Buddhism, philosophy and disorders

Ohh, sometimes I so wish I was still living in England… Perhaps one day I’ll go back as I finish up my doctorate or for post-doc work. Likely not too soon, as all is well here and even with the economy going down, work for me is secure and plentiful.

In any case, this jumped out at me today:

VICES AND DISORDERS
LANCASTER UNIVERSITY FRIDAY 13TH MARCH
FUNDED BY THE ROYAL INSTITUTE OF PHILOSOPHY AND THE SOCIETY FOR APPLIED PHILOSOPHY

The workshop is free and open to all, but places are limited.
Please email Rachel Cooper ([email protected]) to reserve a place. Please note I will be away from the 7th – 28th Feb, so if you email during this period you may not get a reply until I get back.

10-10.30 Harry Lesser (Manchester) Suppose vice was an illness, illness a vice: what can we learn from Butler’s Erewhon?

10.30-11.30 Havi Carel (UWE) The phenomenology of eating disorders

11.45-12.45 Chris Megone (Leeds) Vices and disorders – a neo-Aristotelian view.

2-3 Tim Chappell (Open) Who can we blame?

3-4 Christian Perring (Dowling College, USA) The moral responsibility of people with mental illnesses for their actions

4.15-5 Edward Harcourt (Oxford) Madness, badness and immaturity in psychoanalysis

All of them fall well into my blended areas of interest in Buddhist ethics, philosophy, and psychology. Those who read my blog often know I’ve long been interested in issues around depression and meditation and recently (last summer/fall) become very interested particularly in personality disorders. That work is kind of on a back burner as I return to thesis reading/writing, but I fully plan to return to it at some point.

If you’ve ever had a mental illness (I had clinical depression in my late teens) or been close to someone who has (I was close to someone who likely has/is undiagnosed with Borderline Personality Disorder), each of these topics should pique some interest.

The first and third, dealing with the subject of vices and disorders, would be of great interest to those who want to see philosophers, including the Buddhist variety, taking mental illness more seriously. Most of what I have seen has constituted shoulder-shrugging and ignoring at best, and devaluation of both the subject matter and the individuals at the worst. I think Foucault’s work, which is despised among many mainstream philosophers, came the closest in his examination of the history of madness.

But of even greater interest to me are the two on “Who can we blame?” and moral responsibility… As I experienced in myself years ago, as a mental illness worsens, the ability to be moral in some sense seems to weaken. Other-regarding capacities diminish. The world becomes closed. The “I” becomes paramount and paralysing.

I’m not sure how others experience me in this time, but as selfish and immature would probably hit the mark. When my friend’s episodes would arise, they often manifested in placing completely unreasonable demands on me and reacting with extraordinary anger when I failed to meet her requirements. She also manifested sudden overwhelming insecurities, often also accompanied by anger. In the midst of her emotional breakdowns I generally put it upon myself to ‘fix’ the situation, either appeasing her if I could or trying to sooth her. That is, I made the responsibility in the situation mine – which now I believe was fair to neither her nor myself. It merely served to enable further breakdowns.

Another issue of blame I have come across revolves around genetics and early childhood situations. Both my paternal grandfather and father had clinical depression in their lives, so it was not a big surprise when I had it too. If you’ve seen the movie Monster, you cannot help sympathising with this woman who was raped as a child and emotionally abused by her father. Now if she was both genetically predisposed, perhaps having a father with a personality disorder, and had childhood trauma, it makes it increasingly difficult to say to what extent she is morally responsible for her actions.

The final paper title, “Madness, badness and immaturity in psychoanalysis” raises a related issue. My friend, and I have read this of many people with Borderline PD, would at times snap into a child-like persona. Perhaps it was reverting to a time before her own trauma… Perhaps it was simply a coping mechanism, a way out of a reality that her adult self couldn’t handle. Sometimes these childlike states were playful or pouty, sometimes violent tantrums.

That reminds me of something my then-girlfriend said to me when I was in the midst of my depression. She was a bit younger than me and once said, somewhat bitterly, “I might be younger than you, but your the one that needs to grow up.” She was right of course,in the sense that I was probably acting very immaturely. But, again, in the midst of mental illness it is incredibly difficult to get outside of one’s own shell. I probably thought at the time that she was just being mean.

In Buddhist psychology it may be argued that there is no ‘person’ to blame for immoral actions. But that takes things too far, I believe. Sure, philosophically there is no Self (fixed and unchanging), but there is still that being, the carrier of karma or actions, that continues throughout a lifetime and beyond. And again, in the midst of mental illness, that unfixed and unchanging self begins to look incredibly solid and thoughts that “this will never change” arise again and again.

In this world of appearances, persons arise. Persons are the locus for pleasure and pain, joys and sufferings. In the bodhisattva quest to alleviate all suffering, it hardly seems helpful to leap to the metaphysical truth of “there is no person” or “all is impermanent.” True they may be, but like blaming gravity for the recent plane crashes, it is a case of a category mistake.

The Buddha taught a very wide variety of methods for the alleviation of suffering, most prominently being meditation practice. But there is a great deal more in the Buddhist teachings that contemporary Buddhists can use to deal with issues of mental illness. Teachings on community, reciprocal duties, and more can be applied to the lives of both the mentally ill and those who are close to them. Also, it seems properly Buddhist to admit that there are countless tools available today that go beyond anything the Buddha might have taught; tools such as brain imaging, antidepressants (herbal and otherwise), and so on. The famous Kalama Sutta tells us to use efficacy as the greatest criterion for our activities – do they lead away from greed, hatred, and delusion? Do them. Do they lead to greater greed, hatred, and delusion? Stop them.

This doesn’t get us anywhere near what I might call an ‘answer’ or even a clear action plan for Buddhism and disorders or mental illness, but perhaps the sketch of thoughts will spark something further down the line.

I should note my gratitude to James Ure, an excellent Buddhist blogger who has commented at times about meditation, Buddhism, and dealing with Schizoaffective Disorder. Also see his great post on Buddhism and mental illness.