Ran across this definition of mental health, supposedly from the WHO

[HereSince1628]

6. The problem is two-pronged

Last edited Sun Sep 28, 2014, 06:59 AM - Edit history (1)

Meeting these criteria does NOT mean a person is mentally well.

It just means the dysfunction that defines their illness don't impact on these criteria. Mentally ill people are commonly productive members of society. Furthermore dysfunction is varyingly severe, and dysfunction can be limited in its domains/context. It's pretty common for mentally ill persons to still be demonstrably 'productive and fruitful and to make contributions to society (and I am not sure I even know of a single physical illness that's been defined on the basis of relative value to others?).

Not meeting these criteria does NOT mean a person is mentally unwell.

Replacing a symptom produced by your body with something that depends on the vicissitudes of others in society isn't psychology, it's a statement on the consequences of sociological fairness and chances of life.

Abilities cannot be demonstrated without opportunity to produce said activity so that it can be measured. The mentally ill are often shunned and the shunning can last far longer and produce greater and more enduring dysfunction than an iteration/recurrence of mental illness.

Certainly a person who has a mental disorder may fail at one, multiple or all of these criteria, but such a backward correlation is not dependable as defining illness.