Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site umcp-cs.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!godot!harvard!seismo!umcp-cs!mangoe From: mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate) Newsgroups: net.flame Subject: Re: Neurosis and Sin Message-ID: <1661@umcp-cs.UUCP> Date: Thu, 6-Dec-84 17:52:02 EST Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.1661 Posted: Thu Dec 6 17:52:02 1984 Date-Received: Sat, 8-Dec-84 06:57:27 EST References: <700@noscvax.UUCP> Reply-To: mangoe@maryland.UUCP (Charley Wingate) Distribution: na Organization: U of Maryland, Computer Science Dept., College Park, MD Lines: 23 In article <700@noscvax.UUCP> jmichael@noscvax.UUCP (James A. Michael) writes: >I never equated "neurosis" with "the common cold." If somebody >can believe that "... neurosis is a result of sin," then, using >the same arcane logic, he/she could conclude that any physical >or mental disorder also follows from sin. I don't agree with this, >but if this is "juvenile," then I'm guilty. Charley Wingate also >quotes Carl Jung as, "Neurosis is almost always a substitute for >legitimate suffering," and responds, "Sounds like sin to me." >Again, I don't agree with this difinition of sin, and doubt that >Jung would, also. I've always mistrusted the term "disease" as applied to mental disorders. Something like schitzophrenia, which has established physical causes and treatments, doesn't bother me, but I think the evidence is insufficient to put neurosis in the same category as the cold. A large part of the psychiatric community (for instance, see M. Scott Peck) believes that neurosis and character disorder are products of the patient's thought, rather than externally caused. I have problems with theories which remove personal responsibility from the system, and this is precisely the effect of equating neurosis with "any physical disorder". Charley Wingate umcp-cs!mangoe