half of this website believes that all of your problems can be solved by going to therapy

another half thinks that the entire psychological profession is fake and after some vaguely construed revolution mental health will be solved

what's funny about this is that nothing about it new https://t.co/VH1BF8e68J
I wish this wasn't paywalled because the books Lasch reviewed (in 1976!) sound very familiar. The same kind of dumb debates on this subject that occur constantly here are inherited from boomers
the point Lasch makes towards the end is that all of these books are grasping towards something that neither therapy or politics fully covers, even if both are obviously relevant.
but first, he does a tour through the books. he encounters people who believe all character traits are a product of "propaganda" and "conditioning" that can be fixed with therapy or therapy-like processes, and people who think therapy is a distraction from politics
he notes where both have a point. the people that take refuge in politics and denounce mental health, he often observes, do so because it provides an excuse for the inability to resolve personal anxieties.
at the same time, it isn't clear that consciousness-raising -- consisting of therapy and therapy-like processes can help, especially because they seem to advocate making less investment in others and "live for the moment" (sound familiar?)
Now Lasch at last offers his opinion without leaning on those of others. An obsession with "self-preservation" and "psychic survival" is rooted in a "weakening of social ties" and the "warlike character of the social environment"
Lasch's argument is that "narcissism" is not a psychological defect but a survival strategy to social changes, social changes that are not really attributable to politics or economics.
"A warlike society tends to produce men and women who are at heart antisocial. It should therefore not surprise us to find that the narcissist, although he conforms to social norms for fear of external retribution, often thinks of himself as an outlaw...."
" and sees others in the same way, “as basically dishonest and unreliable, or only reliable because of external pressures....The ethic of self-preservation and psychic survival is rooted, then, not merely in objective conditions...but in the subjective experience of emptiness"
" It reflects the conviction—as much a projection of inner anxieties as a perception of the way things are—that envy and exploitation dominate even the most intimate relations. The cult of personal relations, which becomes increasingly intense as..."
"..the hope of political solutions recedes, conceals a thoroughgoing disenchantment with personal relations, just as the cult of sensuality implies a repudiation of sensuality in all but its most primitive forms. "
So social and political problems do not originate in "privatism" -- people rightly are concerned with private life because "deep and lasting friendships, love affairs, and marriages" become more "difficult to achieve"
and people's search for private sanctuary is natural as social life becomes more "warlike and barbaric." However, consciousness-raising and therapy error by making analysis personal problems purely "personal and private"
Lasch himself is mostly reviewing the work of others in this article. When he himself, in later books and articles, discusses his own diagnoses and solutions we see the final inheritance of contemporary problems from the boomers.
Lasch, for all of his insights about the social background of psychic distress, has little remedy beyond a quixotic movement backwards that reverses the social changes of the last 150 years.
which partly explains why Lasch has become more popular today in an era of online e-trad culture and name-drops of Lasch are popular in conservative publications and left publications that often bandwagon with them
Lasch's idealized solution is hitting a "git reset" on society and going back to a social world dominated by small artisans, craftsmen, and proprietors. This search for individual competence is correlated with meaningful "traditional values"
Whether or not you agree with this view of what Good Society was like prior to some supposed deluge, history doesn't go backwards even if today's social conditions are always temporary.
And its easy to see vulgar echoes of this romantic longing for a perhaps idealized past in the "this is what they took from you" posts about a 1950s family in front of a Disney World castle
But for all of the faults of Lasch and the people he criticizes, the value in looking at this debate is simply that it frees the mind of the various dumb social media versions of the positions the protagonists in it took
in the time it took to do this thread, several people found unpaywalled versions of the Lasch article:

https://t.co/wguZ0av3Ho
https://t.co/R6COwVdidF
for an overview of Lasch's life and times see https://t.co/mriffTwbDz

More from Health

Thread on how atheism leads to mental retardation (backed with medical citations🧵💉)

To start with, atheism is an unnatural self-contradicting doctrine.

Medical terminology proves that human beings are naturally pre-disposed to believe in God. Oxford scientists assert that people are "born believers".

https://t.co/kE0Fi588yn
https://t.co/OqyXcGIMJn


It should be known that atheism could never produce an intelligently-functioning society and neither ever will.

Contrastingly, Islam produced several intellectuals & polymaths, was on the forefront of scientific development, boasting 100% literacy


It is also scientifically proven that atheism led to lesser scientific curiosity and scientific frauds, which is also why atheists incline to pseudo-science.

Whereas, religion in general and Islam in particular boosted education.

https://t.co/19Onc84u3g


Atheists are also likely to affected by pervasive mental and developmental disorders like high-functioning autism.

Cognitive Scientists and renowned Neurologists found that more atheism is leads to greater autism.

https://t.co/zRjEyFoX3P
I think @SamAdlerBell in his quest to be the contrarian on Fauci gets several things wrong here. 1/


First, the failure last year actually was driven by the White House, the #Trump inner circle. Watch what's happening now, the US' scientific and public health infrastructure is creaking back to life. 2/

I think Sam underestimates the decimation of many of our health agencies over the past four years and the establishment of ideological control over them during the pandemic. 3/

I also am puzzled why Tony gets the blame for not speaking up, etc. Robert Redfield, Brett Giroir, Deb Birx, Jerome Adams, Alex Azar all could have done the same. 4/

Several of these people Bob Redfield, Brett Giroir, Alex Azar were led by craven ambition, Jerome Adams by cowardice, but I do think Deb Birx and Tony tried as institutionalists, insiders to make a difference. 5/
This is the $1mln question still without an answer: why were these workers cleaning bat guano from that abandoned mine?

Surprisingly we simply don't know.

China would have all interest in clarifying that point if for instance they were prospecting or selling guano. It did not.


What we know is that EcoHealth + WIV were sampling bat sites in the vicinity at the exact time of the workers being in that mine.

#DRASTIC wrote about this and about other oddities in the official story:

Maybe it's just one of these coincidences.

Then it gets interesting: about a year after the miners death, Olival & Epstein from EcoHealth Alliance co-authored a paper about the coronavirus risk infection from bat guano collection.

No mention of the

That paper oddly used some old bat samples collected by DARPA in 2006/7 at the famous Thai bat cave.

It never mentioned that the Thai monks have been doing this every Sunday for many many years without infection.

But most interestingly it never mentioned the Mojiang mine accident, even if the perfect timing and recycling of old DARPA bat samples seem to point to a likely knowledge of it.

Anyway, the idea was to ask for more money, as you correctly

You May Also Like

Assalam Alaiki dear Sister in Islam. I hope this meets you well. Hope you are keeping safe in this pandemic. May Allah preserve you and your beloved family. I would like to address the misconception and misinterpretation in your thread. Please peruse the THREAD below.


1. First off, a disclaimer. Should you feel hurt by my words in the course of the thread, then forgive me. It’s from me and not from Islam. And I probably have to improve on my delivery. And I may not quote you verbatim, but the intended meaning would be there. Thank You!

2. Standing on Imam Shafii’s quote: “And I never debated anyone but that I did not mind whether Allah clarified the truth on my tongue or his tongue” or “I never once debated anyone hoping to win the debate; rather I always wished that the truth would come from his side.”

3. Okay, into the meat (my love for meat is showing. Lol) of the thread. Even though you didn’t mention the verse that permitted polygamy, everyone knows the verse you were talking about (Q4:3).


4. Your reasons for the revelation of the verse are strange. The first time I came across such. I had to quickly consult the books on the exegeses or tafsir of the Quran written by renowned specialists!