Since anomie has been brought to the table

[Paul Mackin]

On 1/8/2012 2:02 PM, Keith Davis wrote:
> Very interesting thread. Thanks Alice. Agreed, we have this violent 
> streak. Is it more pronounced in some, or simply less under control? 
> Who decides what level is socially acceptable? It's a difficult 
> question to answer. Democracy seemed like the best idea so far, and 
> still does, in many ways, but how do we make it work for everyone? 
> Again, difficult. So many different cultures, levels of intelligence, 
> moral awareness, belief systems, etc. So many different people living 
> in increasingly compressed spaces.
>
> As far as suicide, we know so much about human psychology, sociology, 
> but I still don't think we really completely understand what drives us.

One fairly hot topic in psychology is the tendency to greatly extend the 
domain of "mental disorder" in such a way as to increasingly include 
many behaviors and conditions that are considered socially and humanly 
undesirable but beyond the control of the perpetrators. And, if we can 
define it, we can treat it, often with expensive 
medications--anti-psychotics, anti-depressants, and the like. The need 
for drugs in preventing suicide is much a part of the discussion.  I'm 
not saying there is anything necessarily wrong with any of this.  
However some circumstantial evidence must make us sometimes wonder.

In a review of recent books on the subject in a recent New York Review, 
Marcia Angell says:

"What is going on here? Is the prevalence of mental illness really that 
high and still climbing? Particularly if these disorders are 
biologically determined and not a result of environmental influences, is 
it plausible to suppose that such an increase is real? Or are we 
learning to recognize and diagnose mental disorders that were always 
there? On the other hand, are we simply expanding the criteria for 
mental illness so that nearly everyone has one? And what about the drugs 
that are now the mainstay of treatment? Do they work? If they do, 
shouldn't we expect the prevalence of mental illness to be declining, 
not rising?"

I don't claim to know much about the subject but thought I'd toss 
something into the discussion anyway.

P


>
> There's a lot in this thread to think about.
>
> anomie-"an acute disjunction between the cultural norms and goals and 
> the socially structured capacities of the members of the group to act 
> in accord with them". How big is the group? Our neighborhood, state, 
> church, school, country? Complicated issues.
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 9:35 AM, Kai Frederik Lorentzen 
> <lorentzen at hotmail.de <mailto:lorentzen at hotmail.de>> wrote:
>
>
>     Don't know about your specific type of think tank, but of course
>     there's Robert K. Merton, one of the most important sociologists
>     of the 20th century, who referred to Durkheim's concept of anomie
>     and transfered it to his theory of deviance (still used in today's
>     criminology) in 1938. Merton defines anomie as "an acute
>     disjunction between the cultural norms and goals and the socially
>     structured capacities of the members of the group to act in accord
>     with them". So there is no continuity between cultural goals and
>     the required means. At least not when you stay with legitimate and
>     legal means. So some - think Pacino in Scarface - become criminals
>     to fulfill their American Dream --
>
>
>
>     On 07.01.2012 16:35, Paul Mackin wrote:
>
>
>         The staff sociologist at the think tank i was at used to use
>         the word to described the psychological state of workers
>         brought about by the meaninglessness of industrial work.
>
>         Lack of rule was extended to mean lack of meaning.
>
>         He quoted Durkheim sometimes.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> www.innergroovemusic.com <http://www.innergroovemusic.com>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20120108/2982490d/attachment.html>