The old definition for mental illness
According to the McDraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Science and Technology 1987, mental illness is not a well-defined term. It states in Volume 10, on page 593:
'An imprecise term commonly applied to a variety of disturbances of thinking, emotional reaction, and conduct.'
Now, for the first time, we may have a clearer definition for mental illness after conducting this research work.
The new definition for mental illness
On a social level, mental illness may be defined as a long-term disturbance in the mind resulting in overt behaviours described as not 'normal'. In this research, not "normal" means displaying extreme L- and R-brain behaviour.
On a physical level, mental illness is likely to be the result of nerve damage through tiny strokes in the brain (or perhaps immature nerve development at birth) of the corpus callosum linking the left-cerebral hemisphere with the right-cerebral hemisphere, and the frontal cortex where information from the left- and right-cerebral hemispheres is brought together and processed.
When this happens, mental illness need not necessarily take place immediately (it is likely a stroke may cause a change in the way certain smells of familiar substances are recognised and interpreted, a sudden ringing in the ear, hallucinations etc). However if the brain consistently needs the function of the frontal cortex because the person is under excessive stress to solve a problem and for some reason this is not sufficiently well-developed, mental illness is likely to take place in two ways:
- Reduced brain functions in the frontal cortex may be recreated in other parts of the brain. If the recreated functions interfere with certain other brain functions, a person may suffer what is known as motor control problems and/or visual and auditory delusions such as voices in the head or hallucinations. This is probably how schizophrenia develops in the real world for some people.
- When the frontal cortex and/or corpus callosum are sufficiently damaged or underdeveloped, one side of the cerebral hemisphere or the other may dominate without control from the opposite side of the cerebral hemisphere, resulting in the creation of new 'unbalanced' behaviours (eg. greater creative abilities). The behaviour may quickly get reinforced (especially for young people) until it is extreme because there is nothing to help the brain balance this situation.
NOTE: There are cases where people who suffer a stroke can suddenly develop opposite brain skills to what they were used to before the stroke. For example, an older person who has developed and applied extensive L-brain skills throughout life (eg. construction workers, communicators and managers etc) may suddenly develop exceptional R-brain skills of drawing and other creative abilities after a stroke.
What do we mean by unbalanced behaviours?
Unbalanced behaviours according to this research are of two main types: left(L)-brain and right(R)-brain behaviours.
R-brain behaviours
If the right side of the cerebral hemisphere is made to dominate human behaviour, the behaviours may be described as unpredictable, spontaneous and often
irrational. This may be observed in individuals who make sudden, incoherent outbursts followed unexpectedly by periods of total isolation and quietness.
L-brain behaviours
If the left side of the cerebral hemisphere is made to dominate human behaviour, the behaviours may be described as very rigid, predictable, repetitive, sticking constantly to ones own belief, precise, consistently methodical, and almost always with a reason (considered logical to the person however most people may classify it as illogical because the individual has not taken the time to consider the evidence or has chosen not to gather evidence to support a more balanced reason and hence behaviour). This may be observed in individuals who experience constant repeating of a phrase or word, moving the body and/or arms and legs back and forth, and/or rapid and incoherent talking.
Thus one of the classic consequences of this breakdown of the improperly trained corpus callosum is one cerebral hemisphere may function uncontrollably and produce extreme L-brain or R-brain behaviours characteristic of many types of abnormal behaviour we see in mentally-ill patients. (1)
Yes, but what really is causing all this damage?
Actually, the likely cause for the damage to the brain has to do with the blood vessels.
When you experience stress, your brain is placed into a heightened state of problem-solving to reduce the stress. If there is the slightest chance parts of the brain are not sufficiently well-trained (ie. balanced) to perform the specific task(s) needed to solve the problem, there is a risk that some of your blood vessels supplying oxygen to those parts could be underdeveloped and may suddenly burst under the extra blood pressure during a particularly stressful moment creating what is effectively known as a tiny stroke in the brain. Once a stroke occurs, this effectively destroys the surrounding nerve cells.
Thus we could define mental illness as:
cerebral damage to the frontal cortex and/or the corpus callosum due to excessive stress leading to the creation of microscopic strokes. Once enough nerves are damaged by a lack of oxygen from the blood reaching the nerves, disturbances in thinking may take place which eventually leads to the development of abnormal emotional reaction and conduct.
To put it more simply, mental illness is a form of brain damage through bleeding from blood vessels caused by excessive problem-solving (2) which is often exacerbated by poor support and training.
NOTE: A new study by Dr Karen Cullen is starting to reveal evidence of breaking blood vessels in the brain causing damage to nerves and leaving behind "brain plaques" thought to play an important role in creating Alzheimer's disease. It is about blood flow and how the blood vessels in the brain can cope with the pressure. It is likely the same process is taking place in the development of mental illness.
Yes, but how do you damage the blood vessels in the first place?
Damage to this part of the brain linking the two cerebral hemispheres is thought to occur when a large amount of electrical and chemical information flows in one direction through the corpus callosum, followed by a sudden and unexpected change in the direction of this flow during an intense and stressful activity requiring extensive problem-solving by the individual.
Also the frontal cortex could be overstressed because there could be excessive amounts of information coming from both cerebral hemispheres making it difficult for the brain to find meaningful and simplified balanced patterns and behaviours needed to explain all the information properly.
Why does the brain have to suddenly reverse the electrical flow?
There are times when the brain has to reverse the flow of electrical and chemical information through the corpus callosum. It is natural. This is how the brain solves a problem properly.
What are we trying to achieve by doing this?
What you are trying to achieve by reversing the flow of information (or electrical energy) in the corpus callosum is to find a quality solution. And by quality, we mean a balanced solution.
In other words, what you do is get one of your cerebral hemispheres in the brain (ie. the L-brain) to break down a problem into mangeable parts (or patterns you can recognise, or can easily create later if none exists), and then see the important overall pattern needed to solve the original problem by visualising the interrelationships in the parts and how they relate to reality through the help of the opposite cerebral hemisphere (ie. the R-brain). This is how the brain properly solves a problem.
Sometimes you don't always need to associate a recognised pattern with reality because you already know it will work based on what you've learnt in the past. But sometimes, there comes a problem where even all your acquired knowledge is not enough to solve it.
Now this is where the problem begins. Our society has come to see the skills of the L-brain as so important for communication as well as developing a constantly changing technology that we have taught many people to use mostly that side of the brain for problem-solving.
Then one day, a problem suddenly arises which is so stressful or the problem appears to be beyond rational understanding that it may force us to use our entire brain to solve the problem properly (ie. both sides of the brain).
Why do we have to do it? Well, it is natural for the brain to use both sides of the cerebral hemispheres. We are genetic given the tools to do so, and we should use it. But there is also an environmental factor to consider as well.
Our so-called democratic Western system we have created in society has effectively tied our survival to the problem and so we feel obligated to, or we are told by, our fellow human beings (a kind of expectation or feeling of being pressured) to come up with a good solution within a finite period of time. Whatever the reason, once we choose (with influence from the environment) to force our brain to use both sides of the cerebral hemisphere, we are potentially at risk of damaging certain parts of our brain if it is not well-trained to cope with the information overload.
In the case of mental illness, it is likely the corpus callosum and frontal cortex are where most of the damage will occur since it is not well-trained to transfer and process information on both sides of the cerebral hemisphere.
Mental illness can also go in the reverse direction where a lack of problem-solving in an area of reasonable enjoyment and interest to keep the mind active and healthy can lead to depression. But once a point of extreme depression is reached, the brain can be applied in a very intense and negative way to solving the problem of what to do. And if that is not possible, people may unfortunately choose the easy road of working out how to commit suicide instead of learning how to be happy, finding ways to deal with the limitations in the environment and others, and in doing something positive for others and oneself to bring greater balance (so long as society supports the individual in this area).
|
Can it be transferred to our genes?
Yes and no. In the early stages of mental illness where there isn't a long history of the problem in the family tree, there is not likely to be enough time for microevolution to take place and make changes to the genes in support of a permanent change in the brain through the development of specific proteins. However, if given enough time, the genes can be modified.
The only way to reverse it is to practice using the mind as a long-term problem solving tool and by giving the brain plenty of rest and access to quality resources (eg. food and education). When solving problems, we recommend tackling healthy and achievable problems (usually the ones you enjoy or are easier to solve and hence have a greater chance of solving before going on to the more difficult ones). This is the best way to slowly develop a more robust and healthier frontal cortex and corpus callosum.
But remember, mental illness is not like a virus where you can catch it simply by touching another person afflicted by the disease. There is nothing transferred to make you become the person unless you try to think and act in the same way as the mentally-ill person for a very long time.
Mental illness is nature's way of telling you there is a limit to how much of the human brain can be applied to solving problems in an unbalanced and non-emotional manner. The brain is an organ requiring good training, lots of positive reinforcement, plenty of time to sleep, and giving yourself adequate time to solve problems. You need these things for a balanced mind. And most importantly, for the sake of a good positive emotional development, you must regularly enjoy what you do with your brain.
Who is more susceptible to mental illness?
Virtually anyone is susceptible to it for the simple fact that each one of us has a brain and there is a limit to how much this organ can be applied to problem-solving. But there are some groups of people who we should be particularly concerned about.
Firstly, young adults entering the L-brain "adult" world are more likely to experience mental illness because they have to understand certain changes occuring in their lives as they grow from being a child into adults. For example, their bodies are changing, they have lots of exams to pass, there are lots of peer pressure in society to do this or that, and then there is the stress of finding employment, fitting in with society and being accepted, and in trying to exercise a certain level of independence at home. All this will certainly test their brain's ability to problem-solve during this difficult time.
Secondly, people who retire from the familiar L-brain world into a brave new "more creative" and independent (possibly less team-oriented) world where they must now find a variety of different things to keep themselves preoccupied, happy and feeling like they are still part of the community even if they have to work on their own for long periods of time, will also put some stress on the L-brain types as they find a solution to their problems.
Is it true that the older you are the less likely you will experience mental illness?
Well, yes and no. It depends on what personality type you are (ie. L-brain or R-brain), how you perceive new challenges in life, and whether or not you have the tools or training to meet those challenges.
However, it is generally true that the older you are, the more mental and physical tools (or patterns) you have acquired, and the better your chances of coping with difficult problems later in life. But remember, there will always be the exception to this rule.
Should we be more concerned for the younger people?
Yes we should. Young people are not likely to be equipped with the knowledge, skills and other resources to solve problems properly and in a balanced way as well as understanding how their minds work. It is therefore imperative that society provides young people with all the knowledge and skills needed for a healthy brain (such as balanced education, a stable roof over their heads, adequate sleep and time to play and be creative, and access to healthy foods). Otherwise the brains of a number of young people may rapidly acquire certain unhealthy patterns that will eventually emerge in society as "unbalanced" through behaviour.
And if left unchecked, young people could even develop full-blown "mental illness" where the young brain may suffer permanent damage because of the extreme L-brain and R-brain behaviours shown and this will be more difficult to treat by doctors and psychologists later in life.
NOTE: Brain damage of this kind should not be restricted to the corpus callosum or frontal cortex. It is also possible that epilepsy and other motor control problems may also follow a similar trend where extreme activity could lead to permanent brain damage or other similar significant changes in brain function in those areas controlling muscle.
How quickly does mental illness develop?
Signs of mental illness may be observed immediately should the damage to the corpus callosum and frontal lobes be large and very sudden. Or it may take some time for the effect of mental illness to be observed if the damage is small. Either way, the damage may also be accompanied by a reduction in the level of certain neurochemicals within specific parts of the cerebrum over time causing those neurological areas carrying the neurochemicals to eventually "switch off" or function in a different way.
Why the brain strain?
The only reason why the human brain has to be placed in this state of heightened activity is because it needs to problem-solve something or there is a range of different problems to be solved. And problem-solving can only occur if a person is stressed. The stress can come from a demand placed on us by something and/or someone around us, or that we may choose to do so for whatever reason, and often within a very short space of time or other serious restrictions in our available resources.
So perhaps the real question we need to ask ourselves with respect to the issue of mental illness is, "Why and how much problem-solving is considered acceptable for human beings?"
The typical sign of an activated corpus callosum can be seen from the level of stress people have to go through when solving their problems. When people say they are trying to cope with something (usually just prior to experiencing mental illness in extreme situations), what they're really trying to say is how much problem-solving they are having to do. The brain (especially the corpus callosum) is, therefore, experiencing a heightened state of alertness and actively processing or transferring a large amount of information to different parts of the brain.
|
Why do we have to problem-solve?
Problem-solving is a normal part of life. We all need it because at some point in our lives we have to survive. You see, it is a simple fact of life that we all have to problem-solve to some degree if we wish to survive long enough to achieve certain other goals in life. So when we ask, "What will I eat today?", "Where is that can of tuna?" or "How do I catch my fish in the ocean or river?", these questions are our way of creating problems for ourselves (with a little help from our brain and body) so we may problem-solve them (ie. finding the food and eating it) and eventually benefit from their solution.
Even the need to communicate is a form of problem-solving in itself. Communication has helped in our survival. (3)
The act of surviving in the real world is how humanity has been forced to develop a large brain because it needed to solve the problems of a survival basis for many millions of years.
However, humans are unusual in that even when we have what we need, there is still an inner propensity for us to continually solve problems for the sake of keeping ourselves constantly challenged. Perhaps humans want to know the reason for their existence in this universe? You see, it is healthy for us to problem-solve because the urge to understand our purpose and why we are here gets stronger and stronger as our brain develops over time. This latter behaviour is known as human curiosity.
Now this may be fine when the extra problems being solved are seen as enjoyable and part of our hobby (because we are well-trained) and we choose to solve them as part of our curiosity of learning more about this universe we live in. But what happens when we don't want to solve unmeaningful problems for other people and we begin to lose sight of what is a need and a want? How do we know we aren't solving problems for everyone on a constant basis because others have a desire to have what they want as well as what they need? Or is the necessity to survive by solving the "needy" problems now been supplemented by our want to enjoy all of life's modern conveniences (4)?
This may be the fundamental issue in this whole debate. You see, when a problem suddenly becomes unmeaningful to us for whatever reason or when we are made to feel like having what we want is necessary (ie. a kind of social status), we normally have to solve a lot more problems than is considered normal for the brain to cope with and often with unrealisitic expectations placed on us by others wanting the problems to be solved.
So it isn't just the untrained individual being placed under potentially enormous brain strain which can be a problem, it can also be the pressure of fulfilling the wants of yourself even if the brain is reasonably well-trained to solve the "needy" problems.
What are the consequences for people who don't know the difference between needs and wants?
The boundary between needs and wants has become increasingly more blurred from the way people have learned to behave in modern Western society. All we have to do is take a look at the way business people conduct themselves and how this, together with our high population levels, are creating extraordinary levels of stress for people and the environment.
The consequences of such behaviour then spills over and creates other major social problems such as poverty, unemployment, a breakdown in human relationships, hyperactivity in children etc.
People don't know how much problem-solving is acceptable
As these examples suggest, we are starting to believe that we must have everything that we want simply because we think it will maximise our survival, make us more socially acceptable, and be happy. In other words, we still feel insecure in ourselves because we don't know how much is enough to maintain our survival for the rest of our lives.
What we don't realise, however, is that this "having what we want in order to feel more secure" may actually be creating excessive problem-solving for ourselves and others and hence greater stress and this could in turn threaten our mental health (not to mention the possibility of threatening the survival of our species from an environmental perspective).
In other words, too much problem-solving or not having the skills and confidence to problem solve something can actually cause problems for the development of our brain and this can lead to mental illness.
Also people don't know how much problem-solving is acceptable except maybe for themselves and then they ask everyone else to achieve the same amount of problem-solving in the way they expect instead of letting each person deal with the problems in their own way.
Are we really being obsessed with having what we want?
Well, let us put it this way.
According to the World Wildlife Fund, if every human being in the world were to consume and pollute to the same degree as the people of the United States and Western Europe do at the moment, the human race would need at least another two more planets like the Earth to provide all the resources.
Is this the way we should think and do things in the 21st century and beyond when many other people in the world are fighting to have their needs met, while others are dying because of mental illness and starvation?
NOTE: There are people such as the Fatah Movement in Palestine fighting for equality in certain areas such as a secure job, food and security. Given what we now know about the United States and Western Europe, there is probably a need for Western nations to set up the Fatarse Movement just to show how fat the arses of Western people are becoming.
Who are more likely to be susceptible to this kind of pressure?
We know there are people susceptible to stress because of our attitude to have everything we want. So who are the ones likely to experience mental illness?
The kinds of people who are most likely to suffer mental illness include the L-brain people who are naturally inclined to acquire a whole lot of things for themselves. And because L-brain people are highly social people, they do not like to be seen as not having what others have. This problem may even be exacerbated further with the financially poor types of L-brain people living in society.
Also, the L-brain types being kept in isolation for long periods of time because of their commitment to looking after their children or who live in remote rural areas are more likely to experience mental illness because of the stress of isolation.
Furthermore, any person who is well-trained over a long period of time problem-solving in one particular area and then is suddenly required to solve problems in an area wholly unfamiliar to him/her and/or to perform in a very short space of time could have a higher probability of experiencing mental illness in his/her life.
In fact, mental illness can be experienced by anyone. Occasionally, some rich people can suffer mental illness because of a want that they can't achieve or obtain, or a feeling of intense loneliness while working at the "top". But this is usually rare given their financial status.
Cases of mental illness tend to increase dramatically and with greater severity with people of seemingly "lesser importance" in society. This is usually the poor, the old age group, the socially-dependent, or the young ones left out on the streets. It may also include people who do not have much social status at work or at home.
Generally, the ones we consider most susceptible to mental illness are those with an impoverished social network or deprived of some other fundamental "need", and/or who suffers from the negative effects of institutionalisation (ie. the technique of creating "boxes" to classify and measure people, which is a predominantly L-brain activity).
When do you get mental illness?
Mental illness occurs across the lifespan. However, there is a greater chance of getting the illness in adolescence, just after retirement age, and at practically any other time where you are required to problem-solve or change extensively and very quickly, and often with limited or no support or resources to help you cope with the change.
Is mental illness a contagious disease?
Mental illness can arise because of a genetic disposition leading to an improperly developed brain. However, it can also be environmental.
For example, a car accident in the environment could leave some patients with sufficient brain damage to affect their ability to form stable and balanced behaviours that we would classify as "normal". Furthermore, if given enough time, a person experiencing a constantly negative or stressful environment may eventually affect the person's biological and chemical makeup in the brain and possibly the genetic makeup as well leading to a greater probability of behavioural disorders occuring in future generations.
However, for a healthy person, mental illness is not a contagious disease. You certainly cannot "catch" mental illness like you can with the flu without your consent. The only way you can get mental illness is if you allow yourself to think and behave the way mentally-ill patients can over a long period of time, or to force yourself to live and work under constant and unrelenting stress.
We recommend that you leave it to the experts to allow themselves to see in the way mentally-ill patients see themselves and the world and so risk the possibility of suffering mental illness in their own lives. These are the ones who will properly understand and solve mental illness for society to benefit.
What are the common symptoms that may lead to mental illness?
In the early stages, the basic symptoms that may lead to mental illness include:
- Working too hard over a long period of time or within a very tight deadline and showing signs of not being able to cope such as incoherent or muddled communication and sometimes avoiding people (or going the other way and hence being too social and thus too dependent on others for everything), or perhaps not doing anything whatsoever (or doing too much), especially at a young age, to learn and grow in a balanced way;
- Excessive talking and/or talking too fast without giving time for others to understand and talk for themselves, or perhaps not talking at all even when spoken to;
- Too much social interaction to the point that the person depends entirely on others for one's survival, or there may be complete withdrawal from society; and/or
- Express absolutely no feelings to any situation; or overly react emotionally and physically to a situation, usually in a consistently negative or cynical way.
If left unchecked and there is no adequate support to help the person deal with these extreme behaviours, emotions and thinking, the symptoms can develop into full-scale mental illness such as delusions, hallucinations, delirium, chronic depression, schizophrenia and dementia.
Delusions: Delusions are fixed (or unchangeable) false belief which are not readily accepted by other members of the person's culture or subculture in which he/she lives.
Hallucinations: Hallucinations are a false sensory perception which has the compelling sense of reality.
|
Remember, you should not be surprised to find people suffering from mental illness. We now live in a world requiring extensive problem-solving, perhaps more so than is necessary because of our desire (or other people's desires) to have what we want and not just what we need, not to mention how hard it is to get what we need and want given how many people are now doing the same thing (5). This, according to L-brain people, is what they call reality although this is not the case for people described as R-brain.
How can we solve the problem of mental illness?
It seems we may already know the answer. We either take pain relievers or perhaps the harder forms of drugs like cocaine; perform regular physical activity; consume vitamin pills; spend more time with the family; take time off from work; do some gardening; get out more often etc.
But now that we have a better understanding of what is causing mental illness and why, we can do something about it. In other words, we can create a new, more balanced form of reality if we choose to do so.
This is why many people in western society are now particularly interested in watching lifestyle (gardening, home renovations, holiday etc) and (non-violent) nature programs on television, and in fictional or real stories of people escaping the hustle and bustle of city life (eg. the highly popular ABC series Seachange).
People understand there is a need for balance. By watching these television programs and eventually trying to experience what they see for themselves is their way of trying to reduce the stress and achieving a greater sense of balance they are longing to find in their lives. Even things people try not to talk about in public (especially to their employers), such as taking a day off work and sleeping in late, as well as having sex and watching pornographic videos at home are all examples of ways to keep the mind and body relaxed and in balance.
It is through the act of balancing ourselves that we begin to sense the greater reality of life, become more human, and become one with all things.
## SPECIAL UPDATE ##
There are some dubious religious cults who will take advantage of this situation with people as they look for balance in their lives. Of particular concern are those which take advantage of the people's situation by taking away all their money, and in isolating them from friends and family outside the religious group in return for basic meditation sessions and having "creative fun" in group sessions (sometimes involving sexual activity).
It is better that you independently create your own science/religion to follow in your life. It should be one containing more balanced beliefs and actions which helps you to achieve greater balance. And it shouldn't cost you a cent. Listen to everyone around you as you refine your beliefs to a level of greater balance. But you choose how to balance your life.
If you choose for yourself to engage in sex, meditation or other activities as a means of balancing yourself, that is your choice. It is up to you to decide what it is you need to balance yourself.
Nobody should ever impose their beliefs on you. You decide based on the information you have gathered the best way to live.
|
The critical thing to realise when solving mental illness is to understand the meaning of the word "support". The word "support" and trying to "relax" is often a reoccurring theme. People who suffer from mental illness are or were stressed and were unsupported in some particularly "needy" area. Perhaps the support was there, but they were not quite aware of it. Or perhaps there was a barrier that needed to be overcomed. Whatever the situation, it is important to remember that adequate and timely support to the person suffering the illness is vital.
For example, the importance of stable long-term accommodation for which the person can describe as his/her home is vital for a healthy mental state. Statistics of elderly people living in sheltered accommodation are more likely to experience psychosis (24%) than people who live at home (4%).
Good support does not necessarily have to cost a lot to society. Just being there for someone, listening to their needs and experiences, and giving them a hug and a helping hand is usually enough to help many people suffering from mental illness to feel better, and not just for those who are already healthy.
Support could also mean giving people more leisure time to help them balance themselves in a natural way.
People need leisure to improve their mental health. Restrict leisure time and you will almost certainly increase the risk of creating mental illness.
|
In fact, there are many forms of support people need that do not have to cost society a lot to implement.
For example, L-brain people usually find it difficult to be on their own for long periods of time. Therefore L-brain people are more likely to experience psychosis and other forms of mental illness because of extreme solitude.
A common situation would be the typical case of an old woman (around 70 years) who works as a legal secretary (ie. L-brain) and lives alone (ie. a potentially stressful situation for a L-brain person). Then another person suddenly enters her life. The presence of the person helps to relieve her stress and soon she behaves normally. Sometime later, the person moves away and the item of relaxation and/or need in her life is removed. She develops stress in her life. If the stress persists for a long time, symptoms of mental illness can develop whereby her brain may try to create hallucinations (eg. voices of the person with whom she cares for). If the hallucinations are uncontrolled and the stress is not properly alleviated, she may require medical assistance.
Therefore it is vitally important to support L-brain people in such simple areas as being there for someone, giving them a hug, listening to their story, and finding ways to help them solve their problem, or at least ensure her needs are met. Now should this have to cost society a lot in order to achieve this simple social support system for all worthwhile human beings?
And what about for other people, namely the R-brain types? What happens if we try to immerse them in a competitive and highly communicative L-brain society with lots of people around them? This is likely to create unnecessary stress for these people.
For example, it is not uncommon for R-brain people to enjoy being on their own while they go about achieving worthwhile goals for the good of society and themselves. Forcing R-brain people to suddenly live in a world full of L-brain people talking about everyday things is likely to create unnecessary stress to R-brain people and eventually with everyone else.
Also, L-brain people like to create in their heads a lot of little "boxes" and name these boxes in any way they like. If the "boxes" relate to people in some way and also have a negative connotation associated with them, discrimination and other forms of social division will occur and this is more likely to increase the chances of creating mental illness among the disadvantaged group, especially the R-brain types (or instead start a war with other L-brain people).
To alleviate this problem, we must deal with the L-brain people's own insecurity and extremely low self-esteem problems expressed through their poor communications head on. Then we must teach them the meaning of the purpose of life and why we must support everyone and in return they will see the benefit of that support for all of us.
Bullying, including the aggressive management styles of unrealistic deadlines, high work expectations, unhealthy skepticism and so on, is now the major cause of stress in the workplace for up to 2.5 million Australian employees. The cost to Australia in dealing with the effects of stress of this kind is $3 billion every year in lost productivity.
Malicious gossip is also another source of unnecessary stress for certain people and is costing Australia dearly in lost productivity. As The Canberra Times reported:
'Bullying and harrassment of staff could also be worsened by office gossip' (6)
While there is nothing wrong with having a healthy gossip and may in fact be a good way to relieve stress, negative gossip can have a damaging effect on people.
|
What do we mean by support?
When we talk about support, what we mean is (i) emotional support (eg. listening to their story, giving them a simple hug, a total stranger saying "G'day" to them, or learning not to interfere in the affairs of others and so give people time to think through their problems); (ii) physical support (eg. long-term and safe accommodation, basic foods etc); and/or (iii) other forms of support as required to help people solve a particular "needy" problem.
The term supporting others does not necessarily have to mean giving away money and that is the end of that (7). Otherwise, the average taxpayer will soon turn into a bunch of cynics complaining about how their money is being wasted, especially when they see certain people sitting around doing nothing or perhaps helping themselves to cope with an inadequate and emotionally-deprived L-brain society by taking drugs or whatever.
Supporting others means giving people what they need as soon as they have worked out what it is they need to do. This means people must prepare themselves for receiving support by developing a clear and positive vision in their minds of what it is they hope to achieve for the good of themselves and society. When people have a vision, they will know what to do. And once people start doing something they know they need to do, it will give them a strong sense of purpose of why they are here and a willingness to achieve something good for everyone.
And only then will people have the responsibility of using the money in a wise and beneficial way.
As for the people supplying the "support", they must learn more about the needs of people on a person-by-person basis, to teach everyone to live as simply as possible (ie. to minimise the cost to society), and then to help people see (and let them choose) what it is that they need to achieve for society and themselves when given that freedom and proper support.
Finally, once people have chosen, we must support them properly in whatever they wish to achieve (ie. the best solution to their own and society's problems) as part of their mutual obligation and responsibility to society.
Support means not just meeting a person's survival needs (including their foods, accommodation, and their freedom to be who they are, what they want to be, and how things should be done for all to appreciate and benefit), but also his/her current problem-solving activity as well.
Because once you have people solving relevant and "needy" problems in their lives, will people be able to quickly approach the vision they have of a better society in their own unique way.
For society to tap onto this kind of social and individual power that will definitely propel humankind into the 21st century and beyond, we may have to develop a far more balanced system of government and society than we have ever had before. For example, to meet the fundamental needs of everyone in society, it may require us to develop some aspects of a socialistic (or communism) system in modern society. As for allowing people the individual freedom they need to achieve their own and society's goals, it may also require some aspects of our democratic system to be developed as well.
It is possible that the ideal system for solving mental illness and all other world problems in the 21st century and beyond will require a balance between socialism and democratic ideas. (8)
|
Why should I show support to other people?
Support must be there to assist people in solving problems, especially if it is of a survival nature. If there are gaps in the support services, this usually equates to poor (or no) support in many people's mind, especially for the mentally ill.
Support shouldn't cost an arm and a leg. It is in the simple things that we do which can often make the biggest difference to people's lives.
Finally, the support we must give to people should also include the hope that they can solve all their problems, no matter how large or small they are. As Dr Ramesh Gupta, a senior specialist with the ACT Department of Health, has noted about people suffering depression:
'The patient doesn't think they're going to get any better. And that's the unfortunate thing because not only have they lost the light at the end of the tunnel, they've lost hope as well.' (9)
So ensure people are adequately supported by giving them hope and other needy things, especially for those suffering mental illness. Otherwise the cost to the community will be great as the plight of individuals put under considerable stress continue to be ignored.
Do we need to be reminded of this through scenes of bloodshed on the battlefield or in our local neighbourhood, or of people robbing banks and invading people's homes, or the number of people starving on the streets, taking drugs or being locked up in prisons or mental institutions?
Listening to people's life story and their current problems is now part of the aim of psychologists to help alleviate or prevent people from experiencing mental illness (ie. a form of support). For the talkative L-brain person, this is particularly important.
Understanding the story of others is the first thing to do. Later you can make the necessary environmental changes, give the person the required emotional, physical and/or other forms of support, and when they are ready, they may ask for an alternative approach to the original problem. However, the use of medicine (ie. the clinical approach) for alleviating any kind of serious mental illness should be seen as a last resort, and only then should the safest drugs be used because they have the least side-effects and therefore are less likely to create stress to the person suffering mental illness.
|
What does the support suppose to achieve?
The purpose of the support is to help a person achieve balance by getting them something that they were missing in life or to help them achieve something else. The term balance or "equilibrium" is often talked about in mental health discussions. It is this balance which people seek when trying to solve their problems on their own or when looking for support from the community when they need it most.
And often the best way to achieve that sense of balance is to allow people to achieve something and to do what they need to do for the benefit of everyone and not just for themselves.
Are people being properly supported and trained to handle problems effectively?
As mentioned before, according to the 1998 edition of Comprehensive Clinical Psychology, Volume 6, page 521, the following poor support structures were in place for mentally-ill patients:
- Lack of, or poor education (eg. basic literacy, numeracy and self-help skills);
- Lack of, or poor financial support (including money management);
- Lack of, or poor housing (ie. poor quality or unstable);
- Lack of, or poor social supports;
- Lack of, or poor levels of occupation/employment;
- Difficulties with close personal relationships (family etc).
NOTE: Variations on the above same theme tend to appear regularly among people in poor countries and in places where asylum-seekers are kept in isolation from the rest of the global community for long periods of time.
And then we hear stories in the newspaper and on television of funding cutbacks by the government to social support services and public education together with a new paradigm being emphasised by the authorities of the importance of the business and military sector and in reaching regular and unremitting performance agreements as the way to solve world problems, one cannot help be amazed by how society has managed to keep itself together while coping with an increasingly cold-hearted and profit-motivated world.
So perhaps we need to start addressing the issue of adequate or proper support in modern society.
What is the purpose of life?
The exact purpose of life or "grand plan" for all of us is not quite known at this moment, which is why we have many dedicated religious people in various parts of the world tackling the issue. However, what we have to do in our lives is now becoming much clearer.
We are here to achieve goal(s). Goal(s) have to be aligned to one that helps people and not just ourselves in achieving worthwhile and positive things so that eventually we will solve all our personal and world problems, including mental illness, in the way it should be done - with all our love.
But goal(s) are not the only thing we must strive for. We have to make sure our journey towards these goal(s) are the most interesting and enjoyable we can make it.
There is absolutely no point in struggling through life in achieving someone else's goal(s) if it doesn't have meaning to you and you can't enjoy the journey part as you reach for those goal(s).
You have got to enjoy what you are doing, or learn to use your creativity to make it enjoyable. Remember that old US Hollywood movie where Tom Cruise played the bartender as he juggled bottles and prepared drinks in an interesting way? That is what we mean by enjoying the journey and not just the goal(s).
Making things enjoyable using the things we have available is just another form of love. We all want to express our love while we have this wonderful moment to live in this universe.
So show your love to the world.
Part of the purpose of life is to balance ourselves which in turn will reveal the concept of love for everyone to experience
Love comes in many different forms. It can be by educating someone, giving someone a roof over his/her head, providing the essentials of food and water, giving people a hug and forgiving them for what they may have done, in letting people decide what they can contribute to society in any positive way etc.
It is not about just giving away some money and that's it. Otherwise it is just a way for someone else providing the money of not having to do anything except let the person do what he/she thinks is best for themselves using that money. True love is actually doing something to directly help with someone else's true needs and helping them achieve goal(s) for the rest of society.
What can I do to prevent people from experiencing mental illness?
So if you want to help yourself and others avoid the pitfalls of the human mind, learn to promote love by doing the following:
In essence, if all you want to do is avoid mental illness, reduce unnecessary and excessive stress in your life. Then you must use your brain and body as the instrument for learning new ways of doing things in an emotionally positive manner (12) which will help to increase your options and ultimately your chances of solving any type of problem you are likely to face today and in the future. Do this and, together with adequate support from others if you need it and in doing things at a pace you are able to cope with, you will become a more balanced and healthier person, both mentally and physically.
And finally, when you have learnt enough and are sufficiently confident about how to solve your problems in a positive manner, you will realise that not only do you have to change yourself into a more balanced person, but if you want a permanent solution to all your problems, then you must make changes to the environment for the better. Only then will you influence everyone else to do the right "balanced" thing.
But always remember one thing: if you do ever suffer from some form of mental illness, do not ignore it. Talk to someone you can trust about the problem (perhaps your local doctor).
And most importantly, do not ever believe that your problem is incurable. It is not. You have to develop a positive expectation of a 'curable' solution. You just need time and other support to help you find that solution and implement it well.
What do we do with those already suffering from the illness?
As for those who are already experiencing mental illness, time, sleep, social acceptance and access to appropriate resources and support is the way for people to balance their thinking and solve problems in a natural way.
That is why it is a well-known fact in psychiatry that people who undertake certain types of therapy that promotes creative expression can, and usually do, improve their mental health given enough time. Similarly, people who undertake certain types of therapy that promotes some kind of practical activity for developing the left-brain can, and usually do, improve their mental health given enough time.
In fact, the careful and balanced application of both analytical and creative activities as well as adequate amounts of time and sleep can often help to improve the mental health of all mentally-ill patients.
According to page 519, Volume 6, of the 1998 edition of Comprehensive Clinical Psychology: 'Rehabilitation remains one of the most poorly understood areas of mental health.' Now we may not have to be kept in the dark.
The clue to more effective rehabilitation may well lie in the way the left- and right-sides of the brain function and coordinate themselves in a balanced way. Perhaps we can begin by acknowledging the L-brain nature of society and start implementing serious R-brain activities to counteract the problems of mental illness.
Evidence to support this approach can be seen on page 532, Volume 6, of the 1998 edition of Comprehensive Clinical Psychology:
'The most common interventions for inpatients were "creative" therapies (art, drama, music - 46%), social activities (33%), ward groups (23%), and relaxation (21%)'.
And finally, if self-regenerating nerve cells (like those commonly found in the brain stem of young babies, or the nerve cells found in the noses of people) could one day be a reality, it will assist in the repairing of damaged brain tissue and so put an end to all forms of mental illness. Otherwise, psychotherapy drugs are the only other solution. It is the least we can do for all those people who have suffered in our L-brain society.
NOTE 1: Creative therapies were first introduced after World War II to help war veterans and victims overcome extreme stress. It is believed this may be due to an overactive frontal lobe region trying hard to sort out the information acquired by veterans and victims during the war. Apparently creative therapies have an effect similar to drugs by helping to relax the frontal lobes and allowing other parts of the brain to rebalance itself.
NOTE 2: Since creative therapies do appear to help many mentally ill patients, this could provide evidence in support of the underdeveloped or damaged frontal lobes rather than an underdeveloped or damaged corpus callosum. Why? Because if mentally ill patients do improve through the therapies, some kind of information must be freely flowing between the L- and R-brain. The most logical place where this could happen is in the corpus callosum.
|
But if we want to stop healthy and normal people from ever reaching this abnormal "imbalanced" state, then we have to let people decide how and what they need to do to solve a particular problem. Or at least give them plenty of alternatives to work out how a problem can be solved with the help of accessible and high quality education programs and other resources.
Once a choice has been made, it is then up to society to support the people well in achieving the goals set before them. If people are to properly shine in society, they must be properly supported. They must be given the opportunity to achieve great things for everyone and not just for themselves.
As the Open Mind: Journal of the Tasmanian Association for Mental Health, Volume 10, Summer 1994, stated on page 14:
'The loudest and clearest messages in the Burdekin Report from people who have experienced mental illness were:
- a desperate need for understanding;
- the need to be able to speak openly and to be heard;
- the longing for acceptance by others of the mystery and the unpredictability of their illness, without constantly having to defend and explain; and
- the desire to be equal with others and to have basic human rights respected.'
Mentally-ill patients are generally more prone to continual self-analysis than the average person. While self-analysis may be a noble activity when problem-solving, it must be remembered that it is unhealthy to continually question everything, especially yourself. Only when we need to (ie. it affects our survival), do we question certain things. But at other times, we cannot explain and answer everything. We cannot measure everything. We have to accept the way things are now because there will always be a mystery associated with ourselves and everything around us. To question, means to change. But not to question anything and just accept the mystery that is us and the universe means no change at all. (13)
In the end, we must take a balance. And if we have to change, do it in the most positive and creative way possible.
|
Who is responsible for the problem of mental illness?
Some psychologists believe certain groups of people in society are playing a more significant role in the development of mental illness.
Of particular concern in this regard are the business entrepreneurs, whose job it is to make money by getting staff to be competitive, to adapt to any kind of continuous change, and to use any seemingly reasonable (or unreasonable) method to sell products and services to the masses as well as convince customers to buy them as if they were a need through effective marketing and promotion.
For example, the tactics used by certain banks in this now unregulated industry to make their multi-billions of dollars for shareholders is starting to become more apparent with the death of a bank employee in New Zealand. According to the article titled Bank defends itself over employee's suicide published in The Canberra Times on 11 May 2002, page 13, an ANZ employee and bank manager of the ANZ branch in Christchurch became increasingly depressed and committed suicide because he could not cope with the regular weekly and steep sales targets. For further details about this case, click here.
Another group of people believed to be contributing to the problem of mental illness are those wanting to create large families because they are reducing the amount of support and resources for other equally important people who are already alive today and are entitled to such support and resources. These are usually the L-brain types who love to communicate and be with others, rather than be on their own or to think more globally and understand how their actions may affect many things, including the survival of other human beings.
And there is also another group of people we call the educators, the change experts and other "commercialised" teachers whose job it is to get people to pay for courses and to get them through the learning process as quickly as possible, often without adequate resources and support. As reporter Ann Whyte of The Australian wrote in an article entitled, Short courses the quick way to learn a good living: Courses, promotions and big dollars are inextricably linked today:
'Learning a living -- or learning as a way to increase career opportunities and rewards -- has gripped the marketplace. And it is happening through formal and informal study, either face-to-face or online.
'The first essential is to know how to learn quickly and constantly as the requirements within jobs change.' (14)
This effort to force people to learn quickly and often superficially just to get them to understand the ropes of the marketplace instead of solid intellectual development through long-term and careful education is driven by more and more business-thinking professionals infiltrating the universities. As Dr Clive Hamilton, executive director of the Australia Institute, said:
'Changes to the university system are eroding Australia's already fragile culture of intellectual achievement. With the emphasis on career training and market outcomes over intellectual development, are we in danger of producing a generation of highly educated fools?' (15)
But the responsibility for mental illness lies with everyone. Society has a moral obligation to look after all its citizens, just as much as the individuals composing that society.
This moral obligation must extend to the business community whose attitude has been for a long time one of subtle pressure and expectation (combined with the threat of job loss) to get everyone to perform mostly uncreative (ie. R-brain deprived) problem-solving activities under increasingly tighter constraints, using less resources, less time and longer hours, and to adapt to any new technological changes almost at the stroke of a pen. When combined with the unstable nature of employment (ie. the move towards short-term, shift and contract work) and the effort to get everyone to buy everything as if we all need it, the importance of greater social responsibility in the business community becomes even more paramount.
As Richard Tan, head of IT services at Deakin University, said:
'When there are tough economic and time pressures, people's main priority is to do their job and there's no time to "dream" about the future. You need to [creatively] paint a picture of the future in two or three years time [and not just do things on a day-by-day basis if we are to properly solve problems].' (16)
Businesspeople have just as much social responsibilities to others as everyone else. Unfortunately, this social responsibility is not usually apparent when we hear people like Mr Dwight King, Telstra's head of IT, say:
'I believe a competitive environment delivers the best value for the consumer.' (17)
The problem with this attitude is that when business professionals compete too much for the sake of the bottom-line (ie. build up profits), they quickly forget the difference between needs and wants. Once business professionals blur the boundary between needs and wants through excessive competition and extreme profit mentality, it becomes more and more difficult for these people to discern how much problem-solving is considered reasonable and adequate.
This is a particularly common problem among the giants of the business world. Large businesses are more likely to mix up the terms needs and wants when selling products and services. When this happens, certain big businesses will tend to provide or show only one set of fancy and/or expensive services that everyone has to pay. Even the battler who receives a miserly pension from the government will have to pay, and pay hard, if he/she needs the service.
Otherwise you have to be on the inside to be aware of a basic service or product (if it exists) and then when you ask for it, you have got to be persistent until big businesses eventually give in to what you need.
But when businesses properly learn the difference between needs and wants, will they openly and happily provide two main types of services: (i) the basic level of service (which should be free); and (ii) a more advanced level of service for people who may want it for a nominal fee. To do this requires a certain level of social responsibility.
To improve the situation, business professionals must ask themselves what is more important - people or money? If business professionals choose both as part of a more complete and balanced answer and not just money, then they have to show their support in a cooperative and stable manner, and not just in a competitive and changing manner when making money. This means giving adequate time, creativity and other resources for people to make decisions, let them choose what they need, and to solve problems in the best way possible.
And if the resources are simply not there, then why not let the people decide where and how to work in order to achieve realistic goals? As Mr Dwight King of Telstra's IT section said: 'We keep staff happy by having an environment where people want to work.' (18)
If business professionals can balance their competitive spirit with a stronger sense of cooperation, stability and a modest (not excessive) gain in profit by ensuring people are given the time, creativity and other resources to do the right thing, they will repay the businesses and eventually society many times over with their gifts of quality knowledge, products, experience, fun and hard work as problems get solved properly and in a balanced way.
As journalist Nick Gentle wrote in an article entitled, Onus on business approach, published on page 8 of The Canberra Times dated 8 April 2000:
'Progressive companies needed to examine a "triple bottom line" if they wished to be seen as good corporate citizens, according to a BP executive.
'BP Australia's director of external affairs, Ian Leidner, said global companies were needing to look not only at the financial aspects of their business but at their environmental and social responsibilities.'
As one progressive company wrote on page B3 of the employment section of The Canberra Times dated 15 April 2000:
'We understand that for people to achieve their best they must have the autonomy to choose the working environment and conditions most suitable to them. With the freedom and flexibility to reach their goals without forgetting they have a life. At Acumen Alliance we prefer people to "robots".'
A similar "triple-bottom line" approach is also taken by the maverick business entrepreneur Ricardo Semler, considered by most observers as one of the world's best bosses running one of Brazil's most successful companies, Semco Group. Instead of the iron-fisted management style that saw the family engineering firm Semco on the verge of economic collapse many years ago, Mr Semler Jr. realised the company had to change or perish.
 His first move was to remove the old "militaristic" hierarchical management style that was strangling employees in becoming the best they can be. He did it by sacking 60 per cent of the company's managers. After a serious illness, Mr Semler threw the rule book out the window, began educating employees on how to run the company such as understanding the finance books, allowed factory workers to interview prospective managers and more.
Then he allowed workers to decide the hours they wanted to work and when (bearing in mind that the more they worked, the higher the profits and the more they could earn) so as not to affect their personal and family life. If workers wanted to work the hours at night or spend extra hours in one day so as to take a day off later, then so be it.
On this simple yet drastic change towards a more participative and self-managed democratic management style he successfully made his company grow in profits from A$40 million per year to a phenomenal A$1 billion per year and rising in 25 years.
Today, Mr Semler advocates a triple-bottom line in business and encourages other businesses to do the same. He believes people and the planet should work side-by-side with profit.
|
We all have a social responsibility for one another. Life is more than just doing a job, making as much profit as possible, and that's it. It also involves being socially and environmentally responsible for everything that we do.
As time passes, society is increasingly expecting everyone to support, train and help everyone else in the best way possible so that we can all make the right decisions and reach our goals for the good of society. Otherwise the cost to society for not providing the support will be so great, perhaps even insurmountable, that eventually people will suffer, then fight for their survival, and finally die.
In a newspaper article entitled, Victorian finding on care alarms teachers, published in The Canberra Times dated 17 June 2000:
'MELBOURNE: Teachers are alarmed at a jury verdict awarding nearly $500,000 to a teenage girl after finding her primary school failed to act on warning signs she was being sexually abused.
'Australian Education Union spokeswoman Mary Bluett said teachers felt "under siege" as parents and the wider community expected them to take on a welfare and parenting role, as well as teaching.
'...Ms Bluett said teachers must have proper training if they were expected to play a role in detecting sexual abuse.
'"Society is increasingly expecting teachers to be educators, to be welfare support, to be parents.
'"It is an area where teachers are feeling a bit under siege in terms of community expectations of their job and their role.
'"So we must have support and we must know that when they report in these sorts of situations that they are going to be supported by the community services system, but also by their school and by the state."
'The case was a wake-up call for government.
'It should say, "support your teachers, provide the training and provide the support services to deal with it", Ms Bluett said.' (19)
If, for any reason, we do not show our responsibility to others, then, being so imbalanced in our approach to problem-solving as educationalists and psychologists have noted in the current western education system and in the business world, will continue to place unnecessarily and dangerously high expectations on others to think, behave and perform in the same way as our L-brain society believes they should. And that in itself is almost certainly the cause for so much stress among a growing number of individuals in society who are now probably already seeing the imbalances in society's approach to problem-solving.
But there's too many people in the world to support. What can I do to help?
But some people may argue, especially the government and business professionals, that it is impossible to support so many people today. How can we give everyone the necessities of life if society is already trying to cut-back on its own support and resources?
Well, if the support and resources are so low and/or so expensive that we cannot meet the needs (not the wants!) of everyone, then we must ask ourselves, "Isn't it time we all think differently and start learning to control our population levels?"
Business professionals, however, would shriek at the thought of population control. For them, more people means more customers (20), and that equates to bigger profits. For example, the council of Adelaide in Australia are now encouraging more people, especially young high-income professionals, to move into the centre of the cities to help economically rejuvenate the area and give the council more money by asking the people to pay high council rates.
Unfortunately for people in the business world, the time has also come to start reevaluating their own aim in life in the 21st century and beyond.
Are business professionals there to be self-sustainable and to ensure their own existence by learning to have just enough profit? Or are they designed to grow and expand as rapidly as possible in a constantly changing manner in an attempt to globalise the world market, taking whatever they can from others and the environment, without limit or consideration of the social and environmental implications of this open-ended approach, and all for the sake of profit?
Revolutions in human history are not unusual. As Donald Kennedy, President Emeritus of Standard University, has noted:
'I was struck by what a remarkable time 1890 must have been for the new institutions that were being founded and for the colleges that suddenly found themselves being turned into universities. But I also thought - and I beilieve it more strongly now - that 100 years later we may be experiencing the beginning of another revolution.' (21)
The real question we should be asking is, "Who is benefiting from all of these revolutions - the profit-oriented individuals or the average socially-conscious person on the street?"
Perhaps we need one more revolution in the 21st century to set the record straight once and for all. Why not have a social (and "green") revolution to show the importance of the ordinary citizens on the street (and our natural environment) in solving all world problems in a balanced way?
In other words, why not everyone tell all the governments and businesses of the world the importance of ensuring our environment is well-protected and providing all the foods we need at little to no cost at all?
Then give people other fundamental needs like a roof over their heads. Finally, let people solve all the remaining problems in their own way as a form of contribution to society, rather than be dictated by businesses and the governments on what to do in such unnaturally short time frames on a regular basis. And only then, perhaps we may consider the possibility of creating other things in society which we may all have a chance to benefit.
Instead of focussing all the time on businesses and government ideas of constantly generating excessive profits and creating jobs through the L-brain approach as their solution to world problems, let the people create their own form of employment for the benefit of the global community.
|
If businesses, society and the humble individual, refuses to face up to their own responsibilities on this issue of mental illness or any other problem, to reevaluate all their fundamental beliefs, and so continue with the view that "time is money" and profit is the overriding principle of modern society and that verbal communication and technology is the only way to solve problems, then the solution to any problem, whether it is to do with mental illness or whatever, especially a quality solution, will not come, no matter how much money is spent, how much talking is done, or how many people are employed to tackle the problem.
All the money in the world will not solve mental illness or help people to be happy. We only have to look at the middle-class people who are described as asset rich but are cash poor and who feel they are doing it tough. Do these people feel really happy?
In his essay, What's left? The Death of Social Democracy, the Australian Institute's Clive Hamilton, said in reference to the middle-class battlers:
'More so than in previous eras, we have become accustomed to judging over living standards with reference to the lifestyles around us, and increasingly, those presented to us by advertisers and television producers.
'Yet when people reach the financial goals they have set for themselves, they feel no happier. Instead of wondering whether the yearning for more money is the problem, they raise the amount of money they believe they need to satisfy their desires. This is a vicious circle.' (Pryor, Lisa. Just for thrills, do it on the cheap for a change: The Sydney Morning Herald. 8-9 April 2006, p.40.)
Wealthy individuals have a mutual obligation (and a health benefit to themselves by feeling more happier and mentally healthier) to the rest of society to help everyone, and not just the poor who need to be given the chance to do the right thing by everyone else by doing something worthwhile for society. As Mr Bob Steege of Charnwood wrote to the editor of The Canberra Times on 19 August 2000:
'The Federal Coalition Government's weary mantra of "mutual obligation" as a justification of the continued bashing of the bottom end of town - now to be advanced through yet more of the welfare sector - would be more credible if the same principle were applied to the top end.
'The tax policy, over which they are still preening themselves, has done absolutely nothing to prevent the wealthy from sheltering behind corporate structures and trusts to avoid paying their fair share. The top end surely has a mutual obligation.' (22)
|
And when we cannot face up to our social responsibilities by solving problems in a balanced way, we slowly, but surely become increasingly more mentally-ill in the L-brain kind of way because we are prepared to stick to our own so-called "rational" and narrow-minded beliefs of how things should be solved in the old traditional way. This form of mental illness of the L-brain kind is clearly manifested in society through the upwardly spiralling costs of housing more and more people in mental institutions (and prisons), in the increasing numbers of young people ending up on the streets and taking drugs or committing suicide, and in the increasing numbers of advertisements on television and radio trying to convince young people to join the Armed forces as the only way out of the problem (23). And this does not include the cost of developing better security systems to deal with the increasing crime (24), and in hiring individuals trained in law enforcement and the legal system to help reinforce the supposedly rational beliefs of L-brain people (25), and all because we cannot make the effort to understand how to support our citizens properly and how to reevaluate our own beliefs underpinning the structure of modern society head on with a mature and balanced mind.
Should we continue to carry on with this one-sided L-brain approach of western society, it will inevitably result in the downfall of the human race through such simple, but effective means as war, famine and/or disease (if it isn't to build enough prisons, mental institutions and military camps to lock up people who may have trouble accepting the way the current L-brain "westernised" system works).
Our modern western society with its belief in high profits and strong L-brain thinking can be considered a kind of giant religious cult. The religion being taught by the religious leaders we call businesspeople, politicians and other well-supported individuals is one of continuous, quick and unrelentless change, extensive and spontaneous communication with little thinking behind it, developing lots of complicated technology, and other L-brain activities because certain people need to make lots of money, not to mention the high population levels where everyone wants products and services from time to time. We support these people through our labour, money and time in order to maintain a life that includes owning a home and enjoying those things our L-brain society has to offer.
However, to experience true freedom and real human progress and purpose, you have to create your own personal religion, and one that is more balanced. Believe what you want to believe, be prepared to learn, and change only if there is a chance your personal religion is inaccurate or can hurt others (because the true religion we must work towards is one we have yet to grapple in our minds, the one that is accurate and more loving). And most importantly, help all living things to achieve something great and wonderful for everyone in their own unique ways.
That is all you ever have to do to be a more balanced, free and happy individual for the rest of your life.
|
We need to look at ourselves very carefully indeed. If we are to solve a major problem like mental illness, we need to know precisely how we are doing things today and what we can do better in the future. And once we know what to do with great clarity and a balanced mind, only then will we have a chance to change our beliefs and all of society for the better.
And if that can be done, not only will we become sufficiently balanced - and thus be technically defined as "normal" people - but we will have truly attained the utopia of a society we all dream of. (26)
