text stringlengths 0 9.69k |
|---|
Second harm of this fight, you will use far worse derogatory language to describe behaviors which are outside of norm. As I already said, we already need to label types of behaviors because we are humans and sometimes we're just bad, right. We just need to give explanation to stuff we do not understand. The alternative... |
<poi> |
This is deeply internally inconsistent. If it is the case, as you can see, there is a broad trend towards destigmatization in the status quo on either side due to increased awareness. Why on earth is the likely narrative? |
</poi> |
No, no, no. Exactly, These stigmatization happened because we started using these terms more popular, right? Exactly because now you're using these transfer more. This is one of the reasons which are driving the stigma down, right? I don't think it is, I don't think that these stigmatization happen prior to it. |
What are then the benefits of this? First of all, you have more knowledge about mental health in general, right? Exactly because people are using these terms more. You have many more articles which are basically explaining the drones, right? People engage in discussions about what the does gaslighting even mean like ve... |
Second of all, I do believe now you're more likely to recognize some of these conditions in yourself, right? Because as I said, bunch of the people are actually in the middle of these conditions, right? unless it portray only the most extreme versions. They're not likely to see that and to acknowledge the issue that th... |
Second of all, the alternative is far worse and third of all, we actually increase the understanding and funding for both these conditions. Please, don't be foresight, weshould call me aloof. At least let them call me someone who has ADHD, very proud of us. |
</LO> |
<MG> |
Let me respond to OOO first. Number one and I think this deals of closing opposition as well. Why you cannot opt out of this? The first thing I want to point out is, if individuals who are mentally ill are able to opt out of this narrative on either side, it significantly undercuts all of the benefit opening opposition... |
A lot of reasons why that's unlikely. Number one, the manifestation of this is likely through things like memes for example. Or through things like little snippets on social media because of the way in which individuals communicate nowadays. You are literally unable to communicate nuance with a 150 character tweet. Or ... |
Second response to opening opposition. Why is it there still an incentive for individuals to beat up on medical illnesses and This is important because in so far this was the case. A lot of the benefit on individuals being called weird is probably out. The first thing I want to point out is I think there's symmetric in... |
The leader of opposition respond to this is like, oh, no but is this good? Because if you're not called as someone with ADHD, then, you're going to be called weird or quirky. Here are three responses to this. Number one, I'm genuinely unsure why being called weird or quirky is a bad thing. Like, as a kid I was called t... |
On our side, it is more easier because you only tell individuals who you think as having those issues the be the ones that is likely going to be the case. Final response here and this is quite important. I just don't know why if a kid is called weird, they're not going to go, like, look at their symptoms and then figur... |
Let me raise Shario's material now. No, thank you, Ruben. Number one, charter proves why you delegitimize medical institutions and you trivialize the, beats all of offense, even if steal has a banger extension in this debate. Number one, what this means is, even if they can prove that there's more medical funding or mo... |
Third piece of wing, and this is important. On our side of the, on their side of the house you create a perception of redundancy in the academia of the institution. Because you think if it's the case that everyone knows about ADHD in the best case of opening opposition. Why then do we need to invest in medical institut... |
Before I weigh why this is important. closing up. |
<poi> |
The one thing that I don't understand about the second argument is that if these people are so important, if therapists are so nice, why isn't their symmetric incentives to go and fund these people? |
</poi> |
No, because it is seen as trivial and the issue is it's super expensive on your side, it's not as expensive. I'm going to explain that later. The reason why this piece of wing is important as well is, because if we're able to prove that there's a perception of redundancy, what ends up happening is A, you're less likely... |
But finally, this is important because even if you don't buy any of this, Sharia proves the interpersonal relationship argument, which is at best certain in this debate. The outcomes on the medical industry and the social norms is fairly speculative. So you weigh the certainty above all else. Finally then, what does S... |
</MG> |
<MO> |
Panel, it's very rare that studying medicine and working in a psychiatric clinic has advantages. But in this particular debate, it happens to, yes, they have those advantages. I'm going to explain in my speech why it is necessary to understand what other people are going through in order to have, to free up the resourc... |
Before I get into this line of argumentation, a lot of rebuttal to opening governments. The first thing we hear is when everyone has ADHD, then no one has it. Panel, that's like saying, if everyone has COVID, then no one has it, because a lot of people have mild symptoms and then no one takes the serious symptoms, seri... |
We hear a few things, however, for opening government. We hear this idea that, because you don't have an incentive to invest in the system, if it's just trivial, untrue. If more people access the system, you actually and have the, and, think that this is something that is necessary to be treated. You have a greater inc... |
Now that the discourse is increasing inside and people actually have an incentive to educate themselves because it is becoming part of the colloquial use of language. So, you have a greater incentive for media to educate people on what gaslighting means, on what toxicity means, you actually have a higher likelihood of ... |
Finally, we hear this idea. Finally, let's take them at an even higher level. Let's assume, the field of psychology does take a little bit of harm. We still think that's worth it. If on our side, there's generally speaking, more empathy for people with mental health issues on our side of the house. And this is where I ... |
Why, where does this, the question then is where are people actually more likely to offer us the kind of help that we need on our side of the debate? It is just ultimately, it comes ultimately from people having empathy. How do you gain empathy? OG claims you will have empathy because everyone has these conditions. The... |
<poi> |
This is not a regrets debate. Do you truly believe that all of the things like rising rates of autism, doctors trying to make mental health care more accessible and increasing medical knowledge and understanding conditions aren't far more significant contributing factors. |
</poi> |
to this, generally speaking, only in an academic field and a structurally inaccessible to the average person and presumably yes. For example, when feminists talk about, you know, when feminists or racial scholars talk about things like white supremacy but these haven't yet made it into the general colloquial language o... |
It is significantly less likely that this popular rises. It is unclear to me why the, why even if doctors and medical health professionals have the incentive to popularize it, why the media would listen to this, why the average person would listen to this, etcetera. However, when every person who interacts with your fr... |
</MO> |
<GW> |
The problem with both top half teams is, they do not understand the nuance of the human experience when you are struggling. Crucially, people have a vast array of different conditions whether they are mental health conditions or not, just suffering from gaslighting. People have responded to suffering differently and di... |
First point of framing. I do not think in the absence of popularization, other narratives with stigma would take over. and I want to do with OO here because this is not a regrets debate and I do not think destigmatization happened as a result of the popularization of Therapy Speak. Why? Firstly, prior to this populariz... |
But thirdly, crucially, there are tons of other narratives that exist in status quo that say that people are legitimate for being different and have a right to cook with things differently. This is very popular when we look at things like the commercialization of self-care and popular media. That says you are legitimat... |
But finally, doctors and so on are going to have incentives to reach out and make these things accessible to people through things like WebMD, through things like, easily accessible online things like Google, that can discuss these kind of things and people who actually have these conditions still going to speak out on... |
But finally, even if they're winning on awareness very marginally and I give you significant reasons to cast out on that. I'm going to explain why the greater awareness is bad. Because more information is not an inherent good, if it comes at the expense of misinformation. First extension, How does popularization look a... |
What popularization does is it deludes the platform so there's experts significantly. But thirdly, popularization creates a race to the bottom because the more popular these terms become, the more content creators, influencers, and celebrities have incentives to attribute symptoms of depression, I.E. overeating can be ... |
But finally when these terms enter popular lexicon, they become single catch all solutions that have become common knowledge, I.E. people more likely be prescriptive about them to a significant degree icing. The right response to gaslighting is leaving your partner, the right response to depression is doing X rather th... |
Firstly, it increases the odd that everyone in your social circle believes your situation makes the criteria for a specific high profile personality disorder or a specific term like gaslighting which is high point level, at the expense of others. This reduces the diversity in coping mechanism can turn to, because diffe... |
<poi> |
If you're correct that people have much greater understanding of mental health regardless, presumably that would be have significantly more nuanced understanding also on social media. Either people have more understanding or they do not. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.