Hacker News Reader

Not trying to be rude, but as with most things, there are scales within the ranges of blindness and paralysis.

A lot of people assume blindness means absolutely no sight whatsoever, which isn't true, because quite a large number of legally blind people have eyes that detect some degree of light. Temporary blinding from illness/injury exists. Flashing a bright light into someone's eyes, rendering them momentarily unable to see, is also a very valid and very old usage of "blind" in the English language. Being metaphorically dazzled by something and temporarily unable to respond ties in with the latter meaning and goes way back in its usage.

Paralysis has a similar scale. Many people assume total lack of movement, and "only" having one's lower body unable to move doesn't even immediately register as paralysis in the mental image a lot of people have. People with severe mental illnesses like depression and some forms of schizophrenia are rendered unable to move (it's not a desire to stay still). People can also be temporarily paralyzed through poison or mental shock (as in they literally, physically cannot move out of fear).

Words have range. Context makes their meaning precise. I really hate to bring this word in here, but denying someone with a mental illness the right to use a word is because it's not "real" enough compared to another person's struggle is "gatekeeping". Suggesting words they use to describe their illness is "insulting" is harmful to them.

I completely agree. I think the lack of real, immediate issues (war, famine, terrorism, poverty) in the western world right now is leaving a lot of people with extra time and mental capacity on their hands to try to dig up issues where there aren't any. Everyone can take offense over anything they read, it doesn't mean it's grounded in anything or it makes sense. On the other hand there are people hovering the internets waiting for such a person, to jump to the opportunity and virtue signal how said person is seriously endangered and everyone should adjust to them.

Imho this is how we achieve greatness.

People getting pissed over things there parents took as inevitable is basically the definition of progress.

This is the first generation where mental health has been considerd a value. While its easy to dismiss there terminology issues i would say a few things:

1. That its hard to imagine the impact of having a defining life challange constantly talked about by strangers callously.

2. Go back and look at historical "political correctness gone mad" arguments.. even just to the 90s. The ones i have found all seem examples of things we would not dream of saying today and for good reason.

3. These apparently low priority discussions are how you really solve the root causes of issues. Its by figurng out how to support the un supported that all of society is elevated.

The idea of the child generation always progressing from the parent is dangerously clouded by the immediate past and probably also very myopic.

Throughout history there are many instances where the child generation regresses the status quo by and large, sometimes over multiple generations. Even when there is progress in general, there may be specific aspects of society which do regress relative to the past. All I'm saying really is that we shouldn't look at all forward movement as necessarily moving upward.

Hmm not sure what you are arguing against here.

I didnt say all progress was good, only that progress has a profile and looking at this specific area: what is it about respecting people and understanding the importance of mental health has not been good.

I literally asked the reader to look at this specific issue.

But i agree not all progress is good and some progress is only temporarily good. E.g. capitalism, advertising, intellectual property

Wasn't referring to you specifically, but the idea of progress as a constant change made by the child generation which your comment alluded to.

Imho in a certain manner I get what you're saying and I kind of agree up to a certain point, but having an issue when somebody uses the word paralyzed out of physical context is not how we achieve greatness nor is having an issue with the default git branch being master, nor do similar waste of time discussions. These things are only there since the loud minority wants to signal that they're more woke than their environment. There are real issues with race, religion freedom of speech etc all around the western world.

Same as calling some a cunt imho. The parts of scotland i grew up in it basically means "person".

And if i use it at work like this people know i am not meaning it the qymay it sounds but they still correct me.

That discuasion leads me to have better more productive language in the future. If i cannot handle some constructive criticism thats on me.

I know it can be hard for people who are very normalised to a certain way of speaking.. but thems the breaks. Better than actually being paralysed imho.. plus if i come up with another term for this i can use it with an audience that actually includes paralised people and the reference will still make sense.

No body expects perfect. I still swear too much at work and i still accidentally throw in metaphorical adjectives that belong in the past. But i am better at it than my grandpa (not that i ever heard him say cunt :) )

Slang != Proper non-insulting terms that somebody finds insulting. The original comment was related to the word paralyzed which is miles away from using the word cunt and a pretty stupid comparison tbh.

Fair comment, though the word slang is doing a lot of judgement work and the whole point is that offensivity is subjective. I chose that word as its right out there on the spectrum but genuinely seems totally harmless to me and means person with some additional flavour and familiarity.

I am not recommending the usage of the word. Just pointing out that my comfort with it doesnt make it okay to use.

Agreed that it probably totally failed to getthe message across.. i guess as someone who grew up in a dialect i am used all kinds of moderation and consideration for the listner, and so i don't buy these hard done by arguments over being respectful. I cannot talk in a way that the thoughts come in to my head outside a ridiculously small number of people and to me, it only adds to the richness of life and my personal growth. Ymmv

We are imobilised, we have lost all the momentum we had. Can we get back some of that dynamism we had prior to change x.. i dont see an issue with finding other ways to talking and if it turns out that those ways of speaking offend people i bet i willlearn somenew perspective when i hear why.

This is not a newspeak situation. This is just listening and trying to cause less pain.

There was plenty of mental illness in the past, it was just often swept under the rug, or when it was acknowledged it was termed a "nervous breakdown" (or "demon possession"), etc.

Now a lot more people are coming forward and talking about it, whereas before people would just pretend they were ok, as much as they could. That pretense still happens even now, as there's still a stigma about it, but more and more people are starting to feel safe to come out of the closet.

It doesn't help anyone to tell us them (us) that they just have "extra time and mental capacity on their hands to try to dig up issues where there aren't any".

Not to speak for anyone else, but I've been crazy busy before (and every shade of busy in between) and still been very depressed and had severe trouble coping. Keeping busy might help with mild depression but it rarely works for moderate to severe depression.

Depression is complex and has many different causes that vary from person to person, but if part of the reason for you is that you find life meaningless or find what you do meaningless, then staying busy isn't going to help you. Same if you hate yourself, or if your depression is related to trauma you've suffered, etc.

That doesn't even get in to the "chemical imbalance" theories of depression, which I'm not a big fan of myself so I won't go in to them except to say that just keeping busy might not have enough effect on that either.

To be clear, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akinetic_mutism is a thing — without enough dopamine in your motor cortex, you're "paralyzed" in the sense that there's nothing you (or anyone else) can do to force your body to respond — sometimes even going as far as your body no longer having autonomous reflex responses to reflex-inducing stimuli, similar to someone who's been rendered unconscious.

I'm not a neurologist, but I imagine there's a spectrum there, where other less-severe neurological problem-states (like depression) can get you part of the way to akinetic mutism, and thus you may be fully "paralyzed" in the above sense some of the time, or partially "paralyzed" all of the time.

These words have both a literal/medical and a metaphorical meaning.

Paralysed - inability to act

Blind - unaware of what's going on

The metaphorical meaning was probably intended.

Please pardon the author, you might never know what severe depression does to a brain. Having been on both sides of the spectrum (mental and physical disability, albeit small), I can say it may not be abusive usage of the word.

In any case good luck, may research progress (and there was some recently) and find solutions.

On the contrary, I think paralyzed is quite an accurate depiction of the effect of severe depression. Most people still don't consider mental conditions on par with physical conditions, but that's simply not true, those severe mental conditions' are the result of neurological damage in the brain. In that sense, the person is paralyzed just as you are as problems with his neurological system limited his movement. Spinal cord is also an important part of our neurological system, it's essentially the southbridge of our body, but wouldn't it be funny if we call southbridge damage resulted inability paralyzed, but CPU damage resulted inability not? I get your point where you think spinal cord injury is more physical, but those mental conditions can be just as physical.

> I offer no advice on how to write this kind of stuff, but i'd like to bring up the point that my situation , as someone who is paralyzed, is totally different than the situation of someone who is clinically depressed.

Thanks for writing this in such a non judgemental way.

I really didn't care much about such imprecise language but I too am starting to wonder if something needs to be done - and where.

This and similar wordings are what my teachers would refer to as a literary tool (not sure of the correct English translation but it should suffice.)

But it seems a lot of people doesn't understand (and some won't understand) this. This holds true for both writers and readers.

Recently someone said something about a certain well known country being apartheid, so I pointed them to the encyclopedia (not Wikipedia) that describes apartheid. It didn't work. Journalists had said apartheid so apartheid it was. Was it apartheid? Only in the same sense where the bank "robs" someone by not adjusting interest rates in a timely manner: as a way to spice up language.

It is important to not forget, that natural language do not work like programming languages. They are not clear and precisely defined. Context matters a lot. And allmost no 2 people define one given word exactly the same.

So I do have my trigger words, too, where I try for people to use them in the right way, but it is pretty much an uphill battle and in my experience usually not worth the time fighting it. Just accepting that words have different meanings for different persons ... and most importantly - go out of discussions, when it is not about the topic anymore, but people fighting over the meaning of words.

> I really didn't care much about such imprecise language

But it's not imprecise, it's just metaphorical.

Someone saying they're in hot water does not literally mean they're currently standing in a cookpot or hot tub.

I don't think anything is needed. People just like to fuss over language too much, when its clear (from the context) what was meant.

A thought provoking point that will make me think more about how I use language. "I suffered from severe depression. Then came ketamine" would also have done the job.

It really shouldn't. Words that have a defined meaning and that are used properly shouldn't be banned from use.

Where does that stop? Should we "walk on eggshells" for everything we say, lest a well known metaphor is not understood immediately by someone, or someone (perhaps even in another country, speaking another language, with different social moral norms) gets offended?

Immobilized seems more fit.

I can really get behind your first bullet. Taking clearly defined medical terminology and exporting to strange contexts just sound like nonsense to anyone that uses those terms with any regularity. Like every time someone uses the term antisocial to refer to someone who doesn't get out much I can't help but wince.

People using "paralyzed" or "blinded" in a more metaphorical or abstract sense is very common, and has been for some time: paralyzed by indecision, blinded by love (or lust), etc.

This argument that we may only use words literally feels very Drax-like: "Nothing goes over my head. My reflexes are too fast, I would catch it."

Metaphorical meanings for medical issues are some of the most common metaphors in most languages, and I would be surprised if you aren't using them yourself. Rejecting it seems frankly as bizarre as rejecting metaphor entirely. Are you wincing when you read Shakespeare, Plato, Dante, Dostoevsky, etc, who all use this regularly? You're never been shocked or dumbstruck, never find anything lame or sickening? Never describe anything as crippling, mad, callous, stupid, idiotic, crazy, never get drowned in work?

The metaphorical use of paralysis even predates its modern precise medical usage, having meant more broadly enfeebled before relatively recently taking on its specific motor function related meaning--so that would be the medical field assigning a new clear definition to a term with a 2300+ year metaphorical history.

Anyway, please sign my petition denouncing libraries everywhere for putting all these joke books in the humour section. It is a real hassle for melancholics trying to balance out their bile. Then we're getting onto this Jesus fella for all this fancy double-talk about eye debris, I've had specks in my eye before and cornea scratches are a legitimate problem.

Agreed. A friend who almost died before getting a liver transplant was talking to his neighbor who had just moved in. His neighbor said he was a “California transplant”. Very insensitive.

As the neighbor just moved in, I'm guessing they were unaware of your friend's liver transplant. If this was indeed the case, I find your friend's situation difficult to sympathize with. .

If you did the slightest bit of digging, I think you'd find that 99% of people mean no offense, and would be deeply apologetic if their "transgression" were brought to their attention.

If you're sensitive enough, you'll find yourself offended all the time.

Although I probably insult everyone that has been electrocuted before, I think that's pretty shocking.

Ha!

The word transplant came to Old English from Latin via Old French, so it predates transplant operations by many centuries. As such, unless the neighbour was doing it on purpose it's an unreasonable thing to get upset over. Words have multiple meanings.

I honestly can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not.