrated that it has learned nothing from the debacle in Iraq. Why, then, rattle sabres with an outraged insistence on action in the face of the Hariri assassination report and the overblown and disingenuous focus on Syria as a supposed source of, and a safe haven for, foreign jihadist insurgents? This is clearly a pretext for US military adventurism and an excuse for utter US failure (which is mostly said by critics to be a failure of our counterinsurgency measures, but the real failure was, of course, creating and perpetuating the conditions for insurrection and civil war by our invasion and occupation!). The real “jihadist extremists” spreading their ignorant and dangerous fanatical faith are the neocons running US foreign policy.

This brings up to date a story that forms one of the centerpieces of the Under the Banner of Heaven, Jon Krakauer’s terrifying exposé of extremist Mormon fundamentalism. If you think you know the depths of the America you live in, reading Krakauer’s book may change your mind.

BTW, I heard that Bill O’Reilly said something on his radio show along the lines of, “The bombings will continue as long as the American presence does.” Although he was saying it to attempt to inure the public to the continuing death toll until we “complete our mission” (as Dubya always puts it) it is actually, precisely, an argument for the opposite, of course. And it also eerily reminiscent of that old saw about how “the beatings will continue until morale improves”…