Little excursus in psychiatry versus wholesomeness


Perhaps a millennia-old tradition of witches, shamans, healers, sadhus, gurus, mystics, wise men, enlightened ones, etc., understands exceptional states of consciousness/perception/being better than a mere 100-year-old tradition of psychiatrists?

Every feeling comes with a variation in neurotransmitters and hormones, and psyche docs also say that every human has a different nature of feelings/so neurotransmitter-households etc.! Where does one see an illness then?

Extraordinary otherworld-perceptions and thoughts can also be induced through „drugs“ and other means, like meditation etc…., so what does that to the natural/normal state of consciousness mean?

What is wrong? What is right? What is disease and what not? According to new studies (s.b.), everything should be viewed in a context that adds to the help or hinderance view of a state of being in a special context.
E.g. a mentally disabled person that showed a depressed person that there’s still something worth living for, is that sick or healing?
Or another example of unified karma, Adolf Hitler starting WWII, that lead to the atomic bomb, that led to the creation of ARPA-Net, that led to the Internet and so to humans having access to massive amounts of info and non-info, and the possibility of worldwide discussion and a mutual fecundation of minds, consciousnesses and “souls”, resulting in a maybe worldwide revolution, or maybe an evolvement of humankind, stepping the ladder of evolution, or some kind of massive enlightenment of humankind.

Yeah, the antipsychiatry movement is trying to help but on a different level than the established western biological medicinal psychiatry, as in we don’t see our condition as a sickness but as a state of being that can be integrated in a wholesome way in our reality/everyday life.

It depends from where you look at it if you look from a saddhus/shamans perspective then you have altered states of consciousness when you look from psychiatrists view, you have a sickness, but who says that some possible biological markers are either the source or maybe are the outcome of such states?

AND who determines the power of interpretation of such?
The anthropocentric reductionist view of atheistic science, who gave such power to themselves, or the wholesome view of devine naturalistic spiritual view of masters, which got such power from the Most High (refer to spiritualized science page)?

Schreiben Sie einen Kommentar

Trage deine Daten unten ein oder klicke ein Icon um dich einzuloggen:

Du kommentierst mit Deinem Abmelden /  Wechseln )

Google Foto

Du kommentierst mit Deinem Google-Konto. Abmelden /  Wechseln )


Du kommentierst mit Deinem Twitter-Konto. Abmelden /  Wechseln )


Du kommentierst mit Deinem Facebook-Konto. Abmelden /  Wechseln )

Verbinde mit %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.