The Genetics of Mental Illness

I thought I would give my thoughts on the subject in one post once and for all. In this post, I will summarize the common myths that circulate throughout the media and populace on the subject.

A common myth is that mental disorders are caused by specific genetic or biological problems and are specific issues. Actually, mental disorders are very subjectively diagnosed, making the process of testing for 'genes' for them nearly impossible. The way these genes are searched for is usually through a vast computer that looks for small patters between depressed, bipolar, or suicidal patients. The flaws with the selection process notwithstanding, if genes are supposedly found, the news is trumpeted across the nation, lending credence to the dogma of biological psychiatry. Often, these studies are also refuted, but the public does not see both sides of the story; even if the articles do surface by some chance, they are certainly not given the same front page status as those who support so called 'genetic advances' and are not imprinted in the minds of the public to the same degree.

If theoretically the studies were not badly flawed and there were genuine genetic similarities found between people who were depressed or suffering from mental illness, all this would confirm is that there were similarities, not that depression is caused by a genetic defect.

This is because depression is simply a response to negative circumstances, or the dehumanizing environment of institutional society itself. These genes could code for increased creativity, passive personality, increased intuition, etc. All of these react negatively with institutionalized and controlling society; despite how much authorities ascribe to the idea that they 'cultivate intelligence and autonomy' they indeed do the opposite. We live in a society of the lowest common denominator. Often we ask intelligent people to make do on their own because they supposedly have the capacity, but they are artificially handicapped by being forced to slow down and go through oodles and oodles of bureaucracy. Bureaucracy also has little or no respect for qualitative attributes such as creativity. While the genetic status of personality is unconfirmed and certainly contributes far less than the environment (I was turned passive for a long time though I am naturally aggressive due to negative circumstances), there are certain natural temperaments. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with this.

While the emotional problem or 'mental disorder' that is expressed depends largely on a lot of environmental influences and thought patterns, certain personalities are more likely to react certain ways to the same stressor. In very rudimentary terms, passive people are probably more likely to be depressed or catatonic schizophrenic in very extreme circumstances; they may have trouble opening up and hide everything inside despite attempts to help. Meanwhile, aggressive people are more likely to have anger problems or exhibit violent psychosis under extreme circumstances due to having a natural inclination to outward expression and bursting at the seams when others unreasonably demand that they keep everything inside or suffer harassment and/or punishment. Both personalities have always been around (with many more subsets in between) and are by themselves not a problem. Note: drugs, particularly neuroleptics can cause not only massively violent reactions and extreme sedation, but eventually neurological defects.

Even so, much of personality is developed environmentally, but this is completely irrelevant. It's true that people are technically 'genetically predisposed' to certain reactions under stress, but this applies for the other side as well. Simply put, different people react to stress differently. This is a big difference from the idea of a 'genetic flaw', which is simply a logical leap and completely untrue and unproven. The desire to make money and quantify qualitative attributes has contributed to this subtle tyranny, and people buy it because they typically want easy solutions to complex problems. And as any 'solution' which attempts to put a band aid on a gushing wound, it simply does not work. What is observed here is a tendency to equate correlation with causation, which is a very easy misconception to come to when huge amounts of money are on the line in an area very poorly understood.

We need variety in personality to survive as a human society, without it we are merely machines.