There are a few mental disorders like that, but it's important to bear in mind that most of them (major depression, mid to low functioning autism, anxiety, schizophrenia, and so on) lead to objectively reduced functioning independent of society and a lot of suffering in whoever has them. It's not something to be romanticized.
To give real examples smoking was normal, as was pedestray and ironically the Roman gladiatoral combat which is considered peak decadence was intended to combat decadence!
Normal is a pretty shitty heuristic for being good.
A few counter examples doesn't mean that the heuristic is bad. Heuristics will always have counter examples, that's why they're heuristics, not rules.
If a heuristic has 100 majorly good applications, and 1000s of counter-examples of minor or no real consequence, it will still be good to use...
Given a single counter example, the burden of proof should be on the users of the heuristic to show why the use of that heuristic is an improvement over the alternatives (which have no counter examples).
I just don't see the peak decadence point.
If someone were to properly incentivize you (say, by offering to give you $10000 or whatever) I bet you would be able to come up with few more very important differences.
How about modern sports aren't "to death"?
Although often well paid gladiators often were slaves which brings up the next big difference - consent!
These are differences in moral values that have nothing to do with mental health.
Well, until the 1860s in the US too. And until the '70s, open segregation.
> To give real examples smoking was normal, as was pedestray
From an objective perspective, in what way was classical pederasty "harmful and destructive"? What was the harm and destruction that resulted?
Imagine a bunch of hunte/gatherers, who just entered a new continent (like north-america)- having those loonies orbiting the group, reporting new ressources, scouting ahead- sounds well adapted.
Yeah it looks like wikipedia has a page on this controversy:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_selection
Richard Dawkins apparently doesn't believe in it, and neither does Steven Pinker.
But just based on casual observation I think group selection is real (yes I know that's not scientific). Humans are like ants in many ways... some of us are "programmed" to perform specific roles.
The book Sapiens repeats this over and over and I tend to agree. Religion, government, corporations, etc. are ways in which we cooperate with thousands or millions of others. We don't have to have the exact same genome, and it's not perfect cooperation, but there's something there.
https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/mental-illness.sh...
This mostly doesn't exist.
> a personality disorder which would be more like having a personality that makes daily life difficult?
Go careful with that. People with the dx have usually been harmed by early childhood abuse (although there's some difference between UK and US diagnosing) and many people with the dx feel it's an entirely unhelpful construct.
It's mostly a marketing slogan for drugs, and a gross over-simplification.