Consensus? We don't need no stinkin' consensus...

[Ray Dillinger]

On Mon, 12 Mar 2001, David Honig wrote:

>At 05:51 PM 3/12/01 -0800, Eric Cordian wrote:
>>"Medicalizing" your opponent's argument, instead of responding to it, is a
>>tactic of police states, religious nuts, controlling relatives, and
>>idiots.  
>>
>>Which one are you?
>>
>
>Do you deny that there are clusters of mental symptoms which seem
>empirically to have
>organic causes? 

Sure, such symptoms exist.  Hell, if you define "Normal" narrowly 
enough, ninety-nine percent plus of the population has 'em.  
Including you.

Wouldn't you rather allow a pretty broad definition of normalcy 
rather than start on the thorny issues resulting from allowing 
*ANY* group of people to start making definitions of normalcy 
which, sooner or later, may not include you?

In fact, a lot of traits that are maladaptive on an individual 
level (such as paranoia and being fat) are actually beneficial 
on a larger scale -- a certain number of paranoids will always 
survive the 'unexpected' (to others) betrayals, and a certain 
number of fat people will always survive the next famine.  

Extreme personalities (and physiognomies) are just nature's 
way of keeping the species alive, by pre-adapting a small 
percentage of us to survive the hardships and reverses that 
may challenge the 'normal' population on any given day.

Please don't start in with a line that says "it isn't average 
and therefore it isn't legitimate."  

				Bear