You are NOT Depressed

This post was a comment on Prince Ea's video (Oct 26, 2016 5:37am).
 https://www.facebook.com/PrinceEa/videos/10154694406919769/

The assertion is based on the idea of someone looking from the external position, so detached from the psychological condition. If I see a bird, I know it is a bird and it is not me, of course, because I am a human. I will never know how the bird feels and what it’s thinking.

But remember that we do not just perceive things with the eyes. Sometimes we perceive with other senses, such as feeling and thinking. Your logic suggests the same with this, “I know I am thinking and I perceive and witness myself “thinking” right now, therefore “thinking is not part of me”. Is this the reality that you want people with depression to realize? You are suggesting a MALADAPTIVE THINKING! What I mean is when you actually say that you feel that there is something NOT RIGHT about you (mentally or emotionally), you perceive and witness it with your internal senses. But supporting your logic, I am hungry right now, I can feel my stomach, and what I feel right now is labeled by my mind as “hunger”, that is why I know and I perceive and witness myself “hungry”. Hunger comes and hunger goes while I stay right here. Every time I get hungry, I will think about this, your logic. So I will not eat until I die because hunger “comes and goes” and it is “not hunger” even. Yes, PEOPLE DIE, they also come and GO. People are not like the sky.
Dude, you are using a WRONG metaphor and WRONG logic.

----rebuttal----

Your claims are just wrong. Wrong syllogism. Wrong metaphor.

FIRST


“People stay like the sky, unlike the clouds that come and go.”

People are Skies
the Skies stay
Ergo, People stay.

–>POINT 1: NON SEQUITUR. People die and don’t stay in this world. People come (born) and go (die).

SECOND


“Sadness, frustrations, depression are not you.”

[Sadness, frustrations, depression] are [those that come and go].
[Those that come and go] are [not you].
Therefore, [sadness, frustrations, depression] are [not you].

–>POINT 2: Still NON SEQUITUR. Of course they aren’t, not because they come and go but because they are NOT identities, roles, and characters of people, that’s why they can’t be you. They are emotional and mood conditions, terms (words) to determine what is happening with humans’ neurotransmitters.

THIRD


“You are greater than anything that comes and goes.”

–>POINT 3: EQUIVOCATION. The sun comes (created) and goes (die), but the sun is greater than you.

Proof: SIZE
The Sun is greater (size) than the Earth.
The Earth is greater (size) than you (human).
Therefore, the sun is greater (size) than you.

FOURTH


“The Witness of Depression is not Depressed.”

this is correct for the following:

The Witness of Depression is Prince.
Prince is not Depressed. (TAKE NOTE: does not possess the condition)
Ergo, The Witness of Depression is not Depressed.

(Prince here is the “external observer” of the depressed person, but what if we use “EAas the Depressed (clinically) instead of “Prince”?)

A. (when EA is the witness of his Depression)
The Witness of Depression is EA.
EA is Depressed. (TAKE NOTE: possesses the condition)
Ergo, the Witness of Depression is Depressed.

B. (when EA is the witness of a Depressed (who is not him))
The Witness of Depression is EA.
EA is not Depressed. (TAKE NOTE: does not possess the condition)
Ergo, the Witness of Depression is not Depressed.

–>POINT 4: ILLOGICAL CONCLUSION. “The Witness of Depression is not Depressed” holds true IF the Witness DOES NOT possess the psychological condition.

This is a fallacy.

The Witness of Depression is EA.
EA is not Depressed. (TAKE NOTE: does not possess the condition)
Ergo, the Witness of Depression is Depressed. (INVALID!)

...this is the same as follows:

A is equal to B.
B is not equal to C.
Ergo, A is equal to C.

...when we substitute numbers,

2 = (1+1)
(1+1) is not = 11
Ergo, 2 = 11

An illogical conclusion, a fallacy wherein somebody attests a conclusion that does not follow from the suggestions.

----end of rebuttal----

Have you experienced being hungry? In case you have, and you witnessed your hunger, don’t worry, you were not hungry. If you were not hungry, why did you eat? It seems that something that is not happening is affecting you.

Have you ever witnessed yourself thinking? If your claim is true, then the witness of thinking is not thinking. So next time you are thinking, acknowledge that you are not.

Please don’t feel insulted. I am not angry. I am just refuting your faulty assertion.Read More »

Advertisements

Sayup bisag unsaon!

I was angry when I posted this on Facebook last Oct 15, 2014 8:21am:
Ang pagpamakak SAYUP! Kung musulti ug tinuod SAYUP GIHAPUN? Hilom nalang ui. Maypang magtuon di pa mangaway ang PDF. Psychology btaw akung course pero taw mn gihapun ko, maproblema sd ko, gibati sd ko ug kasakit, mamatay pd ko. I have always been a human, and I'm proud of that! Nganung di mn jd dawatun ang kamatuoran gd? STOP your IRRATIONAL THOUGHTS! Your mind is above your heart, gamita sa saktong pamaagi! THINK!

To formally express my anger, I TELL YOU MY REBUTTAL!
1. Argumentum ad baculum
A fallacy due to a threat which is either psychological or physical.
2. Argumentum ad hominem
(abusive) bias ra kaayu imung judgment sa akung batasan!
(circumstantial) ayaw isud sa akung huna2 nga bati ko pagkataw!
(tu quoque) kai aku mn sd? daghan kaayung rasun para iblame ko, wa jd ka kakita ug rasun i-appreciate ko!
3. False Cause
Naglibog ko kai nausab ang dagan sa storya! sure ka mao nai rasun????
4. False Analogy
your conditions are too inadequate to warrant sound judgment.
5. Red Herring
do not focus on extraneous variables! di na c.la mao ang rasun!
6. Dicto Simpliciter
hahai! ayaw pataka ug gamit ug prinsipyo!

DAH SIGI PA! LAIN RABA KO MAGLAGUT! MAG RESEARCH BAYA KO PARA MAPILDI TIKA!