Bipolar Disorder:

A Critical Look

A Tract Book Essay

By

Anthony J. Fejfar, B.A., J.D., Esq., Coif

© Copyright 2007 by Anthony J. Fejfar

The Definition of Bipolar Disorder found in the Diagnostic Statistical Manual is

flawed. There really is no coherent set of diagnostic criterion for diagnosing bipolar

disorder. For example, tens of thousands of people every year get into financial trouble

and have to file for bankruptcy or are prosecuted criminally for writing bad checks. At

the same time thousands of others are diagnosed with bipolar disorder for “being manic

with their money” and going on spending sprees. Now, it seems to me that there really is

no difference between these two groups of people from a critical standpoint, yet, some

are diagnosed mentally ill and some are not.

Some people are also diagnosed with bipolar disorder for having delusional

religious beliefs. I a person with the wrong political connections starts talking about

God, archangels, Satan, reincarnation, etc., and the persons family doesn’t like this, then

the person can be diagnosed with bipolar disorder. At the same time, however,

thousands of “New Age” books are published a year which appear on the bookshelves of

our bookstores which factually discuss, channeling, God, Heaven, Out of Body

Experiences, reincarnation, archangels, etc. These people are not diagnosed with mania,

but instead are spiritually and financially successful. From a Critical point of view, the

existence of the foregoing groups in our society does not make sense rationally.
 A Third group of people are Philosophers. Most major universities have a

philosophy department which offers a Bachelors, Masters, or Doctoral Degree in

Philosophy. A large number of people are well educated professional or amateur

philosophers. They write books, teach classes, etc. At the same time many psychiatrists

will diagnose Bipolar disorder where the patient has the symptoms of “Excessive

Philosophizing.” Now, it is clear that all professional philosophers, who are career

philosophers enage in “excessive philosophizing” on a regular basis, yet they are not

diagnosed with mania and are not involuntarily committed for psychiatric treatment.

From a Critical point of view, there really is not difference between the two groups.

Given the foregoing, I suggest that the real diagnostic criterion for Bipolar

disorder is “a very spiritual person who is politically naïve and has no siginificant

political connection to protect him or her.” Only politically naïve persons are ever

diagnosed or involuntarily committed for bipolar disorder. From a Critical point of view,

the primary diagnostic criterion for bipolar disorder is political naivete. Is this what we

as a society wants?