It looks like my post gave you the impression that I was equating disorder with morality. That was not my intention. I certainly have my moral stance on various things but I have no desire to discuss them in an online forum.
Wikipedia defines mental disorder as the following:
"A mental disorder or mental illness is a psychological or behavioral pattern generally associated with subjective distress or disability that occurs in an individual, and which is not a part of normal development or culture. Such a disorder may consist of a combination of affective, behavioural, cognitive and perceptual components. The recognition and understanding of mental health conditions have changed over time and across cultures, and there are still variations in the definition, assessment, and classification of mental disorders, although standard guideline criteria are widely accepted. A few mental disorders are diagnosed based on the harm to others, regardless of the subject's perception of distress. Over a third of people in most countries report meeting criteria for the major categories at some point in their lives."
Homesexuals have a statistically higher rate of suicide and substance abuse than heterosexuals. They report emotional distress associated with their orientation. I understand this is most likely due to cultural reasons, but combine that with the fact that they have measurable physical differences from heterosexuals and a case can be made to classify it as a disorder according to the definition above.
My sole intention is to point out that there are professional standards agreed on by the bulk of psychologists on how best to classify disorders. I am suggesting to the posters in this thread that if they are really interested in this topic they might want to actually educate themselves to some degree. I agree with you that it is not a hard scientific method. That really is to be expected considering the subjective nature of psychology.
Regarding my military service, I am proud of what I do, and if you find a way to fight a war without hurting anyone please do share it with the world. You and others in this thread might be interested in reading a book called "On Killing" by Lt Col Grossman. He examines the psychology of killing by those in positions where it is legal to do so. It is interesting that even in war most people are incapable of killing. Off the top of my head I want to say that only 10% of soldiers in WW II actually fired to kill the enemy. It has been theorized that those with some degree of antisocial personality disorder actually make the best soldiers, at least those that have chosen to live a legal and morally upright life. They are capable of making difficult decisions that most people aren't able to without being too distraught over it now or in the future. So once again I am not equating disorder with morality. Rather I see it as a variation from normal.
As far as atrocities, the US military has one of the best records of any military in world history. There have been very few true atrocities commited and those are heavily publicized and the guilty parties severely punished. I can't think of a single atrocity actually sanctioned by the US military at a level above maybe a company commander who would be a captain in his 20's with a few years of service. The fact of the matter is that when you get someone to the point where they are able to kill another human, it will sometimes lead to unwanted results and those people have to be punished and removed from the military. Again, if you know to do it better please let the world know.
Wikipedia defines mental disorder as the following:
"A mental disorder or mental illness is a psychological or behavioral pattern generally associated with subjective distress or disability that occurs in an individual, and which is not a part of normal development or culture. Such a disorder may consist of a combination of affective, behavioural, cognitive and perceptual components. The recognition and understanding of mental health conditions have changed over time and across cultures, and there are still variations in the definition, assessment, and classification of mental disorders, although standard guideline criteria are widely accepted. A few mental disorders are diagnosed based on the harm to others, regardless of the subject's perception of distress. Over a third of people in most countries report meeting criteria for the major categories at some point in their lives."
Homesexuals have a statistically higher rate of suicide and substance abuse than heterosexuals. They report emotional distress associated with their orientation. I understand this is most likely due to cultural reasons, but combine that with the fact that they have measurable physical differences from heterosexuals and a case can be made to classify it as a disorder according to the definition above.
My sole intention is to point out that there are professional standards agreed on by the bulk of psychologists on how best to classify disorders. I am suggesting to the posters in this thread that if they are really interested in this topic they might want to actually educate themselves to some degree. I agree with you that it is not a hard scientific method. That really is to be expected considering the subjective nature of psychology.
Regarding my military service, I am proud of what I do, and if you find a way to fight a war without hurting anyone please do share it with the world. You and others in this thread might be interested in reading a book called "On Killing" by Lt Col Grossman. He examines the psychology of killing by those in positions where it is legal to do so. It is interesting that even in war most people are incapable of killing. Off the top of my head I want to say that only 10% of soldiers in WW II actually fired to kill the enemy. It has been theorized that those with some degree of antisocial personality disorder actually make the best soldiers, at least those that have chosen to live a legal and morally upright life. They are capable of making difficult decisions that most people aren't able to without being too distraught over it now or in the future. So once again I am not equating disorder with morality. Rather I see it as a variation from normal.
As far as atrocities, the US military has one of the best records of any military in world history. There have been very few true atrocities commited and those are heavily publicized and the guilty parties severely punished. I can't think of a single atrocity actually sanctioned by the US military at a level above maybe a company commander who would be a captain in his 20's with a few years of service. The fact of the matter is that when you get someone to the point where they are able to kill another human, it will sometimes lead to unwanted results and those people have to be punished and removed from the military. Again, if you know to do it better please let the world know.
