Jump to content
Maniac Muslim Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Mo-

  1. 1 hour ago, Jbreeze1 said:

    You’re worse if you think about how trolling has damaged people’s lives. 


    I have zero respect for trolls. And zero respect for married men who slander women who live miles away. Keep your tongue back in your mouth. 


    I’d explain in details about the psychology of trolling but I really have no time for it.


    I don’t expect a response so I will not reply.





    Who is trolling?

    Where were you slandered? Saying you're part of a large WhatsApp group isn't slander. Most extended families have one these days. 

  2. 23 hours ago, Eternalbreeze1 said:

    I've come back to address any slander made about me when I was unaware of how to address this. 

    Do you not think it is very unbecoming of a mod and very against Islam to jump to a conclusion and have doubts about a Muslim sister esp without any clear cut evidence or witnesses? Seen as though I was misinformed about these groups as I do not rely on friends - or ever have - I would like to clear that now.


    I do not have friends or any social network. In fact the only people I regularly contact are my immediate blood relatives. To say that I was being "serious" online when on MM when I was mostly joking around is ridiculous.

    And you are a Mod? I revoke that title of yours as a mere title and what you have never become.


    Do you not think your comments are insensitive and that you are sin free? Disgusting.

    I will be the next old member to leave because of what this forum has turned into - a troll fest.


    You're responding to an off the cuff remark that was made nearly a year ago. I think your response is a quite an overreaction.

  3. 7 minutes ago, superman said:

    1) The number of people scoring 10 is objective because it is a number. Yes it is a result of subjective experiences but so is the like/dislike ratio 


    2) Wouldn't you agree feeling happy or sad can be routed to a physical counterpart too?


    1) Something be a number doesn’t make it objective. It can only be objective relative to that particular patient. Like/dislike ratio is only objective in the sense someone objectively hit the (dis)like button. 


    2) Not to a single one, no. It also cannot be diagnosed. Say you’re feeling sad, you say to a psychiatrist “I’m feeling sad, why is that?” they will say “you’re depressed”. If you ask how do they know you’re depressed, they’ll say it’s  because you said you’re feeling sad. This sort of circular logic doesn’t make sense in the diagnosis of a disease. Maybe you’re sad because you lost your job, being sad in of itself is not an illness.


    Compare this to oncology. With lung cancer for example, it can be diagnosed through a lung biopsy, through blood test for circulating tumour DNA, through scans such as the PET scan, etc. 

  4. 3 minutes ago, superman said:

    In my previous post I was saying that you can get objective metrics from subjective data and that such metrics can be useful. This is how I imagine research in psychiatry is done.


    For example:


    A like / dislike ratio is an objective metric.


    The number of patients who scored 10 on a pain scale is an objective metric.







    Both of those things rely on something tangible though (besides the second is subjective FYI and only really used for triage). 


    A like/dislike ratio is the result of people hitting buttons on their devices. Pain is the result of signals being sent to your brain, with the cause being able to be narrowed down and diagnosed. There is always physical counterpart to pain. 

  5. 3 minutes ago, superman said:

    An experiment is not invalid just because it relies on subjective data. As long as you can make reasonable assumptions to make sense of the data.


    The number of likes and dislikes on a YouTube video stems from a subjective experience - you're not seriously telling me that Google doesn't find such data valuable


    Likes and dislikes objectively inform you how the audience that left a response responded to a certain video. The data is then subjectively interpreted (did they enjoy it due to the content, cinematography, etc.), but the data itself is universally understood.


    That is completely false analogy when it comes to psychiatry. In psychiatric diagnoses, there are NO objective measures whatsoever. At YouTube, a like will be registered as a like, no matter what. In the psychiatric profession, a psychiatrist makes a judgement on whether or not someone suffers from a purported disorder. 


    In reality, there is little difference between a Buzzfeed quiz on which Game of Thrones character you are and a psychiatric assessment for depression. 


    Why is it that psychiatry is not held to the same standards as oncology, rheumatology, cardiology, etc.? Diagnoses in these fields are replicable between professionals following multiple tests and biopsies. With psychiatry you may as well roll a die.

  6. 13 minutes ago, superman said:

    If alot of psychiatry is in its experimental stage, and people are actively documenting outcomes, I am not sure it's right to call it quackery. 


    The experiments can never be objective because they rely on subjective observations and self reporting. There has been no physical evidence whatsoever for the vast majority of psychiatry.


    Unlike for physical disease, there is no biopsy for any purported mental health disorder. You cannot objectively test for depression or anxiety like you can for cancer or bacterial infection. 


    Hippocrates relied on the description of humor imbalances to describe illness. Anyone who would base treatment on such claims today would be called a quack. Today psychiatrists talk about ‘chemical imbalance’ in the brain (without ever having validated such claims). I think calling a duck a duck is appropriate here. 

  7. 8 hours ago, Haku said:

    Just wanted to chime in and say, religious figures are no substitute for properly trained psychiatrists.


    Most psychiatry is quackery. 


    When people equivocate psychiatry with medicine or try to put it as a field of medicine we end up with outcomes like this:




    Previous such outcomes included lobotomies, chemical castration of people with homosexual tendencies and the classification of runaway slaves as being mentally ill.


    Talk therapy may work because it is patient led, but there is no need for a psychiatrist to be involved. You don’t need training to know how to talk to someone, you need empathy. 


  8. On 5/14/2019 at 2:08 AM, blueandpurple said:


    Thank you, I appreciate the response. I understand that however the thread upset me and so I felt like I should speak out.


    Out of curiosity (I'm not trying to antagonise you - I'm just curious) if you're skeptical of psychiatry how would you suggest someone with an eating disorder or another mental illness should get help?

    I think counselling (that is talking to someone) can be effective (it doesn't have to be a psychiatrist, it could be a religious figure, a mentor or even just a friend), along with taking little steps everyday to try and become the person you want to be are the most effective steps to achieving any change in behavior, lifestyle or feeling. The second part is easier said than done, but even something as simple as building up a habit like reading books on the train can help you achieve this. 


    I hope you stick around the forum - it is quite dead now, but we have fun discussions from time to time.

  9. @blueandpurple

    Sorry if this thread distressed you. While I am personally highly skeptical of psychiatry as a practice (or indeed, being labelled as a branch of medicine despite no objective validation), most of this thread is nearly 14 years old and was written at a time before there was as much information on the internet as there is today.


    I don't think anyone here was belittling people who have struggles like yours, rather they were just unaware of the struggle itself. 

  10. 31 minutes ago, AROwnen said:

    Do we say the word blessings when describing something good from Allah(set)?



    We do indeed. 


    The Arabic word for blessing is barakah, which is regularly used in Islamic greetings, prayers and remembrance. 

    In fact, the full Islamic greeting contains it:

    Salamu alaikum wa rahmat Allahi wa *barakathu*

    Which translates to:

    Peace and the mercy and blessings of Allah upon you.

    I hope this was of help Uncle Owen :)

  11. 9 minutes ago, Summer.Haze said:

    Is there any reason why I'd suddenly gain 4-5 pound in 2 weeks? 😕  I mean I heard metabolism decreases after age 30 or something, but I didn't realize it happened THAT suddenly. There were no significant changes to my diet... I'm 5' 4" and a couple of weeks ago I was at a steady 145-146 lbs for the last one to two years, and now it's at a steady 150-151. 😕


    Slows down even earlier than that. Mine has started slowing down and I'm only 24.


    In winter people tend to gain weight though. 

  12. On 6/28/2018 at 10:16 PM, Breeze said:

    England underestimated Belgium. 🤦‍♀️ Kept all their best players out.


    It was intentional so that we'd have an easier knockout stage. Coming second in the group means England wouldn't have had to face Argentina, France, Brazil or Belgium until the finals.


    Instead we will face Sweden, then Russia/Croatia and one of the aforementioned (most likely France) in the finals. 

  13. 5 hours ago, Breeze said:

    My question is about astrology and whether it's permissible? For eg. Compatibility charts. 


    In history there's been mystical astrology by Sufi mystics.


    So my question is whether palmistry or astrology charts are acceptable. I mean I don't believe every word, but some of what is written is quite accurate. Then again, if people base their relationships on that, then that's worrying?


    Astrology is both kufr and shirk. 
    If you believe stars cause certain events then it is shirk. If you believe you can discern the unseen by them it is kufr. 


    Al-Bukhaari said in his Saheeh: Qutaadah said: “Allaah created these stars for three purposes: to adorn the heavens, to stone the devils and as signs by which to navigate. Whoever seeks anything else in them is mistaken and does not benefit from them, and he is wasting his time and effort in seeking something of which he has no knowledge.” (Saheeh al-Bukhaari, Baab fi’l-Nujoom, 2/240) - source: IslamQA


  • Create New...