Biological Predestination: A Wolf in Sheep's Clad

One might be inclined to say that the idea of behavioral predestination is rather benevolent, in that it simply shows that we're all different. However, this is simply not the case. When one expands this to beyond very base instinctual behaviors and personality inclinations, they deprive others of autonomy, purpose, and they often lose respect for highly subjective attributes such as intelligence and creativity (though both are often in the same category).

An interesting parallel can be drawn to John Calvin's views of 'predestination' in the 16th century. Though this parallel is virtually unheard of, it is widely known that the ideas of people being 'predestined' to go to heaven and hell kept them strictly in line. When they would cross over the line of what was 'unacceptable', then it would mean that they were predestined to go to hell, giving them a greater impetus to stay in line. Almost a self-fulfilling prophecy, if you will. Also, those who believed themselves to be 'good' were able to say that they were good by nature, by the virtue of god, etc. It should be noted that this system of beliefs was probably one of the 'best' for maintaining order, but what effect would it have on the psyche of such people? Here are a few examples:

Passive aggression. With the constant threat of being labeled 'divinely tainted', people back then probably expressed their anger in other ways.

Denial of emotions. This would probably cause a lot of problems that may not take a toll on a person's 'orderliness', but instead on their overall emotional health.

Labeling of oneself as 'bad' or 'tainted'. This would probably be the worst effect. When those who had 'sinned' accepted that they had supposedly sinned, they believed themselves to be innately bad and thus strived to become more and more orderly. However, they could have instead questioned the very basis for this system in the first place, but under that pressure many will not.

Still don't see the comparison? Let's look at today.

Non 'mentally ill' people believe others are 'tainted'. This leads to the idea that they are beyond help, which itself breeds more hopelessness. It also fosters a sense of arrogance that one is beyond such suffering because they must be 'genetically fit'.

Idea of being 'screwed up' prevents people from expressing their emotions, often for fear of being labeled 'unfit'.

Psychiatrists are quick to blame the 'genetic makeup' of such people, further reinforcing this notion.

The equation has not changed, but it has been masked, under the veil of sham science. There's no mistake about it: biological predestination is a wolf in sheep's clad. Many follow the fallacy that science is separate from life, but this could not be further from the truth. Much of our legal and economic systems are based on science, and when 'hard science' attempts to objectify something subjective (the mind, emotions, experiences) with tremendous authority, a vortex of pure disaster has been created.

Biological psychiatry is sucking the purpose of existence out of people with its notions that our finest behaviors have a substantial genetic basis without even providing evidence for this claim. Evidence to the contrary is often dismissed as 'anecdotal' and thus 'worthless' while psychiatrists commit the same fallacies but in contrast to anti-psychiatry advocates utterly fail to examine social variables. Is everything in our conscience simply a manifestation of chemical reactions? Maybe, maybe not. But science is not even close to understanding let alone safely changing these reactions. And even so, a natural approach which leaves room for the subjective that biological psychiatry has a disdain for may provide superior help.