Reddit reviews Madness and Civilization: A History of Insanity in the Age of Reason

As for postmodernism I'll reiterate what I was saying in the other tread : if you take the principle of charity seriously you shouldn't argue about postmodernism at all because it's not a real theory actually endorsed by any of the very diverse authors lumped together under this label.

This would be a great time for Scott to engage with these ideas by reviewing a Michel Foucault book, the guy whose ideas we're mostly talking about when we talk about postmodernism.

The perfect choice would be Madness and Civilization :

• It's a book about the history of psychiatry. It's relevant to what Scott does so it won't be a waste of time.
  
• It's clearly written. It's full of interesting historical anecdotes. It's a foundational book well respected by historians.
  
• It's a good illustration of the ideas of Foucault about the relationship between power and truth.
  
• More cynically, having read Foucault is a useful signalling device that'll make you look sophisticated and erudite. As a symbolic capital investment it's worth it.

Hey. Sorry for your loss. Here's an unordered list of things I'd like to hear about:

• When bipolar disorder is well managed we have long periods of living pretty run-of-the-mill lives. It does take effort to manage, so I think a good understanding of spoon theory is important for people who don't have bipolar disorder.
  
  
• While it's our responsibility to manage our symptoms, at a certain point we really can't help what we do, and it's not our fault. Our brains literally function differently.
  
  
• We are aware of how hard it can be for our loved ones.
  
  
• I think it would be really useful to cover the social model of disability. It's not something that gets talked about often, and it offers some real insight into why some people have hard lives.
  
  
• It's important to me for things like this to partner with (or something similar) someone who has bipolar disorder. Equity is important not just in terms of supporting the people who have bipolar disorder, but for your audience to get a holistic understanding of what's happening.
  
  
• A history of how mental illness is viewed and treated. I always recommend Madness and Civilization for this: https://www.amazon.com/Madness-Civilization-History-Insanity-Reason/dp/067972110X

This is a good start

and so is this!

This is, possibly surprisingly, good too.

If you're looking to jump right into a text and think you have a grip on the language, try Foucault's Madness and Civilization It's great and pretty easy to read.

Another good introduction (or at least, MY introduction to philosophy is Slavoj Zizek. He's pretty easy to read and understand, but makes ties to Lacan, Nietzsche, Heidegger, etc in a cohesive manner that makes you want to learn more. Of his work, I'd check out The Sublime Object of Ideology, The Parallax View or watch his movie! (Which is extraordinarily entertaining for how dense it is. He's also kind of amazing in a philosophical rock star kind of way.)

Hope that gets you started!

You don't have to take my word for it, but I, a rando on the internet, wasn't the first one to make that assertion, if you'd like to read 300 pages of Foucault explaining that theory further instead.

> The only value of living in a democracy comes from the fact that the people can change the way the state acts, and in our current system that is near impossible.

Ok, well what if the voters want more of the same? If the function of democracy is to change the way the state acts, then democracy is going against the will of the people.

> I genuinely think that you are far more deluded than the person you originally responded to.

Well, thanks. Is this really necessary, it's just abusive. I bet you wouldn't be happy about abusive people having a say in governance.

> You think that even if nobody has any real say in how the government works, everything will just turn out fine anyway.

I didn't say or mean that. I was merely alluding to the fact that democracy like all non-utopian political systems has its issues.

> You don't give any value to the idea of personal agency in terms of state governance

What does this even mean?

> and frankly you're just a bit mental.

Cool, I'll call up my GP and let them know /u/TheresanotherJoswell thinks so. Seriously though you should give this a read through before you start calling people mental.

You're far better off reading these books than wasting time with Peterson. Peterson's works are a soothing balm, these men sought after absolute truths -

https://www.amazon.com/Meditations-Thrift-Editions-Marcus-Aurelius/dp/048629823X

https://www.amazon.com/Critique-Pure-Reason-Penguin-Classics/dp/0140447474/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1527773842&sr=1-1&keywords=kant

https://www.amazon.com/Madness-Civilization-History-Insanity-Reason/dp/067972110X/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1527773870&sr=1-4&keywords=foucault&dpID=41FzjCBzJJL&preST=_SY291_BO1,204,203,200_QL40_&dpSrc=srch

https://www.amazon.com/Nicomachean-Ethics-Aristotle/dp/0872204642/ref=sr_1_6?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1527773951&sr=1-6&keywords=aristotle&dpID=31b2stlDDgL&preST=_SY291_BO1,204,203,200_QL40_&dpSrc=srch

https://www.amazon.com/Republic-Dover-Thrift-Editions-ebook/dp/B00A73FJ10/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1527774019&sr=1-4&keywords=aristotle+the+republic&dpID=51dfJWGupmL&preST=_SY445_QL70_&dpSrc=srch