My name is Jeffrey Riley and I am bipolar. I was first diagnosed in 2005 when I was 22 years old. I had a conservative upbringing and neither my family nor I were prepared for my diagnosis. From my graduation from HS all the way to the present day (age 41) , I have struggled with the illness mightily at times. Thankfully, for the last six or seven years, with the help of medication, some wonderful mental health professionals, and my own hard work, I have achieved a relatively stable level of competence and clarity of mind. I am writing a fiction book chronicling the tales of four mentally ill young people (ages 15-20), namely their stays in a mental health clinic, what they did to get there, and the things out of their control (parents, symptoms, etc) that contributed to the breakdowns that put them in there. The book draws on some of my own personal stories along with various contrivances. The story also includes narratives of some of the types of mental health professionals that work in these clinics. That said, I have experience in mental health clinics, run-ins with police when I've been my most symptomatic and a laundry list of medications I've taken over the years. I also have learned much about the symptoms of bipolar disorder from research (I'm an amateur psychologist.) Bipolar disorder and those that suffer from it are issues that are very close to my heart. I have a college degree and a love of philosophy (though I'm not an expert) and I want to write essays from my perspective in this blog about how the views of certain classical philosophers apply to those people today that have bipolar disorder (including me.) I came to this conclusion when I was reading on the Greek classical philosopher Epicurus and I couldn't help thinking about how his views on what comprises a good life relate to those with bipolar (and other mental illnesses for that matter.) I want to help those with bipolar (as well as making my own opinions known), and I think posting my insights in a blog will be fun and possibly helpful.
I want to write on comprehensive philosophical subjects including the best lifestyle for bipolar people, whether it be the moderate and ascetic life freeing human beings from pain that Epicurus preaches, to the relative disconnection from society and its perceived evils that Cynics preached to the integration with indifference of the Sceptics to the attention to duty and the spirit of responsibility of groups like the Stoics. I will also comment on Pre-Socratics along with the 'Big Three" of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle where their views are applicable to bipolar people. My main goal? To write on the best possible way for bipolar people to live, contribute to society or achieve mental and emotional peace (or both.) What is possible for the bipolar sufferer? What is realistic? What is preferred? What if a bipolar sufferer chooses to forego all the above questions and perspectives to achieve a different way of facing society and living their lives? These are the questions (and many others) that I want to comment on and I hope I can create an interesting and insightful dialectic to anyone who happens to read it. After the Greeks, I'll probably comment on the Existential philosophers (my favorite group) and other more modern minds. I will also attempt to comment on how bipolar people and views of political philosophy intersect though it isn't my main goal. In my view, people with mental illnesses are not welcome by the general public in political matters so I don't want to write endlessly on a subject that I feel largely doesn't apply to the bipolar. ALL of that said, I'll be posting some comments soon. I'm a huge fan of the opinions of Epicurus; I also like the Cynics and Sceptics so I'll be starting with those schools of thought. I hope that anyone who reads my blog will find it entertaining, stimulating and thought provoking. My E-mail address is below if anyone wants to contact me for whatever reason.
wwwocls@yahoo.com
I'm new to blogs and I don't know my way around yet so there are several features I'll need to learn (such as if someone can just message me through the blog or not.) All comments relative to bipolar disorder and/or it's relation to philosophy are welcome. If you are a person with bipolar disorder and you would like to chat with me about it, excluding philosophy, you are more than welcome. As I've written above, I have a lot of experience with the ups and down of the illness and will help if I can.
Friday, June 20, 2014
Bipolar Disorder and the Cynics
Note: Most of the source material for my post come from "A History of Western Philosophy" by the great Bertrand Russell. Other source material may come from Wikipedia or other sources. My information on the Cynics comes from that section of Russell's work.
Note II: I am long winded so I hope the reader will approach my writings with forbearance. I also mix tenses too often so bear with me there, too, please.
Instead of starting with Epicurus, I'm going to start with the Cynics. As Russell writes in this lead in, different time periods and different social situations produce different perspectives into which philosophies are channeled. The Greek city state of Athens had, due to it and the other Greek city state's military victories over the Persians, enjoyed nearly a hundred years of prosperity and power. During this period, "Pre-Cynics" Plato and Aristotle wrote extensively on politics and their ideal of the perfect, just, forms of government based on Plato's ideals of a moral utopia and Aristotle based on his form of perfect logic. That said, Plato and Aristotle are massive individual subjects worthy of several enormous posts and their philosophies are too complex for me to write on at the moment (and would take a ton of study beyond the few basics I know.) I mention them here because they wrote on politics at a time when Athens lost the Peloponnesian War to Sparta and Athenian power would never be the same. Plato and Aristotle are more products of this waning power and have what would be considered largely optimistic world views of the proper form of society and government. Another major philosophical school, what would become known as the Cynics, went in the other direction, creating a profoundly pessimistic philosophy as pertained to society and whatever form of government happened to be in charge of it at the moment (in this case, "society" meaning the fading power of the Greek city state under the increasing power dominance by the "barbarian" Greeks, the Macedonians.)
The first Cynic (before the term was used) was Antisthenes, a follower of Socrates. Antisthenes got the ball rolling for Cynic thought by laying a foundation. In his view, the only proper life was one of simple goodness, which could be attained by the simple man. He grew to become disillusioned with high minded, evolved philosophical thought and began to preach what many would consider a more lowly existence. This has elements of the ideas of the much later Transcendentalist Americans. Go back to nature, forego materialism and work on the problem of personal happiness and social morality. It is the philosophy of a defeated people and can be compared to the later realities of agrarian Europe after the Western Roman Empire fell. Advance Roman civilization declined in the hands of barbarian conquerers and the citizenry of what would become Europe de-evolved into much more simple farmers. However, in this instance, such a change in societal behavior occurred due to the ignorance of the people that flooded in after Rome fell. Educated men like Antisthenes (and, later, men like Thoreau) went in on purpose but make no mistake: They were complex men who believed in an easier way of living, not simple men whom daily existence would have become a hassle whether it was simple or not. For Antisthenes, that meant no government, no major materialistic pursuits, no organizations like religion, no private property and no luxury amongst other things. He was an unrealistic purist in this way but put action to the belief that humans are best off when there are as few societal impairments as possible.
The greatest Cynic was Diogenes. He (whether on purpose or not) created the name "Cynic" by his wanting to live life like a dog (as he said.) "Canine" means Cynics in Latin.) Diogenes was another moralist who believed that life is best lived if it is lived simply with as few social institutions and obligations as possible. His philosophy was very Buddhist in application. Freedom from desire, including not just social institutions and materialistic goods but from basics like food and shelter, was the right path, the moral way to go. Diogenes' way can be summed up best by the story of when Alexander the Great came to visit Diogenes when he was sunning himself in Corinth. The most powerful man in the world asked Diogenes is he needed anything. "Yes," Diogenes said. "I need you to get out of my light."
Finally, to how all of this applies to those with bipolar disorder such as myself. Cynicism was very much a minority philosophy and so is the community of bipolar sufferers. Cynics eschewed society as a source of moral corruption and tried to live apart from it. Bipolar sufferers often see themselves as strangers with their fellow humans, a group long persecuted, and often strive to live apart from the majority for the same reasons as Cynics, namely that life would be happier if its lived apart from the majority. I have felt all of these things before and continue to, more or less intensely, on a frequent basis. Like the Cynics, many bipolar people are pessimists. Why try to enter a society in which we're doomed to failure? I feel doomed to failure because I can't function properly in a high functioning world. If I can't keep up, shouldn't I detach and try to find happiness away from the high functioning? What good would it do me, a bipolar sufferer, to bang my head against the brick wall of people that I'm just not like? I'm happier when I act as an individual pursuing individual goals of personal welfare and morality that have nothing to do with how other people see things. In this way, me as a bipolar person couldn't be more like a Cynic in the desire to be happy apart from what we consider society as bipolar people are a distinct minority in a majority based environment.
The criticism of the detachment of a bipolar person from society is that it's just not practical. When I say detachment, I don't mean a personality disorder like Avoidant or Schizoid. I mean the conscious decision to separate in the pursuit of happiness. That said, we just don't live in the era when a frontiersman and a wagon train could head west for farms and greener pastures. Society is more interconnected than ever and detachment can offer little relief from trouble because we would still be stuck in a mechanized, black top world whether we try to get away from it or not (except for people who own rich farm land in Montana. They can get away) As far as food and other means of support, begging used to be a much more noble way of living. Jesus and Diogenes were beggars who taught on street corners and Socrates was supported by his wife. Begging in a materialistic culture is damned, pure and simple, and carries an enormous stigma. That's a big problem with Cynicism and a huge problem for those with bipolar disorder, the vast majority of whom are not philosophers who want to beg and teach on street corners but people who want to work and function happily with others but are often handicapped to do so. I have many days when I can barely function with my illness and I'm posting in blogs and trying to write a book to find my place in the world. If I went into the wood to get "back to nature," I stand as good a chance of survival as I do being socially integrated: About equal. The bipolar sufferer needs societal help. That means psychiatrists and medications. Yes, bipolar people need them to function at all mentally or the bipolar sufferer will usually slip into psychosis or manic and depressive episodes at the first hint of major stress. I need society. I need, no, have to have good people in the mental health profession to help me or I'll go insane. I think that Cynicism can be practiced from time to time and we all do so when we go to a nature park or a church or meditate in our quiet time. As a perpetual philosophy, it's a detachment from real world troubles which offer no solutions to the life problems of a bipolar person. In that way, Cynicism, though an attractive ideology for those bipolar people who do not choose to go to doctors and take their medicine, is impractical for those seeking relief because that can only be attainted through cooperation with society.
Note II: I am long winded so I hope the reader will approach my writings with forbearance. I also mix tenses too often so bear with me there, too, please.
Instead of starting with Epicurus, I'm going to start with the Cynics. As Russell writes in this lead in, different time periods and different social situations produce different perspectives into which philosophies are channeled. The Greek city state of Athens had, due to it and the other Greek city state's military victories over the Persians, enjoyed nearly a hundred years of prosperity and power. During this period, "Pre-Cynics" Plato and Aristotle wrote extensively on politics and their ideal of the perfect, just, forms of government based on Plato's ideals of a moral utopia and Aristotle based on his form of perfect logic. That said, Plato and Aristotle are massive individual subjects worthy of several enormous posts and their philosophies are too complex for me to write on at the moment (and would take a ton of study beyond the few basics I know.) I mention them here because they wrote on politics at a time when Athens lost the Peloponnesian War to Sparta and Athenian power would never be the same. Plato and Aristotle are more products of this waning power and have what would be considered largely optimistic world views of the proper form of society and government. Another major philosophical school, what would become known as the Cynics, went in the other direction, creating a profoundly pessimistic philosophy as pertained to society and whatever form of government happened to be in charge of it at the moment (in this case, "society" meaning the fading power of the Greek city state under the increasing power dominance by the "barbarian" Greeks, the Macedonians.)
The first Cynic (before the term was used) was Antisthenes, a follower of Socrates. Antisthenes got the ball rolling for Cynic thought by laying a foundation. In his view, the only proper life was one of simple goodness, which could be attained by the simple man. He grew to become disillusioned with high minded, evolved philosophical thought and began to preach what many would consider a more lowly existence. This has elements of the ideas of the much later Transcendentalist Americans. Go back to nature, forego materialism and work on the problem of personal happiness and social morality. It is the philosophy of a defeated people and can be compared to the later realities of agrarian Europe after the Western Roman Empire fell. Advance Roman civilization declined in the hands of barbarian conquerers and the citizenry of what would become Europe de-evolved into much more simple farmers. However, in this instance, such a change in societal behavior occurred due to the ignorance of the people that flooded in after Rome fell. Educated men like Antisthenes (and, later, men like Thoreau) went in on purpose but make no mistake: They were complex men who believed in an easier way of living, not simple men whom daily existence would have become a hassle whether it was simple or not. For Antisthenes, that meant no government, no major materialistic pursuits, no organizations like religion, no private property and no luxury amongst other things. He was an unrealistic purist in this way but put action to the belief that humans are best off when there are as few societal impairments as possible.
The greatest Cynic was Diogenes. He (whether on purpose or not) created the name "Cynic" by his wanting to live life like a dog (as he said.) "Canine" means Cynics in Latin.) Diogenes was another moralist who believed that life is best lived if it is lived simply with as few social institutions and obligations as possible. His philosophy was very Buddhist in application. Freedom from desire, including not just social institutions and materialistic goods but from basics like food and shelter, was the right path, the moral way to go. Diogenes' way can be summed up best by the story of when Alexander the Great came to visit Diogenes when he was sunning himself in Corinth. The most powerful man in the world asked Diogenes is he needed anything. "Yes," Diogenes said. "I need you to get out of my light."
Finally, to how all of this applies to those with bipolar disorder such as myself. Cynicism was very much a minority philosophy and so is the community of bipolar sufferers. Cynics eschewed society as a source of moral corruption and tried to live apart from it. Bipolar sufferers often see themselves as strangers with their fellow humans, a group long persecuted, and often strive to live apart from the majority for the same reasons as Cynics, namely that life would be happier if its lived apart from the majority. I have felt all of these things before and continue to, more or less intensely, on a frequent basis. Like the Cynics, many bipolar people are pessimists. Why try to enter a society in which we're doomed to failure? I feel doomed to failure because I can't function properly in a high functioning world. If I can't keep up, shouldn't I detach and try to find happiness away from the high functioning? What good would it do me, a bipolar sufferer, to bang my head against the brick wall of people that I'm just not like? I'm happier when I act as an individual pursuing individual goals of personal welfare and morality that have nothing to do with how other people see things. In this way, me as a bipolar person couldn't be more like a Cynic in the desire to be happy apart from what we consider society as bipolar people are a distinct minority in a majority based environment.
The criticism of the detachment of a bipolar person from society is that it's just not practical. When I say detachment, I don't mean a personality disorder like Avoidant or Schizoid. I mean the conscious decision to separate in the pursuit of happiness. That said, we just don't live in the era when a frontiersman and a wagon train could head west for farms and greener pastures. Society is more interconnected than ever and detachment can offer little relief from trouble because we would still be stuck in a mechanized, black top world whether we try to get away from it or not (except for people who own rich farm land in Montana. They can get away) As far as food and other means of support, begging used to be a much more noble way of living. Jesus and Diogenes were beggars who taught on street corners and Socrates was supported by his wife. Begging in a materialistic culture is damned, pure and simple, and carries an enormous stigma. That's a big problem with Cynicism and a huge problem for those with bipolar disorder, the vast majority of whom are not philosophers who want to beg and teach on street corners but people who want to work and function happily with others but are often handicapped to do so. I have many days when I can barely function with my illness and I'm posting in blogs and trying to write a book to find my place in the world. If I went into the wood to get "back to nature," I stand as good a chance of survival as I do being socially integrated: About equal. The bipolar sufferer needs societal help. That means psychiatrists and medications. Yes, bipolar people need them to function at all mentally or the bipolar sufferer will usually slip into psychosis or manic and depressive episodes at the first hint of major stress. I need society. I need, no, have to have good people in the mental health profession to help me or I'll go insane. I think that Cynicism can be practiced from time to time and we all do so when we go to a nature park or a church or meditate in our quiet time. As a perpetual philosophy, it's a detachment from real world troubles which offer no solutions to the life problems of a bipolar person. In that way, Cynicism, though an attractive ideology for those bipolar people who do not choose to go to doctors and take their medicine, is impractical for those seeking relief because that can only be attainted through cooperation with society.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)