A question and analysis relating to evil

[Scott A. 0]

The question I would ask, would be: by what method was the knowledge that allows this prediction, initially gained?

I think you indicated it in a previous post, which would be, in a clinical context, a thorough psychological evaluation that includes, at a minimum, an in-depth interview (and, of course, behavioral observation). Outside that context, one would have to observe the person's behavior in multiple contexts and talk to him enough to sufficiently understand his premises and psycho-epistemology.

This may take some time to respond to, Scott; it involves, for one, a thorough definition of mental health...

I admit that I have not yet completed such an explicit definition to any thorough degree whatever, and am unsure of the timeframe of that completion; it could be considerable, although it is not an insignificant priority in any regard. When it, and the relevant work related to it, is complete, I look forward to that conversation. :-)

Although I have read very little of Branden's work subsequent to his Objectivist days, his essay "The Concept of Mental Health" in the February, 1967 edition of The Objectivist is very good and might save you some time in formulating a definition yourself from scratch. I won't go into a long description of that article, but the definition of mental health offered is: "the capacity for unobstructed cognitive functioning--and the exercise of this capacity." He ties this into biology, evaluation, psycho-epistemology, and integration (among other things).

Another way I often define it is that mental health is the rational integration of one's thoughts, emotions, and actions, as manifest in the pursuit and achievement of rational values. Branden's definition focuses on cognition, which I agree is the fundamental. I add the other components because, from my perspective, one's overall psychology is wider than just cognition. Cognition is fundamental, but the other parts must be considered in order to gain a full understand of a person. For what it's worth...

[organon 0]

...

Although I have read very little of Branden's work subsequent to his Objectivist days, his essay "The Concept of Mental Health" in the February, 1967 edition of The Objectivist is very good and might save you some time in formulating a definition yourself from scratch. I won't go into a long description of that article, but the definition of mental health offered is: "the capacity for unobstructed cognitive functioning--and the exercise of this capacity." He ties this into biology, evaluation, psycho-epistemology, and integration (among other things).

Another way I often define it is that mental health is the rational integration of one's thoughts, emotions, and actions, as manifest in the pursuit and achievement of rational values. Branden's definition focuses on cognition, which I agree is the fundamental. I add the other components because, from my perspective, one's overall psychology is wider than just cognition. Cognition is fundamental, but the other parts must be considered in order to gain a full understand of a person. For what it's worth...

Thank you, Scott, for both your own thoughts and the reference re Branden; I will integrate all of this into my own rational definition, as it established.

John