[David Maes]

I think an animal might have symptoms which look a bit like schizophrenia, but I think an animal just can't get schizophrenic. (it also doesn't speak)

Animal behaviour is more behavioristic: stimulus - respons.

It interacts following instincts.

Human behaviour is different; there is something else: but remember that DNA of a chimpanzee is 99 % the same as that from a human; so there still is a not-to-underestimate component in human behaviour which is instinctive; (referring to Freud).

Concerning the not-to-underestimate difference between an animal and a human; I think language could be an important factor in it.

An important remark also is that schizophrenia is not the same as splitten personality (splitten personality is a lot more rare also)!

Schizophrenia is rarely agressive; I think splitten personality is more agressive.

So I think if my 'connecting animals' would have a connection with something, I think it should more have to be with splitten personality.

Schizophrenia is more paranoid, chaotic, evolving to the delusional.

Didn't Einstein or Beethoven had it also? And Vincent Van Gogh (when he was painting perfect turbulence).

Is it a 'turbulent' sickness?

Vincent Van Gogh had a 'special language'.

The possibility to have trouble to process data also seems to increase in high stress situations.
Is there decompensation when you add too much structure to it?

[David Maes]

Adding some philosophical thoughts: (don't know if it can be compatible with it):

It seems to have a problem to 'adapt itself to the environnement', when it wants to 'focus potential energy'.

So it closes in itself; it gets embedded. When it's embedded, it can even less adapt itself; so getting in a vicious circle, it finally deteriorates and results in decompensation.

So to avoid it, the embedded has to be destructured. Has the system to be 'opened', to avoid further deterioration?


Not only the sickness seems to be 'turbulent', also seems to be the 'spreading' of the places on the human genome, of the connections with it. (which I think is rather remarkable though.)


I'm not sure, but what probably happened is:

The chimpanzee is an ancestor of Homo Sapiens.

'Recently' homo sapiens evolved and had an advantage in evolution because of language.

This language caused the problem of the recent sickness schizophrenia.

So animals don't get it.

[David Maes]

Originally Posted by David Maes

Is thinking that animals could have it, just due to the fact that people just have the ability to recognize theirselves in animals?

I think: yes.

But animal models can be used to study schizophrenia.

[David Maes]

Originally Posted by David Maes

Can a chimpanzee be schizophrenic?

I think: no.

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by David Maes

I think: no.

Looks like you are having a one-sided conversation with yourself here David?

You are not alone my friend,it happens to me as well!


regards michael.

[David Maes]

Sorry Michael, I was just thinking loudly; hope I didn't take too much posting space.

I think I also see an other connection: when you would measure the vision field of the schizophrenic; I think you should get a patron which looks similar like the turbulence Vincent Van Gogh painted. (think it happens with 'paranoid' people or people in a 'paranoid' state).

What I'm just wondering now (but I'm not sure off course): did Vincent Van Gogh paint his own hallucinations?

If so (I don't know whether paintings are dated); could the sequence of his paintings in time give an example of his symptoms of deterioration?

[David Maes]

But I think it doesn't always 'deteriorate'.

To think is to 'speak'?

Consciousness - unconsciousness.

[David Maes]

I think we should be more sceptical of phenomena like 'remote viewing' and subliminal perception.

Concerning the ideas of Sigmund Freud; lots of his ideas already have been adjusted; but I still think his achievements are indelible.

I think hypnosis is more an act of suggestion.
In hypnotherapy, I think hypnosis is more a means to an end.

So that's my humble opinion.

[unvanqx]

i personally guess every(!) living creature can develop schizophrenic behaviour (not behaving as compared to average) (to me it is just specific/conspicious behaviour (to me it is also normal for that particular individual showing it) especially if there is no physical damage to the brain or in general a developed physical malformation in the brain in the latter cases you may call it abnormal sick and sometimes also call it schizophrene - humans need only to "diagnose" it in humans ....
and i bet if it has to be even an individual only perceiveing/processing 50% (call them humans who obey almost in complete the system-actually the majority-) of happening in the surround can develop schizophrenic behaviour if put in a targetted fit environment - to me animals show a similarity if caught in the wild and put in a cage - on contrary: if you take a gnu out of flock and let it land in gnu-heaven for a specific time and send it back to the flock again others probably will not accept it and diagnose it unacceptable by abnormal behavior compared to us even if the special gnu is just a little smarter by now and brought special supportive machinery to support itself from gnu-heaven to not depend on others while not in gnu heaven ....
animals/insects too must be classified kind of schizophrenic on this planet by humans if humans would be petty but there is no need as they are not integrated in the system - in this system only humans live - as humankind has generated this system (sure it helped humans as a specific creature on this planet alot ) and classified for themselves only in a social way what is normal and what is abnormal and mostly by use of phantasies or wacky theories or ethics (another phantasy to me) in general , etz- if you look at this system from an outside logic view you may find this system (even to me as human it appears almost in 100% abnormal) very sick - so human as a social entity shall not wonder if 1% turns out to be different in a special way from the other 99% even if they are called schizophrenic - are scientist who pursue bigbang, blackholes, etz. classified sick? no - not in general - they pursue topics/phantasies which are mostly accepted by the environment (even if just for entertainment) and this scientists can make a living out of this .... is a priest classified sick? not either by the public in general... but for example the individual which conquers mindwise the universe by abusing god is classified sick as she/he tries to put things right for her/his brain which never can be put right ... the individual just has a certain drive towards projected theories or topics .... on this planet is not much having profound evidence ... human kind is not that intelligent thats the reason its brain developed phantasy (i do agree humankind has alot of phantasy and that makes it kind of very intelligent again) to cope with topics which at stage of evolution are out of reach by far just to cope with the environment they built or they are born into - if you build a sick environment/system and obey or not obey the system .... in both cases you depend on it ...

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by unvanqx

i personally guess every(!) living creature can develop schizophrenic behaviour (not behaving as compared to average) (to me it is just specific/conspicious behaviour (to me it is also normal for that particular individual showing it) especially if there is no physical damage to the brain or in general a developed physical malformation in the brain in the latter cases you may call it abnormal sick and sometimes also call it schizophrene - humans need only to "diagnose" it in humans ....
and i bet if it has to be even an individual only perceiveing/processing 50% (call them humans who obey almost in complete the system-actually the majority-) of happening in the surround can develop schizophrenic behaviour if put in a targetted fit environment - to me animals show a similarity if caught in the wild and put in a cage - on contrary: if you take a gnu out of flock and let it land in gnu-heaven for a specific time and send it back to the flock again others probably will not accept it and diagnose it unacceptable by abnormal behavior compared to us even if the special gnu is just a little smarter by now and brought special supportive machinery to support itself from gnu-heaven to not depend on others while not in gnu heaven ....
animals/insects too must be classified kind of schizophrenic on this planet by humans if humans would be petty but there is no need as they are not integrated in the system - in this system only humans live - as humankind has generated this system (sure it helped humans as a specific creature on this planet alot ) and classified for themselves only in a social way what is normal and what is abnormal and mostly by use of phantasies or wacky theories or ethics (another phantasy to me) in general , etz- if you look at this system from an outside logic view you may find this system (even to me as human it appears almost in 100% abnormal) very sick - so human as a social entity shall not wonder if 1% turns out to be different in a special way from the other 99% even if they are called schizophrenic - are scientist who pursue bigbang, blackholes, etz. classified sick? no - not in general - they pursue topics/phantasies which are mostly accepted by the environment (even if just for entertainment) and this scientists can make a living out of this .... is a priest classified sick? not either by the public in general... but for example the individual which conquers mindwise the universe by abusing god is classified sick as she/he tries to put things right for her/his brain which never can be put right ... the individual just has a certain drive towards projected theories or topics .... on this planet is not much having profound evidence ... human kind is not that intelligent thats the reason its brain developed phantasy (i do agree humankind has alot of phantasy and that makes it kind of very intelligent again) to cope with topics which at stage of evolution are out of reach by far just to cope with the environment they built or they are born into - if you build a sick environment/system and obey or not obey the system .... in both cases you depend on it ...

Thanks unvanqx,like the way you presented this post,interesting.

regards michael.