What Qualifies as a Mental Problem?

This post will come off sounding argumentative, but I don’t intend it that way. It’s based on a genuine curiosity. After reading the comments to my posts for the past few days, it’s clear that people fall into some interesting categories. This made me wonder who gets to decide when a certain way of thinking qualifies as a genuine mental problem.

For example, as many of you noted about your fellow posters, a common way of thinking goes like this:

“If you think Jack the Ripper was a doctor in his day job, and you think doctors are positive role models, you must support Jack Ripper and celebrate the killing of women. Die, you woman-hater!”

Is that a form of mental problem, or does the fact that it describes how the majority of the population forms political opinions make it good mental health by definition? That’s a serious question.

Suppose we give this way of thinking a name. Let’s call it ripperitis. Sometimes labeling things is enough to change how we deal with them. Perhaps having a name for the condition will allow scientists to get funding to find a cure. I hope so, because it would give me something new to say to end political debates.

“Well, Bob, based on your rant, I’d say you have a bad case of ripperitis. I hear they’re working on a pill that lets people like you appreciate the complexity of arguments.”

And then Bob would say, “If you think drugs are such a great idea, why don’t you go marry a cocaine dealer in a civil union?”

Comments

[lisa levy]

Do you know that scrubs can be ordered by sets in very cheap prices. Can you imagine a set would only cost as low as $9.99 and other items for as low as $5? You can buy it from http://www.cheapscrubset.com , an online wholesaler of scrubs and gear. What exactly do they have? They sell jackets, lab coats, printed and patterned tops, clogs and of course scrub sets. If you buy in bulk, you can even get discounts which means big savings! They accept payment Visa Mastercard and payment by check.

In the site, you can view the different styles of scrub sets. You can choose items by color or by style. They got colors in orange, lime, white, red, etc and also available in different sizes ranging from extra small to extra large size. They have a table for sizes which you can use as guide when ordering your own gear.

With all these information available, shopping with http://www.cheapscrubset.com is easy and quick. You have four choices how to place your order; through online, by phone, fax or mail. Simply choose which of the four methods suits you best.

check them out at http://www.cheapscrubset.com

[stydent]

Very nice

[00j]

Wonderful article, many thanks

[Jinjer pars]

The type of argument style that is used by most people under the guise of "logic" or "being http://mazda-review.info clever", is to replace the syllogism with fallacies, as in the case of your Jack the Ripper example. It's a fallacy to assume that because one thinks doctors are positive role models, and Jack is a doctor (for the sake of the argument), that one would automatically approve of EVERYTHING Jack the Ripper does

[Lazy Boy]

Scott that way of thinking has a name: Sophism.

Logic and rhetoric should be mandatory studies for anybody getting a post secondary education.

Its not a mental flaw, it's an education flaw. How can you expect people to come to the right conclusion if they don't understand the basic fuctions of a syllogism. Let alone not understand why an argument is invalid or pernicious.

Everybody would gain by revisiting Aristotle once in a while.

Lazy Boy

[Dalebert]

Joining these comments late, so this has prolly already been said but...

The reverse is also a common tactic. If you oppose an action by (insert so-and-so good guy) then you must support (insert so-and-so bad guy that they oppose)!

[AJ]

My first reaction: he he he.

but seriously, the form of rehetoric you describe is not actually a mental illness, it's just plain and simple stupidity. The only thing these people suffer from are low IQ's and the sooner we become the ruling class and make them our minions, the better.

[Good game hunter]

I'm pretty sure this type of thinking was mentioned in the book "Influence." If my memory serves me right, there's a whole psychological explanation that the author feels is the main cause behind this mentality.

I think....^^
Cheers,

[Ray]

Every time I see "Bob" in your example above, I read it as "josh B". Weird.

[Adrian D.]

Shorebreak:

1 A
2 B
3 skipped per instructions
4 B
5 B
6 A
7 B

How good was your guess?

Scott:

Allow me to recommend the book "I am RIGHT. You are WRONG," by Edward de Bono. The author puts forward some *very* interesting ideas. I don't agree with them all; but they are interesting.

[Jay]

Scott,

The arguments types you used as an example in your blogs are not mental illnes, but simply sloppy logic. It's also a rhetorical trick used by many lawyers, politicians, and salesmen.

An argument (in the logic sense of the word) goes "If A, then B, if B then C, so if A, then C), where A, B, and C are replaced with conditional statments.

The type of argument style that is used by most people under the guise of "logic" or "being clever", is to replace the syllogism with fallacies, as in the case of your Jack the Ripper example. It's a fallacy to assume that because one thinks doctors are positive role models, and Jack is a doctor (for the sake of the argument), that one would automatically approve of EVERYTHING Jack the Ripper does. Not necessarily so, in fact, seldom is it so.

This style though, sadly, is what passes for political discourse these days, especially on the left and right wing (and I stress "wing") blog sites. I tried both. In one I was a traitor and terrorist-in-training, in the other I was a Nazi sympathizer and a Bush book-licker.

[Chad]

Given the huge percentage of the population who makes this kind of fallacy, it might actually be those of us who think *correctly* who have the mental problem.

[mtj]

I'll give you a great example of abuse of logic.

Sunday my daughter called me to tell me a woman who lives in our building came to the door and started asking her 20 questions about my boyfriend and his truck. Someone hit her car and took off w/o a note. His truck is white and it has an impact on the rear bumper ... so logically it was him right? She was just "certain" that he was the culprit and she told her to tell us the police would be knocking on the door.

Besides the fact that the impact on his truck could not possibly have made her dent unless he was levitated at the time, the impact on his truck is over 6 months old. He also has the name, address and phone number of the uninsured great grandma who bashed him in broad daylight in a parking lot. Pah ... details details. Who needs em right?

Did she bother to ever come up and talk to him or me about this ? No (Let's just intimidate the teenage daughter when she is home alone). Did the police show up yet ? No (They probably looked at his truck and her car and laughed at her). Did his brake line get maliciously hacked just 2 days after this accusation? Yes.

He worked on his brakes 2 weeks ago and inspected them thoroughly. So this had to happen in that time. No it's not a mechanical issue. He and my brother verified that by observing the lines where it occurred. The plier marks and filing are also a dead giveaway.

And just Saturday we took my 10 year old son to the top of a Mountain for a hike. I guess you could say we were all pretty damn lucky that day huh?!?!

But don't get me wrong ... I'm not accusing anyone without the facts. That wouldn't be logical.

[Carl]

Okay, so this is getting way too heavy now. Can you just go back to being funny, please? Thanks.

[izz]

I find it disturbing that so many people who post seemingly intelligent comments have such a terrible time at grammar and basic knowledge of the English language and spelling. I can accept simple keyboard mistakes (and foreigners) when one is typing feverishly, but to mix up the use of "They're and Their and There" is inexcusable. I am not an English genius and I do not think I am "above" anybody, but common mistakes like this are so prevalent that it makes me wonder what in the hell all of you were doing during English class.

http://webster.com/

why don't you people "expand your barins" and do a spell/grammar check occasionally

here are some more gems

"thoughs" who like a good laugh
"your" stupid
a very logical and articulate response that has generally "mist" the point

[Matthew Kovich]

The war between cognitive dissonance and cognitive autonomy continues to wage.

I hope our side wins, Scott.

[Shorebreak]

It's interesting seeing the various responses that come out on this blog. It would probably be a great source for research if each individual poster could be contacted and polled with a few basic questions.

Some questions that I would ask are:

1. What is your primary source for news?

A) Mainstream sources, such as CNN, FOX News, PBS, ABC, Newsweek, Time etc.

B) Foreign media.

C) Independent media - typically found on the internet.

2. Do you listen to talk radio?

A) Yes

B) No

3. If you answered No to question 2, skip to question 4. If you answered Yes to question 2, answer the following question:

Do you ever allow talk radio to be a source for news or information that influences your opinions?

A) Yes

B) No

4. Do you believe that the US federal government is

A) generally controlled by the consent of the governed.

or

B) generally controlled by the interests of a small private (non-government) minority.

5. Which is more important for the longevity of a representative republic during a time of crisis:

A) Assuring that publicly expressed opinions are not contrary to the will of the government.

or

B) Assuring that all opinions may be freely expressed, especially those that question the motivations and actions of the government.

6. Do you believe that there is a high level of propaganda in the US?

A) Yes

B) No

7. If you answered Yes to question 6, do you believe that your opinions have been influenced by propaganda?

A) Yes

B) No

That would be my poll. I'm relatively certain that I could answer most of the questions correctly for many of the individuals here, based solely upon their comments.

[Rick]

Mental illness?

Yelling 'FIRE' in a crowded room then criticizing how people react to the 'joke'.

Now thats sick - isn't it Scott.

[YITBOS]

Interesting that there are at least two people (me and somebody else) who reads both your blog and Figaro's....

http://www.figarospeech.com/it-figures/2007/9/25/all-dilberts-are-alike.html

[phaser]

Unfortunately, apathy and laziness do not rise to the level of mental illness. Far too many people just don't put in any effort to try to understand the complexities of world or even local problems. So, they end up with simplified reasoning and arguments that lead to the cognitive dissonance that sounds like insanity.

In nature, animals tend to appear lazy, but it is just their natural inclination to conserving as much energy as possible between uncertain meals in order to stay alive. Humans, unfortunately, have the same natural inclination, though we overcome it in many ways. But, for some reason, a large number of people, all over the world, let that natural laziness manifest itself in their political thinking and let themselves believe the most simplified arguments, no matter how idiotic.

[mtj]

This all reminds me of the scene from The Holy Grail ...

you must realize that witches burn. What else burns? Wood does. And since wood floats, and ducks also float, if a woman weighs the same as a duck, she is in fact a witch. At that point you may burn her without fear of recriminations.

[Sir Mike Tallon]

I never had an official name for it like "ripperitis", but I referred to them as people who take everything to the extreme: "I don't like Metallica."
"Oh, so, I guess all rock music sucks and you hate metal? You don't like absolutely any rock music that exists?"
Just because ONE THING isn't, doesn't mean the extreme of it always is. Most of the time, there's an infinite variety of beliefs you have over everything, not absolute extremes in all categories. All these people who do it are the poorest debaters, so I usually laugh in their face and stop talking to them.

[Adam Williams]

Its not a disease, and it already HAS a name. Its called 'stupid'.

[Dom]

Scott, please help.

After, reading these comments I need some sort of pill to help me to feel life is worth living.

Even when you explain yourself coherently as I feel you have, people still misinterpret and send you burn-mail. Why? And how are non-nuts people supposed to cope?

Where is the love man?

[Sreeram]

Could you post these two link on your main page?They contain the transcripts of what was said. I think a lot many people dont know what they are talking about. This could shed some light..assuming they are intelligent enough to understand what is being said.

http://tangibleinfo.blogspot.com/2007/09/ahmadinejad-interview-60-minutes-cbs.html

http://tangibleinfo.blogspot.com/2007/09/ahmadinejad-at-columbia-university-full.html

[@Rob]

philosotainment - used multiple times in one of the posts

Is this the word of day on someone's toilet paper? or maybe it was a dare?

Friend - "Dude, I dare you to use the word philosotainment today."

Poster - "Dude, pfft that's easy. Have you ever heard of the Dilbert Blog?"

Friend - "The what?"

Poster - (rolls eyes)

[XX EE]

I LOVE THIS POST!

It's amazing that, even though you and I live on opposite coasts, you've somehow met my friend Bob.

[Gregg]

It isn’t mental illness, Scott. It’s just a lack of training in argumentation. The issue is one near to my heart. Most people don't know the difference between inductive and deductive logic. Deduction is appropriate when there is a complete enumeration of items in the premises and induction is appropriate when there is an incomplete enumeration. Argumentation is the field of study that applies dialectic logic to resolving controversy. Rhetoric deals with persuasion. The example in your posting was an example of a categorical syllogism that is intended for use in deductive (or formal) logic. Formal logic only requires the form of the argument to be correct and the premises to be correct, and the conclusion will follow with certainty. It is great for math and programming, but not much good for controversies in which the premises are NOT certain (like almost all real-life arguments). In your argument, the fallacy lies in the premise "doctors are good role models". That premise needs to be examined to see if you mean EVERY doctor or some doctors. If you mean only SOME doctors (which you clearly do, because you don't KNOW EVERY doctor) then you can't draw a conclusion using deduction. Induction allows for probability of correctness.

[Chad Gould]

These last few blog entries have certainly been entertaining. A few thoughts of my own:

A) I think Mr. Ahmadinejad's speech in the end proved your first foul-mouthed satire right, in a way. It is not right to attempt to censor his speech -- that only makes him a martyr. Instead, it is best to let him speak and make himself look like a fool.

B) Some of the comments seem to display an irrational fear of Islam. I think that if some Americans took the time to dig deeper into things, they wouldn't be as afraid of a fundamentalist Islamic takeover. Sure, Iran *projects* a superior huff, but domestically Iran is troubled by a bored youthful population, half with no jobs. I'm sure Mr. Ahmadinejab would prefer that people not mention Iran's heroin addiction rate, which by some accounts is the highest in the world. It's easier for the Iranian president to ruffle American feathers versus attempt to *fix* these domestic problems.

Funny how there is a shade of this in America today.

C) The Holocaust was horrible. That being said, the Holocaust does not shield an interest group affected by it from criticism. Like it or not, Jewish activists are one of several linked with what is called "neo-conservatism". Contrary to some commentators, criticism of neo-conservative policies does not imply sympathy with Nazis.

[elmindreda]

Currently it's psychiatry that defines what is and is not a mental problem, but please don't confuse that with actual problems (either way).

[listo]

I guess ripperitis have already a name, i'm not sure wich one of those but it must be here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

[ShaunL]

Maybe it’s -

- Scott is a cartoonist
- Cartoons simplify issues
- All Scott’s arguments are simplistic. Especially if I disagree.

Great couple of posts. Keep poking the ant hill

[Andy Watt]

"if u cant think straight u need to die.

Posted by: fred"

Alas! Another queer basher. Scott, you do attract 'em, don't you?

[Gabriel]

You're smart, but you're not that smart. You're post was bullshit filled with lies and non-sequiters and people who disagree are not insane, they just disagree with you. Get the hell over yourself.

[Gabriel]

Or maybe this a mental problem.
Let's say you make a sarcastic post detailing why you think the outrage about Ahmedinejab's appointment is wrong, in which you make outrageous lies about Israel, regurgitate falsehoods about Ahmedinejab's anti-semitic statements, show that you had no proper understanding of what free speech means and draw a clear moral equivalence between Bush and Ahmadinejab

Then you claim that it was a subtle commentary about the drive to war with iran.

Then you claim that people who see through your BS are insane.

I call it "You're a f**king douchebag Scott, rot in hell -ism" Have fun with your neo-nazi buddies and all those enlightened chums across the Atlantic. I mean it's been literally, what, decades since they committed a major genocide on their own patch, right?

[Borjan]

Well...

Logic is a powerful tool of reason, but reason itself is rather arbitrary (in humans) and not really necessary for survival. It's an evolutionary thing.

I'll send you a link in the e-mail.

[Steff]

What?
We cannot add to the already too long list of 'mental health problems!'
Everyone that has Ripperistis should pick up a new activity, preferably outside and very active. Get off the couch, away from the desk and doing something to raise your heart rate, respiration, and enjoyment level of life. QUALITY fun, fun, fun.
Funny how much clearer the head is after a refreshing walk or game (playing, not just spectating.)
And then there is the overwhelmingly growing attitude that it is okay to JUDGE others when we should all be LISTENING and trying to stretch our imagination to understand what life is like in someone elses' skin.
You are a master comedian, of course your web log might just be too much for some, but I didn't post the other day solely because I was too freakin' busy, I read it and laughed and then thought, wait what is he saying, and then I laughed again, sometimes it takes a bit for it to soak in, but I am sure that eventually it will.
Sometimes I think that people throw an idea out there just to get gears greased up and moving round and round.
I bet you are already addicted and could not quit the log if you tried (snot really a challenge- the others probably cannot either.)

A positive mind is a strong mind and a strong mind just can't be beat!

[Joemer]

The human mind is obviously highly susceptible to brainwashing and trauma based mind control. Television, music and entertainment driven by a corporate\political agenda have proven very effective along with an education system that has deteriorated to a degree where our instutions of higher learning resemble high priced trade schools.
The general population is no longer capable of critical thinking as a result, much less civil debate. You're just seeing the results of it.

[Allan]

This discussion of the last few days reminded me of a joke I recently heard;

Two builders (Dave and Stuart) are seated either side of a table in a pub when a well-dressed man enters, orders a beer and sits on a stool at the bar.

The two builders start to speculate about the occupation of the suit
Dave: - I reckon he's an accountant.
Stuart: - No way - he's a stockbroker.
Dave: - He ain't no stockbroker! A stockbroker wouldn't come in here!
The argument repeats itself for some time until the volume of beer gets the better of Dave and he makes for the toilet.
On entering the toilet he sees that the suit is standing at a urinal.
Curiosity and the several beers get the better of him.
Dave: - 'Scuse me.... no offence meant, but me and me mate were wondering what you do for a living?
Suit: - No offence taken! I'm a Logical Scientist by profession
Dave: - Oh? What's that then?
Suit: - I'll try to explain by example ... Do you have a goldfish at home?
Dave: - Er ... mmm ... well yeah, I do as it happens!
Suit: - Well, it's logical that you keep it either in a bowl or in a pond. Which is it?
Dave: - It's in a pond!
Suit: - Well it's reasonable to suppose that you have a large garden then?
Dave: - As it happens, yes I have got a big garden.
Suit: - Well then it's logical to assume that, in this town, if you have a large garden then you have a large house?
Dave: - As it happens I've got a five bedroom house ... built it myself!
Suit: - Well given that you've built a five bedroom house it's logical to assume that you haven't built it just for yourself and that you are quite probably married? And with a family?

Dave: - Yes I am married, I live with my wife and four children.
Suit: - Well then it is logical to assume that you are sexually active with your wife on a regular basis?
Dave: - Yep! Five times a week!
Suit: - Well then it is logical to suggest that you don't masturbate very often?
Dave: - Do what? Not me, mate!
Suit: - Well there you are! That's logical science at work!
Dave: - How's that then?
Suit: - Well from finding out that you had a goldfish, I've told you about your sex life!
Dave: - I see! That's pretty impressive. Thanks mate!
Both leave the toilet and Dave returns to his mate.
Stuart: - I see the suit was in there. Did you ask him what he does?
Dave: - Yep! He's a logical scientist!
Stuart: - What's that then?
Dave: - I'll try and explain. Do you have a goldfish?
Stuart: - Nope
Dave: - Well then, you're a wanker

[Plop]

If you disagree with me, you clearly have a mental problem...

And logically, if you agree with me, you cannot be sure you don't have one either ;)

[Graham Bannister]

http://blogadvisorysystem.com/

[Greg]

'fraid you're out of luck there. Psychology gave up on trying to find a decent definition of sane ages ago and decided to go with 'you're sane when most of your culture says you are' sanity now requires a decent amount of irrationality.

If you don't believe me look up depressive realism - deperessed people tend to have more rational views about the world but we call them crazies (obviously in more scientific terms)

It strikes me a possible solution is to attempt to start a new culture in which rationality and sanity are considered the same thing. I don't think you've got the money to buy an island somewhere though :S

[gordon_goosemonster]

It is a kinda mental problem, but it’s not neurological it’s environmental.
Basically certain people brainwash their children to believing certain ‘truths’. These ‘truths’ would include their religion, race, sexual orientation, political affiliation and stuff.
Anyone who dares to question these truths are automatically demonised and despised.
Even a hint of criticism, such as Scott’s previous posts, triggers an un-rational response. Hence the disjointed shite replied.

[mpk]

BTW, speaking of logic and how it is often misapplied, one of my favorite strips of all time is on page 122 in "Shave the Whales." Dogbert sits on a pillow and ponders:
-People catch worms to go fishing.
-People eat fish that just ate worms.
-There is definitely a wasted step here.

Next comment, in response to "car free since '93" -

If you agree with Szasz that there is no mental illness, then you are mentally ill, and need to be hospitalized. (Oops, am I coming up with a false argument? )

Or perhaps you were just opening the forum up and exposing an alternative view points that those of us curious enough to follow the link can decide to accept, reject, or blame you for?

I digress here since I've had to care for family members who would be a harm to themselves and others. To me, they were mentally ill. No ifs ands or buts. Medication and compassion got them through the weirdness.

In short, my personal experience causes me to disagree with some of Szasz philosphies summarized on Wikipedia. I was more worked up about what I learned about Szaz than the opinions I developed while reading Scott's recent blogs or the extreme liberal/conservative comments made in reply.

Maybe my meds are working...

[Tarun]

Hi Scott,

I ve been reading your blog for a few months and dilbert for a few years. A lot of thoughts and also the logic that you apply are similar to the way I think. I strongly recommend that you read a book called "Fooled by Randomness" and then follow it up with another called "The Black Swan". Both these have been written by Nassim Taleb.

[Clare]

Just maybe, some of your blog readers are saying "dance monkey, dance!" to you?

[T.G.]

"All you did was sugar-coat the same schtick to make yourself appear superior."

Yes. In essence is all the same :).

Intelligence is no sure cure for subtle or not so subtle ripperitis, biased judgements are a possible root and arrogance and contempt are a possible symptom, hehe.

[me]

Well, I think it boils down to education. When I was a kid, we had a whole year of logic classes where the primary theme was how to avoid error in thinking (such as the one you describe).
I must say that not everybody understood, so maybe this should be thaught to older children. As we all learn how ro swim, how to play basketball or whatever, so we all (at least it seems) need to learn how to think. I mean, most everybody knows hot to think basic thoughts needed to get laid, get something to eat and get roof over your head, but very small number of people learns the rules of baseball just watching the game (and if you don't know the rules it soon gets boring) and similarly, from observing people think complex thaoughts (and not everbody does this), it's hard to learn to do it yourself.

[Dmitry Z]

Ah, if only that would work!

[Andrew]

Of course you know...most people NOT suffering from Ripperitis don't leave comments as often as the sufferers. We (yes I speak for the collective) just enjoy your work and shake our head in disbelief at some of the comments, whilst laughing our tits off.

Hard to believe this condition exists and sufferers are probably a danger to society, but then again, at least it is entertaining.

[fred]

if u cant think straight u need to die.

[Anil Ravindran]

Hi Scott,

I've thought about this long, and I've thought about this hard. I've finally come to the conclusion that yes, a line of thought qualifies as sane only because the majority does it. 'It's the done thing' kind of thing. I've also looked at this from the other end of the spectrum: the truly other end. Take, for instance, a COMPLETELY deviant individual. He/she (yeah, we need to be politically correct and all that jazz, don't we?) would probably think the REST of the world (the majority, and therefore by conventional definition, sane)is insane. Insane, or just plain different.

I think it's the people on the middle of the bridge are the confused lot!

Cheers!
Anil

[marty]

Remember - half the people in the world have below average intelligence.

[Dexterous]

Scott,
had to write this, i tend to read a lot of responses from your bloggers and i have identified 3 primary groups amongst them all (though there can be/are people who may fall in none of these catagories)
1. People who by some strange incident ended up thinking they are smarter than most others. So they try to rationalize their thinking rather than expanding their barins analyze and accept others. i.e. dumb intellectual narcissist
2. People who don't have individual opinion, that is their thinking is driven by some editorial/blog/statement that they have seen or read. i.e. dumb headred sheep.
3. People who think that by googling anything for 10 mins constitute enough research to form a solid opinion on any internatinal topic. i.e. dimwits
Yes people you do fall into one of these catagories.. DEAL WITH IT.. and yes i know i might also fall in one of these catagories, but atleast i can see the peoblem here and i can deal with it.

[Matt]

Scott,

The world is a complex place as we all know and no person is completely able to understand it. The human brain has many ways to help us cope with this, which basically boils down to a rapid categorisation process. While this helps us cope with intense information exposure, it also gives us some of our illogical thought processes. Confirmation bias, prejudice, framing, endowement effect, Von Restorff, and many more. This allows people to offer up as rational, logical arguments, things that are neither.

This then couples with the spectrum people sit on how comfortable they are with the uncertainty of the world ranging from, 'so what' to 'please don't let that scary reality intrude on my life'. The level of fear drives people to comfort zones of thought, a world view that allows them to make sense of and feel comfort in the world.

There is then a level of self realisation and tractability. While everyone builds their own view of the world, some allow scope for change in theirs and some don't. While it is not possible to take in everything at once, it is definitely possible to rationally examine specific facts and decide if a particular mental schema needs to be altered. For some people this is easy, for some to do such examination of their 'beliefs' exposes them too much to the fear.

Fear leads to anger, anger leads to the dark side.

It is key to realise that while there is a group of people that apply this to many/most/all facets of their world, all of us have at least one mental comfort zone that if breached will lead us to irrational argument. It could be argued that there is a level of this behaviour that would indicate a mental illness.

And don't forget that there are some people who are simply assholes that enjoy winding people up with stupid arguments.

[wolfizzi]

I read recently, in Wired Magazine, that Neuropsychologists are now studying how our brains are stimulated as we are forced to listen to ideas. They wire up test subjects brains and start playing audio tapes of conservative and liberal talk show hosts.

Interestingly, when self-identified conservatives hear O'Reilly speak, it causes the areas of their brain associated with pleasure to light up. The same thing happens when self -identified liberals hear Al Franken. Their brains react as if they are having sex or eating chocolate.

What do you suppose happens when the test subjects hear political talk that does not agree with their pre-determined positions? You might think they would experience pain, or at least seem to have eaten something distasteful. But what actually happens is much more insidious. What happens is - nothing! It is as if they never heard the speaker at all!

This shows that people may be incapable (at least to some degree) of taking in any ideas they are not pre-disposed to accepting. I think this explains a lot.

Meanwhile, I stand by my previous comment that the only solution is a third party.

Stamp out ripperitis, vote RATIONAL PARTY, '08!

(Ratbert could be our poster child.)

[Venkatdeep]

Scott,
Few things first...
How many ideas do you get for a new dilbert strip by reading comments on your blog?? :)
From the past few days the blog seems to be bordering on ideas and opinions of people who are commenting here.. Not that I mind...its your blog...Gotta wonder whether its a part of the Dance monkey dance approach...or have you hypnotized us all into seeing similarities?

The trouble with following the herd is stepping into what it leaves behind!

Cheers

[Phoenix]

I noticed in grade school how directions from the teacher made perfect sense to me, but not to my classmates, she had to repeat herself several times to make herself clear. This was an observation I made shortly after moving and attending a public school for the first time in my life after going to private schools for years. I think the problem lies in the public school system, they barely keep the population literate, let alone thinking logically.

[interracialgirl]

All your comments are reasonabl, as a single woman , here i just want to show some of my feelings about life and relationship:Some one please tell me why when a woman gets a good man... I mean a real keeper... she then changes her mind... do most women of us know what we really want in a man? indeed most are not. Whoa! That's a loaded question. And you're sure to get many different answers. and some of them are interesting at http://interracialsingleonline.com. So, here goes mine...The simple answer to the question above is yess, but only to a certain point. It depends on what you are looking for and how much time and energy you are willing to devote to developing a friendship/relationship.

[Ashley]

Scott,

This brings up an interesting point. Most people believe that illness and disease is some static fact-- once we discover a new disease, everyone accepts that categorization.

The reality is that illnesses are (to some extent) culturally defined and they evolve over time. One example in the U.S. is homosexuality. 50 years ago, homosexuality was considered a mental illness. Now, society (in general) considers it a valid life choice, not some mental defect requiring treatment.

Similarly, other cultures have different concepts of illness and the body. While these differences are being minimized as western culture and values are increasing exported all over the world, they still exist. For example, consider Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM). TCM views the body as more of a complex organic entity that maintains harmony through interrelated processes. Western medicine, on the other hand, tends to look at the body as a machine with individual parts.

With these two conceptions of the body, the same cause of illness will be treated in two very different manners depending on the modes of discourse surrounding it (i.e. is the illness stigmatized?), the patients' and their family's interpretation of the illness, and the course of treatment.

[Aardwizz]

As long as people are publishing there favorite silly-gisms, here's mine:

Proof of Life After Death:

After a death, comes the mourning.
After the morning, comes the night.
After the knight, comes the bishop.
After the Bishop, comes the Pope.
The Pope has serious convictions.
After a serious conviction, the judge gives you life.

Therefore there is Life after Death.

©¿©¬

[Cassandra]

Lots of famous syndromes are named for people. John Langdon Down's name has lived on long after he died, but I'm not sure he'd be happy with the way he's remembered.

In that spirit, ripperitus should be named for malfeasant people who foster ripperitusy thinking and deserve to be associated with it throughout history.

I nominate "Limbaugh-O'Reilly Depravity".

[Bob]

Your post today is a continuation of yesterday's post.

I suffer from a condition called obvious-itis. Actually, that is not true. I think it is great. You guys have to suffer my ramblings.

[Aardwizz]

Mental problems are a specttrum, not an absolute. At what point in the rainbow does "Red" become "Orange" ?

De gustibus non est disputatum.

That translates variously as "There's no accounting for taste" or "It's pointless arguing with idiots"

[insignis]

"Go on, admit it ... you're trolling today." -- Calgarian

Dude. He's trolling every day. Did you not get the memo?

[Damien]

Speaking of interesting categories I wonder how many people fall into the category of "siding with Scott cause he's smart" or as I like to put it: followtheleaderitis.

Hell i'm suffering from it a little bit just by stating it that way.

It seems to me there are two groups who comment, thoughs who like a good laugh and relate to what you are saying and generally post along these lines:
Scott's right, Scott's right, blah blah blah Scott's right. Insert some quoted reference about people in general from five posts ago generally referencing Cognitive Dissonance.
Most of these people don't understand what they are saying but manage to make the same point thats already been made multiple times before them and convey a tone of condescension as if they want to say at the end "isn't that right Scott."

The second group are the ones who generally like and understand your humor also, but they like and prefer Righteous Indignation (I seem to be refering to a previous post damn that followtheleaderitis i've got it again).
This group unfortunantly tends to focus more on the indignation and less on the righteous owing mainly to the logic traps you laden your posts with. As such there posts normally consist of:
"Na uh, your stupid, Scott's stupid" or at best the ripperitis example. Every now and then they will of course hit on a very logical and articulate response that has generally mist the point of the post, but thats ok. Half of them are only arguing not because they disagree with Scott but because they see the other group as a bunch of simpering idiots who don't have a thought of there own and just suck on the teat of Scott's intelligence so they may regurgitate it in there own time and feel better about themselves. The second group then disagrees in an attempt to show that they to have thoughts and wish to bask in your opinion of there intelligence which generally takes the form of a post commenting on there comments.

In the end Scott we all seem like children vying for your attention through different means. Please tell us how smart we are :)

Just in case anyone is curious, yes I fit into both groups I just flit between them from post to post.

[terry k]

Mental problems? What mental problems??

All that is being said when you suggest to someone that they have a mental problem is that you believe that you do not have a mental problem. And your crazy if you believe that.

[Hukga]

It's called an analogy, Scott. Why do some people seem to have an allergy to them? Or maybe it's a fear. Analophobia. Or a mental problem. Antianalogitis.

[Josh Scholar]

I realize that Adams mistake was that he followed one of his usual patterns - for just the wrong gag.

Adams likes to find something extremely cynical position, something Dogbertish if you will, to agree with at some point in his rants. In this one it was the " Israel’s best interests dictate keeping the neighbors too economically weak to purchase expensive weapons, and to control as much territory as possible."

It went badly wrong for two reasons:

1. In the first paragraph he established that he was mocking right wing, Ann Coulter fans etc. Just the people who DON'T buy into the that sort of thing - and since the gag was inconsistent with the object of the satire it broke character and came across as being Scott's actual opinion rather than satire.

2. It doesn't fit in with his usual "I'm so realistic and cynical" gag because:

a) it's not actually possible for Israel to be destroying the economy of the middle east

b) the claim that Israel wants greater Israel, as it used to be called, is out of date - at this point polls have shown that Israelis would be perfectly willing to trade land for peace but know that this isn't possible, no one will offer peace.

c) both items are actually examples of purely fantastic slander used by regimes like Syria as an excuse for nixing democracy and other vile oppressions. Also used to justify terrorism. Also used by every antisemitic group on the planet.

Thus it isn't cynical to accuse Israel of the impossible its merely a gag that sounds like antisemitism. He'd do as well to accuse Israel of dosing Palestinian women with aphrodisiacs in chewing gum (another bit of antisemitic propaganda) or of making Matzoh out of the blood of Muslim babies.

The joke just lies down and dies. No actually, it fails so spectacularly that I don't have words to describe it.

[Shrink]

I've been a psychotherapist for a lot of years, and the only people who think this way are right-wing politicians and their minions. It's a distortion of logic, purposely done to mislead and dazzle with bullshit.

[Tennessee Leeuwenburg]

Ripperitis is also pretty useful in some situations.

Billy tried to makes friend with the shark. Billy got eaten by the sharks. I should avoid all sharks...

When it happens to be true, it can be a great mental short-cut.

People tend to make short cuts when
-- they don't really care enough to learn about something properly
-- they find an explanation they find likely

"If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way."
- Bertrand Russell

[George]

Why do we speak? Some seek the pleasure of accordance, some seek the thrill of confrontation. It is not unusual to attend any discussion that end up saying absolutely nothing in substance. Speaking feels good, what more motive do we need?

[j]

Ahmadinejad said today "Iran has no gay people", however, some scholars suggest a more accurate translation as "cartoonists have small penises and make up for their inadequacy by stirring up trouble via blogs".

I'm no Islamic scholar, but they may be onto something.

[fan of logical reasoning]

All dogs die.
Socrates is dead.
...therefore Socrates is/was a dog.

Except, um, no he wasn't. Think of this line of reasoning as a Venn Diagram. One big circle is things that die. In this big circle is humans, plants, dogs, other stuff you can name. The other big circle is dogs. Some dogs are alive and some are dead, so the "overlap" between the two circles would be the dead dogs. But you can be in one of the big circles (dead stuff) without being in the overlap area (dead dogs). Similarly, if the two circles are "doctors" and "positive role models" you can approve of some doctors (the overlap area) without liking Jack the Ripper. Or "good doctors" could just be a smaller circle in the big doctor circle and still exclude JtheR. Really, it's pretty easy to use logic properly, but maybe I'm just being smarmy.

[jaques]

Well Scott,
you certainly have me thinking. If an artist's presents and ugly, deranged attempt at "satire" which he probably posted on Yom Kippur to avoid criticism from Jewish readership...and then quickly retracts to heady psuedo-intellecualism...well isn't it time to question his mental status?
Once that guy start accusing any criticism as mental dysfunction...begin to doubt whether he just is making this stuff up.
PS Che, Josef Mengele, Zawahiri were/are all trained physicians and murderers...shows you what an idiot i am.

[Luke]

On an entirely unrelated note, yet somewhat relevant to you...

You're posts in the past have made me wonder (sorry, more about free will), if robots are created to act like they think they have control over themselves (think movies like A.I.), and we ourselves have no actual free will, then what would the difference be? Both of us are programmed to think we have control, yet do not, and are simply made of different materials. It would only be a matter of time before they hold their own parades as the blacks and women did in the past to get their own freedoms.

I've just been waiting to say that, yet the opportunity has not come up recently.

[Steven McDaniel]

"...“Well, Bob, based on your rant, I’d say you have a bad case of ripperitis. I hear they’re working on a pill that lets people like you appreciate the complexity of arguments...” " Scott

I agree that we can't all think the same, and ultimately we all have something valuable to bring to the table in a debate. Political partisanship, above all other maladies, usually blinds anyone to this facet of the philosophical process, though. On the other hand, there comes a time when you have to lay your cards on the table, get down to brass tacks and take a firm position. And then you have to be prepared to take flack from those of the opposing view, and, ironically enough, from those who try to insist you're 'not appreciating the complexity of arguments.' For instance I believe in Jesus and the Bible, though I respect other people's wishes to hold other views. Now those with 'ripperitis,' will immediately have figured out that I therefore also hate science, watch NASCAR, make moonshine, and kill homosexuals. And they'll know that I came from middle America, where my town probably doesn't even have a sushi bar. People like that are impossible to engage in intelligent dialogue. Like my 'invisible Friend' said: 'Come let us reason together', (then He said, 'though you sins are as scarlet, they shall be white as snow', but that's another story..). See, even preaching should be regarded as valid debate deserving of a respectful hearing. Come on, people, let's be provocative, but not fruitlessly vindictive, and remember, we have 2 ears and one mouth, and should use them respectively in that proportion.

[RunningFool]

Jack the Ripper is a good psycho killer.
All psycho killers are people.
Therefore Jack the Ripper is a good person.

[cr steuusy]

Cloud has it right. Its a formal logical fallacy. I believe it is the fallacy of division. You are dividing jack the ripper into "day" and "night" and then inferring something from "dayness" into "nightness".

As the Professor in Narnia noted, "its logic. Either she's lying, she's mad, or she's telling the truth...what do they teach in school these days?"

[Donovan Young]

Let's give the symptoms of this "Mental Illness" a name. Let's call it "Stupidity" for lack of a better term.

Based upon popular opinion, being "human" means we are not capable of being "Perfect". So, either we have or we will err at some point in our lives. It also stands to reason that at least some of these errors could be defined as "Stupid" by at least one other person.

Furthermore, those who we feel are "Stupid" do not themselves share this feeling. In fact they feel the opposite to be true. It's fundamentally implausible to suffer from "Stupidity" and the lack of "Stupidity" at the same time. However, it is entirely feasible that both opposing opinions suffer from "Stupidity" at the same time.

Since we are all human we must therefore all be "Stupid".

So, what I would really like to know is can "Stupidity" be considered a temporary illness or are we all doomed to be stupid for our entire lives?

[David]

Bob sounds like an entertaining guy.

[jerry w.]

It goes with out saying that everyone in the world is crazy except you and me.

But you know, the more I go back through your earlier work, well, I have to say I'm getting a bit worried about you.

Just the other day, I was sitting in my room and talking to myself, and then........

Hey, where was I going with that?

Do you think that it's time for my meds?

Oh yeah!

So who died and made you Geebus?

http://boskolives.wordpress.com/

[Adrian]

As somebody else already said that's not a mental illness it's simply a logical reason failure, but I think you can call it mental illness when you notice the foam at the mouth of those people.

[Half Canadian]

BEGIN QUOTE

For example, as many of you noted about your fellow posters, a common way of thinking goes like this:

“If you think Jack the Ripper was a doctor in his day job, and you think doctors are positive role models, you must support Jack Ripper and celebrate the killing of women. Die, you woman-hater!”

Is that a form of mental problem, or does the fact that it describes how the majority of the population forms political opinions make it good mental health by definition?

END QUOTE

Maybe it's just faulty reasoning.

[Okgenuine]

Ripperitis is usually rednecks. And the pill they need is actually called 'coffee'. Something they avoid like crazy. Great post. Made my day. I was wondering if it was going to get to you for awhile now because it's a problem everywhere. Every forum is like that.

I've had severe mental illness for 14 years now, finally started getting better last year. And I think if a person doesn't have it for at least 5 years, it should be relabeled 'a right of passage'.

[Avi]

It's called being a moron. Inability to understand rational, logical arguments or rhetoric, and inability to formulate your own. People failing to understand what point the other person is making, hallucinating that it is offensive, and attack angrily.

I'm pretty sure there's a Dilbert strip where Dilbert says to PHBoss, do you mind if I work while you hallucinate?

At my school newspaper, a similar thing happened where someone thought the student comic had insulted the fraternities (it had merely poked fun) and got all mad and angry.

[Drone74B]

If that were a mental disorder, then most women would be considered mentally ill. Seriously - Most guys can relate to this conversation:

Woman: Do you think she's attractive?
Man: Sure, I guess so.
Woman: So, you want to sleep with her, huh?
Man: Um.... (Shit!) I just said she was attractive. You ASKED me what I thought. I never said I wanted to sleep with her.
Woman: So, you don't want to sleep with attractive women, but you sleep with me. So you prefer ugly women and you think I'm ugly?
Man: Of course you're not ugly. I think you're beautiful.
Woman: Do you think I'm prettier than her?

And so it goes. Personally, I think women start these conversations on purpose when they want some alone time. From the second she asks the question, there is no way a man can come out of this in a positive light.

[Mo]

Another pitiable stab at wit. You're not funny, and you're uneducated. Blabbering boorish bullshit and refusing to step down from your pedestal of righteousness and accepting the facts doesn't score you any points.

If you are conceited to the degree that you cannot accept your failure of judgment, you can get fucked.

[Lukaii]

I love how ignorant some of the responses to your last couple of posts have been.
It does amaze me though, I always imagine people smart enough to read your blog (let alone turn on the computer) would be smart enough to not pay heed to all the propaganda bull**it your country is obviously force fed by your govt/media.
The media coverage here in the UK has been slightly more balanced. While not painting Ahmadinejad as a saint it has not tried to undermine his message without letting him speak it.
Oh, if only I lived in the land of the free...
Keep up the good work Scott

[Matt]

I don't care who sees it as a mental problem - Iran needs to become a glass parking lot. Maybe then the Cult of the Paedophile will realise that there *is* room for plurality in the world when it comes to belief systems.

[D. Mented]

Having a little expirience in this subject, it seems to me that what defines a mental problem is that:
it is a problem (impedes function in some way)
it is mental (as opposed to physical or circumstantial - the latter being something like a lack of education keeping a smart and motivated person in the lower rungs of the ladder where he or she can't get enough money to get an education but makes too much for financial assistance)and
it isn't something that can be fixed simply by better understanding or a change of perspective. This can be because of inability to understand rather than lack of information, or inability to change perspective rather than lack of inspiration...
That last pretty much covers all moist robots - if you believe freewill is nonexistant rather than difficult to achieve.
What surprises me is the number of generally intelligent and reasonably well-educated people who have heard about the existance of mental problems, believe they can exist- hypothetically - yet faced with someone who is clearly disturbed or deficient, always believe *this* person is sane and stable, choosing to act this way because of a bad attitude...it's *those others* that they read or heard about that are really ill.
D. Mented

[$8]

Scott,
While the responses to your recent posts have been larger than usual, I think it's a small minority of the readers.

As a general rule, I don't turn to you for political input. I've read many of your posts and they aren't valueless, but I don't find them more informative than many others out there.

I'll never understand why people really care about your political leanings. As a consumer of your cartoons, I come here for laughs.

I don't tune in to the debates of candidates to hear them make jokes either. So it's fair that way.

On a related note: I've noticed that you've responded to a fair amount of people's criticism with sarcasm and a dismissive attitude. I won't tell you how to run your business, but is that something you are proud of? It's an easy trap to fall into, but you seem like you're often smart enough to avoid it. Better luck next time.

[Mauro Cicognini]

Wow, kudos to AllanL5. Perfectly summarized, polite, articulate. Not many comments on blogs are this level.

[amenot]

I don't know how Scott can "please" everyone. If he doesn't talk about politics or religion, what other hot subject can he talk about? the boring "cubicle"?
I even like his name calling and straight swearing.

[Lordzues]

Hi Scott,

Your blog is so okay! Please don't stop because of most of humanity are stupid idiots! You changed my view on the Iran debate positively, thanks for that.

At first I agreed with NY for not letting the Iranian president Ahmadinejad on the Twin Tower Site, but what about freedom of speech and movement! Who is going to decide who is allowed there and who isn't? And based on what?

The world would be a better place if everybody was nice to eachother. I will be the first to start, who joins me?

I heard there are special interest groups for supporters of Jews and Israel. Everywere when someone says anything about Jews or Israel, they all are called to respond and comment. This could explain a few of the reactions you've received... I'm not sure if it is true, but it sounds plausible.

[workerant]

Go for president. You're the only one making sense these days.

[Szocske]

The Rosenhan experiment proved that everybody is diagnosed with severe mental problems:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosenhan_experiment

[Jorrath Zek]

Never argue with Idiots, because the people watching won't be able to tell which one is the idiot.

[Jason]

I think it should be called Adamsism or Scottism. The second one already sounds like another mental condition, so it'd be easy to remember.

Apparently Mr. Adams has been suffering from it for years.

For example, one of his very old comics:

I'm paraphrasing because I don't have the damn book in front of me:

'Reading gives you knowledge,
And knowledge is power,
But power corrupts,
And corruption is a crime,
And crime doesn't pay.
If you keep reading, you'll go broke.'

See? Mr Adams has been suffering from this for a very long time. Its just not overly obvious because of his profession.

Oh, I completely disagree and I'm willing to fight you to the end of the earth over it. TODAY'S POST IS NOT ARGUMENTATIVE!!

[TS]

According to Wikipedia, only 1/3 of adults get through enough of Piaget's formal operational stage of cognitive development to work in it regularly, which means that 2/3 of adults can not reason logically or think abstractly.

[Nasikabatrachus]

I wonder if there's a word for using made-up anecdotes about children who get highly emotional about abstract things no child could actually care about without being brainwashed by their parents and community to try and drive a point home.

[JShope]

So many crackpot psychiatrists, so few blogs to post on. Sad.

Quite simply, you listen to the ravings of too many lunatics and wonder if they might have some deep-seated truth. Unfortunately, the effort to find it is fruitless because it is so obscure that it can only be seen after it has been found in some other place.

--
Send in the parasite clowns on their horses
Send in the idiots and let them advance
Send in the monsters of your own creation
Send them all in and give them a chance
-- (Alphaville)

[James Yeamans]

Hey you need to lighten up on your editorials and stick to comics and making me laugh. Sure, everyone is pissed about the way things are going, but hey, what the hell can anyone really do about it. Just sit back and enjoy the ride and make us laugh at the same time. Humor is about the only thing that keeps from crying. The worst thing about bitching about things is no one listens and no one cares what others think because we all have our own selfish problems. So in other words, "lighten up, Frances!"-stick to your funny as hell observations. Or you'll end up on the fucking O'Reilly Factor , which by the way I watch most often times.

James Yeamans
Rockport, Tx.

[Tom]

In my experience, I've found that people are dumb. OCTAOE (Einstein).

[Cytohead]

It's not insanity. It is "failure to think". Logical thought is a process of producing a more ordered state, therefore is is thermodynamically unfavorable and unlikely. Thinking does contribute to biological fitness (long term reproductive success). However, the biologically driven thinking of ancestral peoples has produced the current system in which reproductive success is no longer measurably dependent upon thinking. I predict that all higher order thought processes will cease within two generations.

[Cloud]

Oh yeah, here's a link:

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/mathew/logic.html#herring

[Cloud]

This "mental problem" is an informal logical fallacy, of course. I'd have to say it's best classified as a kind of red herring.

[Sam Thornton]

Everyone in the world is crazy except me, therefore these bars on my window are to keep them all out.

[Some guy]

I live by two principles in life.
1. Reality is a matter of perspective.
2. Truth is a democratically elected viewpoint.

The simplified version is that everybody sees things based on their own perspective. The most common perspective is "the truth." So if there are more people that think talking to an imaginary old man is crazy than there are that talk to imaginary old men, they are considered "mentally ill." On the other hand, if the majority of people believe in talking to an imaginary old man, than those who think the idea is foolish would be considered deficient or "mentally ill." So, in answer to your question, whoever has the most people believing their delusion is the one that decided who is mentally ill and who isn't.

[Ehren]

I think you are talking about a known logical fallacy. My favorite example is, "All men are mortal. Socrates was mortal. Therefore, all men are Socrates."

[DWH]

So is being too drunk, or 'ripped',a prelude to 'ripperitis'?That might explain a lot.

[techguy]

The closest thing to what you describe is not what any of the others claim, but rather Reductio ad Hitlerum, as in
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_Hitlerum
It has all the qualities you describe, plus a specific baddie. However, I like your name better.

[Sam Adams]

Scott:

I had an Uncle Phil. Uncle Phil liked to talk. The more
Uncle Phil said, the less intelligent he appeared and the
less people respected him. He thought he knew quite a bit,
which became more and more easily distinguishable as false.

You are becoming my Uncle Phil.

[bcammack]

["I'm terribly sorry that you're stupid and I'm not"

Thank you, hehe, arrogance is usually stupid, no matter how bright it is a person, it is ever a pity when someone get to believe its own self gratifing lies, but, hey, seems it is deep programming in our common kernel.

Posted by: T.G]

Missed my point completely. I can't do anything about anybody else's mental competency and I refuse to apologize for my own. When the anti-intellectuals come carping about it, I tell them to kiss my ass. I'm not going to feel guilty about being smart. That's just some bizzaro-adult corruption of elementary school peer-group pressure.

All you did was sugar-coat the same schtick to make yourself appear superior. I don't have much regard for that, either. Deal with it.

[degailen]

Your blog is great! I was directed to it a few days ago by some colleagues of mine and I can't get enough. You are NOT suffering from any sort of mental malady that I can tell. Unfortunately, I can't say the same for a good deal of your audience. As an Army vet with relatives still serving, I think that American's are afflicted by some sort of mass delusion bordering on hysteria. Perhaps they just need something to hate. I know, lets introduce the 2 minutes hate and hate week. But seriously, I think they want to believe what our government is telling them no matter what their eyes show them. This is unfortunate. Collectively Americans have forgotten how to think past the next episode of whatever reality show is being dumped down their throats. My harsh view of Americans does NOT make me an America hater. If I were, I wouldn’t have rushed off to serve in the Army. What it does make me is person that hates people who are too lazy to think for themselves and want to rely on some higher power (insert yours here) to give them the answers to everything. If this is you (reader) then instead of getting ticked off at me, try seeing past the end of your nose and finding the truth instead of allowing yourself to be spoon fed what amounts to a pack of lies. If this is NOT you, then you know it and are most likely not offended when someone says something that you don’t agree with. It’s like we Sgt’s used to tell our troops, “If it applies to you, do something about it, if not drive on.”

[Shawn]

Hmm, I think this might be your most disingenuous post yet. Yes, a few of the posters were being very stupid and missed your "subtle" point. However, based on past history, it's pretty clear this is exactly what you were aiming for. In others words, you can't keep saying "Dance, monkey, dance" and then act surprised when the dance floor fills up.

[rita mae]

Ha. Wish I could know how many of the readers of your comments will think that "CheChe2" is/was serious.

Penis.

Scott, still love you, but still too old to stalk you.

Rita Mae

[Zach]

I think a lot of people have mental problems, and I don't blame them. Have you seen the crap the put on tv? Movies? Video games? Throw that in with a steady diet of soda and fast food, long work hours, inflation, war, materialism, etc. and you have the perfect recipe for serious mental problems. I know a lot of flat-out crazy people that actually think I have mental problems! The audacity!

[Geek]

I think there are two problems here:

1) the education system does a poor job of teaching logical reasoning

2) religion does a good job of teaching illogical reasoning

It's a self-reinforcing double whammy.

[Tony]

I dont know. I read the post that got everyone rialed up and frankly. It was wrong. In so many ways. I agree you should give almost anyone a forum to voice their views. However we all know how propaganda can sway the masses. I know that allowing that man to have such a fourm here would be allowing our enemy to spread his propaganda.

And I am sure that SunSu(sic) would not approve. Furthermore dont we have enough idiots spreading their propaganda around the country. I.E. The Fearacons,,The Defeatacrats so on and so forth. Between calling a man like General Patreaous ... General Betrayus and Saying that if u elect a Democrat you will be supporting Terrorists.

I have no Idea which way is up. Then we have melodramatic people like you stirring the pot.

STOP BEING PART OF THE PROBLEM!!!

OTW when you do humor U ROCK!!

[car free since '93]

But did Robbie finally get his fill of pie?

CFS '93

[Tarus]

Mental Illness is a myth:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Szasz

[Marxist]

Scott on drugs.

[Tom Foster]

Are you implying that some drug dealers are gay?

Then you must be saying that all drug dealers are gay.

Therefore you must be saying that all gay men are drug dealers.

Homophobe!

[QwkDrw]

You say: "Is that a form of mental problem, or does the fact that it describes how the majority of the population forms political opinions make it good mental health by definition?"

Still say your NYC vacation posts were the best recently. Could have been the inclusion of a second person's (your wife's) perspective into the humorous observations.

Now the "ripperitis": With my limited human abilities to deceiver anything beyond, "What's up?", it seems in posts lately that you might be dancing (sorry, bad word) with Moral Relativism -- situational ethics. Something that is occasionally condemned as bullocks -- and certainly not by only smart people.

[Lego_90]

It's not ripperitis, it's got a very simple name. But sadly ,there's no cure for stupid.

Some people just can't, or refuse to, reason for themselves.

[tim shepard]

Did you ever play Wff n Proof? It's a great game about understanding propaganda. The propaganda technique you refer to is the "Ad Homninem" attack.
http://www.ilstu.edu/~jecox/FOI%20Materials/Logical%20Fallacies%20Definitions%20and%20Examples.htm

[Economizt]

Whatever, most humans think like that. Here you go again with your logic thing; PEOPLE DON'T THINK, THEY FEEL dammit what is so hard about that.

[Josh Scholar]

And what do you call it when some famous person is so full of himself that he can't consider, for even a moment, the possibility that he got a point or two badly wrong in a rant?

Of course a lot of people don't get satire, of course a lot of people are confused by it. That's not news. But it's also not a convincing excuse when you mouth-off and as many things wrong as your target.

Even the great Scott Adams isn't always the model of competency. Live with it.

[Shane]

CheChe2, you are full of shit. So are any one of you who believes exercising his freedom of speech and opinion is somehow anti-American. If anything it is pro-American. Last I checked, it is what your country supposedly stands for. Yet, any time someone disagrees with the propaganda machine, you sheep stand up to defend it.

[Susan Holland]

Okay, I still don't remember the name of the fallacy, but another example goes something like this:

Doug is a man.
Men die.
Therefore, Doug is dead.

[Susan Holland]

I see this as a logical fallacy. It has a particular name but I can't remember it right now.

I don't see this as a mental problem, but instead a very common flaw in logical thinking.

[Fuzznsmoo]

Could it simply be that these folks are just stupid?

[Oracle128]

It's not a mentally unstable belief, it's just a stupid one. And if we take "stupid" to mean "less than average intelligence", then by definition, half the population is stupid. That's a lot of idiots.

If we take into consideration that idiots are the ones more likely to exhibit neanderthal, mob-like behaviour, and speak out the most loudly for something they irrationally believe (whether it be religion, politics, science etc), then it's easy to see why one would think that the popular opinion is something as irrational as your example. But it's just the idiots doing what they do best.

[Susan]

Forget giving people a "stupid" sign, we should send them back to school. People get sent to anger management classes, so why can't we have "how to think" classes?

It wouldn't be all that hard to round them all up. We could start with all the knee-jerk posters that lurk around here all the time.

[reuters]

Yes, and I wouldn't be suprised if scientists showed a strong correlation between ripperitis and too much watching of fox news.