Signs of insanity.

[Keary]

I'm currently writing a story and in it multiple of my characters are insane and I was just wondering whether or not there is a definitive list about the signs of insanity. I know about the obvious ones such as voices in your head and seeing things but was wondering if there were more subtle symptoms.
Thanks to all that help.

 

[Anthile]

Sanity or insanity are only vaguely defined terms. Look up mental disorders.


Insane people usually think they are sane and saner than the other people around them. Also, absolutely inappropriate reactions to mundane issues.

 

[Beat Mango]

According to Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, stomach pains can potentially signal the onset of mental illness (incidentally, Kurt Cobain said the reason he started taking heroin was because it eased his severe stomach pains). There are others too I've noticed, although they're only correlative: intense eyes (madness is often when a person is too intense for their own bodily and social good, in my opinion), extreme agitation, any chaotic or strangely inconsistent behaviours. People with mental disorders seem to be less "in their body" and have more trouble carrying it around than so-called normal people - this is hard to describe but I can spot it even out of the corner of my eye by the way someone walks or stands.

Although I'm not sure whether these things describe insanity or merely define it...

 

[cheese]

Generally, anything in a person's perception that deviates from reality - where reality is determined by majority consensus - would be considered signs of 'insanity', in the usual sense.

This gives rise to interesting situations, since you could theoretically have the world populated largely by the insane, and - if their perceptions happened to cohere with each other - it would be the sane (those whose perceptions cohere with reality) who'd be institutionalised. Many stories have been created about these sorts of situations.

I think quite a few of the mental disorders wouldn't qualify as 'insane' in general usage, since they describe behaviour that deviates from the norm, rather than perceptions, although the latter of course influences the former.

A lot of behaviour is described as 'mad' or 'crazy' when it deviates from the norm. The assumption is that perception must be similarly skewed to achieve a behavioural result so different from the majority. This isn't always the case, at least when arguing subjective truths (eg "you should not talk to yourself in public"), since given the same processed sensory input, sufficiently novel thinking can result in novel or deviant behaviour. The label 'insane', as commonly used, is more appropriately applied to behaviour that springs from errant perception of objective facts, such as "there is a person sitting on me", where the brain recreates perceived facts in a way that does not cohere with 'reality'.

God, this sounds really twattish. Anyway, I hope it's of use. If you think about it as perceptual errors (that aren't corrected on closer examination), that might help you come up with interesting signs.

 

[Cognisant]

Being perfectly normal.

 

[amorfati]

I can offer you some things I know about myself, even though I'm not considered "insane" by psychiatric standards, I'm for all intense and purposes a schizo (archetypically at least) and would probably be considered "insane" or "mad" by societies standards

Beat Mango said a few things that are concurrent with my being. I have extremely intense, penetrating eyes. Woman seem to love my eyes but many of them can't look into them for longer then a second without the intensity making them feel uncomfortable.

Also, I have primarily gone through life, ever since I was a very young child (and who knows, probably when I was an infant too) existing primarily in my head. Now I'm an INTP, so this isn't wholly uncommon in this regard, but to the extent that I have inhabited my mind and the utter power it has over me; that's where I'm different from people. I am not naturally prone to being in my senses. I have to be shocked into it over and over again from other people, like waking up from a dream. I have to remind myself over and over again to be in my senses because otherwise I am unconsciously existing in my head perpetually.

Another thing I will add are the delusions and fantasies that occur in the madman's mind. The Genius-Complex is very common, for one. Many "mad" people, probably because they feel so utterly, fundamentally different from almost everyone around them, come to a point in their life where they start having very serious thoughts that they are a genius. It happened to me when I was about 17, and it was probably the most seriously delusional thought that I had experienced up to that point, and may have been the sign of my evolution from severe anxiety and depression to full blow schizophrenia.

From there on the delusions and fantasies became more extreme, and this goes hand in hand with histrionics. One time when I was smoking pot I came up with the most outrageous epiphany imaginable. I felt so relieved, so utterly relieved for I had found what my destiny was: I had come with an ingenious way to make an impact on the world, to be known by all, etc. I had come up with the idea that I could mock the crucifixion. I would dress up as Jesus, be crucified, put it on camera, and (I would need other conspirators of course) to put it on the internet (totally anonymously) and let the hysteria begin: I mean, just imagine, you go on youtube and you come across some random video, you click on it and you see a man being crucified, actually crucified like Jesus, he's on the cross and he's just parading the crucifixion, but for real, the whole thing has music in the background and great camera shots... it's set up like a real piece of art, but it's all real. And no one knows where it came from or why. I thought it would just make an explosion and really get people to think. I mean, if being "known" was what I was striving for, this really is an ingenious idea. I'm still proud of it! Haha

From that point on, struggling with whether I was really a genius or not, and absolutely hell bent on making the biggest mark I possibly could on the world, to be in the pages of history, I started conceiving of any way I could be heard, make my impact. As my alienation, utter loneliness, suffering and hatred grew, I started conceiving of many different "Art-Crimes". I'm not going to name any particular things I was fantasizing about, but everything was to try and to some kind of crime (against society or myself, or both) and turn it into a work of art. This is all before I ever even heard of Nietzsche by the way, so don't blame him.

Basically, it all comes down to delusions, histrionics, and the need to be a piece of history, to change the world, not for the better or for the worse, but simply to change the world as powerfully as can be imaginable.

The philosopher Gilles Deleuze, in his book "Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia" talks about the schizo and his relationship to history by using Nietzsche as an archetypal example:

"There is no Nietzsche-the-self, professor of philology, who suddenly loses his mind and supposedly identifies with all sorts of strange people; rather, there is the Nietzschean subject who passes through a series of states, and who identifies these states with the names of history: "every name in history is "I"... it is not a matter of identifying with various historical personages, but rather identifying the names of history with zones of intensity... each time Nietzsche-as-subject exclaims "They're Me! So it's Me!" No one has ever been as deeply involved in history as the schizo, or dealt with it in this way. He consumes all of universal history in one fell swoop. We began by identifying him as Homo natura, and low and behold, he has become Homo historia..."

btw, I have never had hallucinations except for when I was on drugs. You said you wanted "subtler" symptoms, so I hope I have given you some ideas.

I am nervous posting this, because I don't know how people are going to respond, but at the same time it feels really good to get this insanity off of my chest. I am much different these days. I still have my fantasies, and I vicariously experience their intense content through my head and fulfill some psychological need by doing so, but I keep them as fantasies and am more aware of why I have them and what function they serve, instead of trying to manifest them as reality.

Now you all know a little bit more about me. Hope I haven't scared anyone

 

[WorkInProgress]

Didn't scare me at all, Amorfati. You mentioned how your hatred grew over time. Hatred toward humanity? Also, I was curious if you still consider yourself a genius.

 

[onthewindowstand]

This isn't a comprehensive definition, but believing something in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary is a sign of inanity in my book.

 

[amorfati]

Didn't scare me at all, Amorfati. You mentioned how your hatred grew over time. Hatred toward humanity? Also, I was curious if you still consider yourself a genius.

Yeah, my hatred grew from hatred of bullies when I was young to hatred of Christianity for committing crimes against my family for generations upon generation and for lying to me and everyone else about truth, to hatred of the government for the same lies, and then to hatred of humanity for supporting these liars and not seemingly giving a shit.

As far as being a genius, I don't consider myself one in the traditional sense, I'm probably just more schizo then anything.. When I was younger I had associated genius solely with IQ and I knew I didn't have the IQ to be a genius, which very much confused me because I felt like a genius, like it was just a very, very strong intuition that I was a genius because I would understand philosophical/metaphysical concepts with such ease compared to my peers that I just couldn't make sense of why that was the case. I came upon the concept of relativity when I was a kid before I even knew what relativity was, and then I came up with the concept of determinism, egoism, moral relativism, the Hegelian dialectic, and the eternal return before I had ever read anything about any of these things.

Finally, when I came across Kant's definition of genius; the ability to understand concepts by yourself that need to be taught to most other people, it really reaffirmed by belief that I was a genius.

These days I don't see things as so black and white (like "genius" or "non-genuis" there are many shades in-between), and I also don't have the psychological need to understand myself as a genius, because the psychological need arose from my feeling of such profound distance from other people in the way I thought that in order to make sense of it I had to believe I was a genius, or else I would have to admit that I was insane... and I believe I actually thought that I was both, a "mad genius".

I still don't know exactly what a "genius" is today. I believe the traditional genius must have an extraordinary intellect, which I don't have, so I'm definitely not a genius in the traditional sense. My current perspective on this matter as that there is a certain, fundamental archetype that both "genius" and "madness" spring from. I believe that the madman and genius experience reality far more similar to one another than they do with the common person. My idea is that the fundamental archetype they share is what I would call (I'm making up this phrase right now as I go along) "intellectual alienation". They both think far differently from, and therefore experience reality far differently from, the common person. But where the genius is different from the madman is that the genius can articulate his thoughts and convince others of his genius while the madman cannot.

So I experience the same "intellectual alienation" that the genius does, but I can never provide any "proof" for this. I think all INTP's are probably fundamentally ingenius in this regard.

 

[Da Blob]

I'm currently writing a story and in it multiple of my characters are insane and I was just wondering whether or not there is a definitive list about the signs of insanity. I know about the obvious ones such as voices in your head and seeing things but was wondering if there were more subtle symptoms.
Thanks to all that help.

The DSM-IV-Tr is the reference book used by professionals for diagnosis of mental disorders. you might find some inspiration there....

 

[onthewindowstand]

Yeah, my hatred grew from hatred of bullies when I was young to hatred of Christianity for committing crimes against my family for generations upon generation and for lying to me and everyone else about truth, to hatred of the government for the same lies, and then to hatred of humanity for supporting these liars and not seemingly giving a shit.

As far as being a genius, I don't consider myself one in the traditional sense, I'm probably just more schizo then anything.. When I was younger I had associated genius solely with IQ and I knew I didn't have the IQ to be a genius, which very much confused me because I felt like a genius, like it was just a very, very strong intuition that I was a genius because I would understand philosophical/metaphysical concepts with such ease compared to my peers that I just couldn't make sense of why that was the case. I came upon the concept of relativity when I was a kid before I even knew what relativity was, and then I came up with the concept of determinism, egoism, moral relativism, the Hegelian dialectic, and the eternal return before I had ever read anything about any of these things.

Finally, when I came across Kant's definition of genius; the ability to understand concepts by yourself that need to be taught to most other people, it really reaffirmed by belief that I was a genius.

These days I don't see things as so black and white (like "genius" or "non-genuis" there are many shades in-between), and I also don't have the psychological need to understand myself as a genius, because the psychological need arose from my feeling of such profound distance from other people in the way I thought that in order to make sense of it I had to believe I was a genius, or else I would have to admit that I was insane... and I believe I actually thought that I was both, a "mad genius".

I still don't know exactly what a "genius" is today. I believe the traditional genius must have an extraordinary intellect, which I don't have, so I'm definitely not a genius in the traditional sense. My current perspective on this matter as that there is a certain, fundamental archetype that both "genius" and "madness" spring from. I believe that the madman and genius experience reality far more similar to one another than they do with the common person. My idea is that the fundamental archetype they share is what I would call (I'm making up this phrase right now as I go along) "intellectual alienation". They both think far differently from, and therefore experience reality far differently from, the common person. But where the genius is different from the madman is that the genius can articulate his thoughts and convince others of his genius while the madman cannot.

So I experience the same "intellectual alienation" that the genius does, but I can never provide any "proof" for this. I think all INTP's are probably fundamentally ingenius in this regard.

How you thought of those ideas at young age sounds so much like me...

 

[Trebuchet]

I understand from my own lay perspective that the symptoms must significantly interfere with the person's life. For example, if someone can't hold a job, or keeps messing up relationships in a big way, or ends up in jail, or simply can't do the things that are necessary to get along, then it may be a clinical problem.

In a book, I would show it by having the character do or say things that are seriously counterproductive, like threatening his friends, standing up in a movie theater to give an impassioned speech, or playing chicken in his car. It could be something quieter, like failing to notice a fight breaking out because of being overly focused on a Happy Meal, or forgetting his name for a moment, or announcing things that are usually private (bathroom or sexual events, for example).

I read a delightful book with 4 characters that are insane (or are they?) called The Four Arrows Fe-As-Ko by Randall Beth Platt. It is short and has great examples of how to show someone who has some problems like that.

Also, there was a great edition of Science Friday on the topic of schizophrenia, its diagnosis, and its treatment, which could give you some good ideas.

I am fascinated that you are writing a book, and wish you luck. If you are willing to answer, I am curious to know more.

Why are your characters insane? Is it central to the plot, or to who they are? Do you know why they are insane?

Since most cases of insanity can be effectively treated (though it isn't always easy or successful), how are you going to stop them from having successful treatment?

EDIT: another great place for examples is Miss Information. She writes short humorous things about life as a librarian, and librarians get their share of people with interesting behaviors. Read a few of them. At least you will laugh, and probably you will find inspiration.

 

[Jah]

Catch 22 ?

If you ask "am I insane?" you are probably not insane.

(Also related; The cosmic schmuck principle. Every so often stop and ask yourself "Am I acting like a cosmic schmuck?" and the more often you ask this question, the less you are likely to act like one. People who never question their own actions are probably always acting like cosmic schmucks.)

 

[CoryJames]

A lot of insane people begin as "psychopaths". These are people who cannot understand or feel real emotions. They view the world as their game and others as pawns in their game. I also agree fully with the intensity idea previously brought up. When someone severely overreacts to commonplace situations and become fixated on something small, it is usually a sign of insanity. You should read One flew over the cuckoo's nest. This may help.

 

[Trebuchet]

Catch 22 ?

If you ask "am I insane?" you are probably not insane.

I can't believe I didn't think of that. It's one of my favorite books of all time, and chock full of insane characters: Clevinger, Yossarian, Doc Daneeka, Hungry Joe, well...uh...everyone in the book I think.

"There was only one catch, and that was Catch-22, which specified that a concern for one's own safety in the face of dangers that were real and immediate was the process of a rational mind."

So, maybe a lack of concern for one's own safety would be a good symptom.

 

[Abraxas]

Generally, anything in a person's perception that deviates from reality - where reality is determined by majority consensus - would be considered signs of 'insanity', in the usual sense.

This gives rise to interesting situations, since you could theoretically have the world populated largely by the insane, and - if their perceptions happened to cohere with each other - it would be the sane (those whose perceptions cohere with reality) who'd be institutionalised. Many stories have been created about these sorts of situations.

Ladies and gentleman, that is reality! Think about all the revolutionary ideas that changed the world most. Think about Galilei. Think about Einstein.

Think about how you can deviate from currently determined reality.

Finally, when I came across Kant's definition of genius; the ability to understand concepts by yourself that need to be taught to most other people, it really reaffirmed by belief that I was a genius.

...I was a genius, or else I would have to admit that I was insane... and I believe I actually thought that I was both, a "mad genius".

The common way we think about the nature of human mind is that it is either sane or insane. ... there is an area of the mind which could be called “unsane” – beyond sanity, and yet not insane. Think of a circle with a fine split in it at one end is insanity, you go around the circle to sanity, and on the other end of the circle close to insanity but not insanity is “unsanity”. This is perhaps where all the superlative effects of humanity come from. Not only of art but of science. -Psychiatrist Sidney Cohen

 

[cheese]

The common way we think about the nature of human mind is that it is either sane or insane. ... there is an area of the mind which could be called “unsane” – beyond sanity, and yet not insane. Think of a circle with a fine split in it at one end is insanity, you go around the circle to sanity, and on the other end of the circle close to insanity but not insanity is “unsanity”. This is perhaps where all the superlative effects of humanity come from. Not only of art but of science. -Psychiatrist Sidney Cohen

Yes! That's what I was saying.
*edit
Or rather, that was the ocean from which that pathetic little dribble of a distributary (my post) flowed.

Also, I was trying to avoid definitively calling anything reality.

 

[Puffy]

Heh, under Kant's definition I would be a genius to, I don't think IQ has much to do with it, though I certainly don't feel like a genius.

Insanity has a broad set of symptoms I think, be creative with it, why are your characters insane? Think how you would react in their situation if you experienced what made them insane.

 

[RubberDucky451]

I've been living with a schizophrenic for about 8 months. (Long story)

-Having conversations with themselves.(whispering and then laughing)
-An obsession with order. (all things must be organized and properly aligned)
-A blank stare. (Spending time sitting alone staring into nothingness)
-Overemotional (Laughing hysterically when it is not appropriate)

 

[Da Blob]

“There is a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.”
Oscar Levine

"I don't suffer from insanity. I enjoy every minute of it. " ~Author Unknown

"The statistics on sanity are that one out of every four Americans is suffering from some form of mental illness. Think of your three best friends. If they're okay, then it's you." ~Rita Mae Brown


Insanity is a social status, more than it is any real mental state. One can be quite insane and it is OK, as long as one does not cause any one else in society any problems... Even then a lot of medications for mental illness, makes it easier for society rather than easier for the 'lunatic", Thorazin is one example of such...

 

[Abraxas]

Also, I was trying to avoid definitively calling anything reality.

I meant that,

...reality is determined by majority consensus...

, in my opinion is reality. In other words: There is no absolute reality (at least) in human functions, physical or mental. Laws (created), criteria to determine one's mental health, etc. are not absolute truths/realities because they have the ability to vary. Absolute reality should not be able to vary.

 

[Mondorius]

I've been living with a schizophrenic for about 8 months. (Long story)

-Having conversations with themselves.(whispering and then laughing)
-An obsession with order. (all things must be organized and properly aligned)
-A blank stare. (Spending time sitting alone staring into nothingness)
-Overemotional (Laughing hysterically when it is not appropriate)

Disagree, schizophrenia is caused by the brain over producing dopamine, the reverse effect is kind of interestingly known as parkinson. Some pills for parkinson will cause you to hear voices and all, if dosage is wrong.

While I'm no specialist and can't exactly say what they hear comes from, it's always purely audio hallucinations, voices or sounds. TBH, I wouldn't consider schizophrenia as being "insane". Sure it can probably lead to some really crazy personnalities in the long run, especially if not treated. I mean who could even look sane after hearing voices for even only a whole day? How 'bout a week? What if it becomes easier to count the time you spend NOT hearing voices?

OCD's have nothing to do with that and being overemotionnal either. It's more of a response, which depends on people.

Insanity is a social status, more than it is any real mental state. One can be quite insane and it is OK, as long as one does not cause any one else in society any problems... Even then a lot of medications for mental illness, makes it easier for society rather than easier for the 'lunatic", Thorazin is one example of such...

Very much agree.

Can't end this topic without saying that everyone's at least a little insane. I mean what's sanity in the first place anyway? What is considered to be normal behavior and logical choices are strongly influenced by your values and environment, namely how you were raised, culture and what's deemed arbitrarily as normal by the society you live in in general, what's conveyed by media, etc.

 

[nexion]

Generally, anything in a person's perception that deviates from reality - where reality is determined by majority consensus - would be considered signs of 'insanity', in the usual sense.

This gives rise to interesting situations, since you could theoretically have the world populated largely by the insane, and - if their perceptions happened to cohere with each other - it would be the sane (those whose perceptions cohere with reality) who'd be institutionalised. Many stories have been created about these sorts of situations.

I think quite a few of the mental disorders wouldn't qualify as 'insane' in general usage, since they describe behaviour that deviates from the norm, rather than perceptions, although the latter of course influences the former.

A lot of behaviour is described as 'mad' or 'crazy' when it deviates from the norm. The assumption is that perception must be similarly skewed to achieve a behavioural result so different from the majority. This isn't always the case, at least when arguing subjective truths (eg "you should not talk to yourself in public"), since given the same processed sensory input, sufficiently novel thinking can result in novel or deviant behaviour. The label 'insane', as commonly used, is more appropriately applied to behaviour that springs from errant perception of objective facts, such as "there is a person sitting on me", where the brain recreates perceived facts in a way that does not cohere with 'reality'.

God, this sounds really twattish. Anyway, I hope it's of use. If you think about it as perceptual errors (that aren't corrected on closer examination), that might help you come up with interesting signs.

My thoughts on the matter pretty much exactly.

This isn't a comprehensive definition, but believing something in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary is a sign of inanity in my book.

A literal definition that I have heard is "Doing the exact same thing twice in the same factors and expecting different results."

There are, of course, loopholes to that definition, but it generally holds true.

 

[Anling]

Insainity is really more of a legal term meaning that a person cannot distinguish right from wrong or the consequences of their actions and thus can't be held responsible for them.

If you're really meaning what are signs of a mental disorder, then the DSM is the place to check as Da Blob suggested. There are many and they don't all act the same, obviously.