[D-G] On Schizophrenia

[Benjamin Bailey de Paor]

V. Interesting topics though have not yet read to the fin. 
Just wanted to suggest perhaps a definition which might rest against contempory wester superstition; a definition between that which is actually relatively bad for a person and there for could be diagnosed as schizophrenic and those symptoms which may otherwise be judged hastily though can happily be known as schizoid. It is complete rout noun (? Excuse my grammar perhaps) and does offer some different modes of application. We tend to over look this in the wake of medical / religious histeria... Possession / discovery. I believe it is a relative condition. 
B

On 14 Jan 2011, at 04:11, Teresa Mayne <teresa.mayne at gmail.com> wrote:

> :) I know you never said it was easy...The way I see it is that to live in
> society as a 'functioning' member takes a certain degree of irrationality,
> at least in Western society.  I am well aware of the connections between
> 'symptoms' of schizophrenia and shamanism, Hindu mysticism, etc.  and even
> being able to channel persectory affects in a particular manner, but to be
> able to do this one must have a certain degree of faith in the social
> network that 'decides' that the avenue that you are taking or the symptoms
> that you are exhibiting *belong *to that network - are valuable for that
> network and valuable only for that particular part of that network. In my
> particular experience (and maybe my experience was extreme) that level of
> irrational control did not exhibit itself.  I could not argue with logic
> because she could always come up with a better argument to justify her
> system.  When using irrational beliefs like love and adding assumed
> information like, 'I was at school, I left for school therefore I've must
> have been there all day' didn't work.  Logically there are so many problems
> with that statement and she saw them all.  Anyways I'm rambling...obviously
> my experience is different than yours and I will repeat there are many
> schizophrenics who do manage to work within the social system and you're
> right that isn't portrayed enough.  Although at the same time I definitely
> don't think that the schizophrenics that manage to adapt to their society is
> what Deleuze is getting at by using that imagery, but I of course could be
> wrong and I see the Eternal Return as extremely rational.  Anyways, probably
> just a difference of perspective.  Take care.
>