Forum:Psychiatry is a pseudoscience 2

Dirk made some very valid point and concern regarding what psychiatry really is, an insidious political tool for tyrant to exert social control on people who are deemed undesirable. The sane vs the insane, the insane has no right to be what it is perceived to be insane and needs to be controlled by those who are sane. The psychiatrist act as the thought police who stands in the line between chaos and order, they are like the people who have to deal with the understain of society that society does not want to deal with. Society standard can often affect the outcome of the diagonisis since it is based on subjective interpretation that is inherent to one's culture. This create a social psychology of labels which categorizes people and stigmatises them, the diagnosed vs the undiagnosed. This is political medicine at its best, the alliance between medicine and state just like the alliance between church and state, the abuse of the healing relationship, what is gained here is the suppression of dissent which is desirable to the state and the financial gain of the pharma companies who produce these "solutions" to counter whatever problems they invented.

I would like to add that psychiatry is more like a secular religion based on science, it is like the worship of science rather than an actual science. We have to suck up to the authority who claims to be expert and that claims their research is scientific and look scientific. When you look at the way in which treatment is justified by using the DSM book. All these listed disorders are just a way to make financial gain of treating people, it is so obvious, only the most hardcore believers would reject this claim. It may look to be a legimitate science but any critical analysis would shed light to the fact that it is fraud. Often symptoms are exaggerated and drug treatment are given as an all line solution to every problem. symptoms could range from not sleeping too well, feeling moody to twitching your nose which is just a description of behaviour rather than a medical observation based on empirical science.

You have to understand how the real world works, most of you don't realize that those who holds power and authority over you are constantly engaging in phonyness, fraud and deception and instead of dismissing it as a conspiracy or irrational, maybe you should open your eyes and see the bigger picture.

What you rationalwiki people should call yourself is pro-authority, and irrational considering authorities can't be trusted no matter if it is medical or educational. You should call yourself irrational wiki because all of you are more like small minded political conservative who extort your own values and beliefs rather than examining anything more critically. Considering the majority of you are americans, you might as well as be a dumb sheep who are not capable of any kinds of deep intellectual discussion but reject and insult people who don't share your view or disagrees with you as an act of censorship.

Dirk fail to realize is that rationalwiki is devoid of any science and it is more about mindless political and social commentaries and rant in all its articles and discussions than an actual wiki about refuting and debunking myth and dogma in relation to authority. I have prob through most of your dumb articles which offers nothing but junk and bias without evaluating anything from an objective non-bias, rational and scientific point of view. Rationalwiki is like an american opinion hub, it is full of dumb down opinions and argument from a questionable pseudointellectual. Gipp (talk) 16:40, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * We would like to clarify that those voices you hear at night are not us.--CIA (talk) 16:56, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * So tell me then, who do you consider a valid scientific authority, or do you believe that all scientists are frauds? - Grant (talk) 17:00, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * So my manic episodes are actually rebellions against the state and a political statement against the statist thought police (whom they wish to suppress using psychiatry)? Awesome! --Raysenn Get the paddles, he's having a cancer! 21:07, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * ...Gipp wouldn't happen to be a Scientologist by any chance, would he? -- 21:18, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Dirk? Fuck off - David Gerard (talk) 22:11, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I am 99% sure this is his sockpuppet. --Raysenn Get the paddles, he's having a cancer! 23:34, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Typical response from the childish mentally retarded and deluded community of rationalwiki, Maybe you americans should get entertained by the idea of growing the fuck up instead of resorting to childish bs. You make an invalid assumption that me agreeing with Dirk makes me his sockpuppet. I guess it is to expected of the kind of standard one might get from a discussion in this shit wiki full of american trolls. There is no point in debating with mindless believers who has his head set in stones and act like morons, nothing constructive can come out of it. So if you have nothing good to offer than just shut the fuck up. 03:21, 25 April 2014‎ (UTC)
 * You may want to look up "projection". And using "mentally retarded" as an insult in a rant complaining about the stigma of mental illness is rather... vile, I think.--ZooGuard (talk) 14:00, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Personally, I wouldn't mind an answer to my question, especially since I'm not American and therefore probably shouldn't be painted with the same brush. - Grant (talk) 14:19, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Personally, if he's into mental illness denial, I'd love to hear his explanation of what my manic episodes are. And, like Grant above, I'm not American. --Raysenn Get the paddles, he's having a cancer! 15:04, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Neither am I - that's why I bothered to answer, I found the accusation amusing.--ZooGuard (talk) 16:46, 25 April 2014 (UTC)