Can philosophy cure madness? Three approaches


Author: Terence Rajivan Edward
Abstract. This essay actually focuses on a kind of madness, where one perceives a lot of "hidden" messages (or interprets the world so that there are a lot of these messages). Perhaps there are other kinds of madness. Anyway, I describe my experiences of this kind and I make three philosophical proposals for combatting madness: a Cartesian one, a Wittgensteinian one, and my own one, which I call "particularist." My own one seems the riskiest of the three.
Draft version: version 4 (31st May 2026 poem changed, minor edits; version 3 24th June 2025, Rawls added)
PDF at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/395234797_Can_philosophy_cure_madness_Three_approaches
And: https://www.academia.edu/143771383/Can_philosophy_cure_madness_Three_approaches


"As solid and well put together
As a feather"
 
Can philosophy cure madness? I shall not be concerned with all kinds of madness here. I shall focus on one kind, while remaining neutral on whether it is the only kind. I have myself experienced this kind before (or so it has been proposed). First I shall present this kind. Then I shall present my experiences of this kind. Then I shall present three proposals for combatting madness, the first two of which are inspired by famous Western philosophers. I don't know if philosophy can cure madness, but these approaches are of interest I think.


Definition
The kind of madness I shall focus on is characterized by perceiving a lot of "hidden" messages, or else interpreting the world so that there are a lot of these messages. One does not have to think that the messages were written specifically for oneself, in order to experience this kind of madness. But compared to a normal subject, one is different:
1. one detects many more messages;
2. one regards these messages as relevant to one's life.
If you try to talk to someone about these messages normal subjects do not perceive by themselves, they will probably say, "Are you sure there is any message there?" Anyway, only if conditions (a) and (b) are met does one count as experiencing this kind of madness.


Experience
In September 2023, I was forcibly admitted to hospital and in October the doctor concluded that I was experiencing a kind of madness. Before being admitted, I remember noticing a lot of things I did not notice before 2022. For example, I saw a plumber's van which said, "Drain care and repair." The normal way of reading these words on a plumber's business vehicle is: we, the business, take care of and repair drains. But I saw - or thought of, if that is more accurate - another way of reading these words: drain away care and repair. To drain away, in English, is to slowly take away. Why would a plumbing business have words intended to be interpreted that way on their van? This was my explanation. Sometimes when you are progressing towards a goal, it is as if you are overcoming levels with their obstacles (like levels in a video game). And when you overcome a level and move to the next level, you want to tell everyone (or many people): I overcame this terrible level and if you are ever in it, it is difficult and this is what is in it. I thought the business was communicating, "Just about anyone can work for a business or organization. But to get going as a business was very difficult and we had to overcome this level in which there is opposition and it drains (i.e. takes away) care and repair." But of course, if you tell a normal subject this interpretation, they will probably say, "What are you talking about? It just means: we, the business, take care of and repair drains." Or some people will anyway.


When I was supposedly mad, I perceived a lot of less evident messages, like this one. Each business had messages about its history and the problems it had to overcome and these messages were relevant to me. For another example, the clothing shop Charisma Closet, as I interpreted it, was saying, "We tried to be charismatic and it worked for a while, but then you just get put in the closet, metaphorically speaking." ("Charisma Closet" is a strange name for a shop, isn't it? The closet is not a place which one thinks of as a place of charisma.)


The Cartesian solution
What to do when you are perceiving a lot of these less evident messages? The great Western philosopher, Descartes, prompts me to realize one solution. Focus on what is certain (or much more certain) and ignore merely suggestive evidence. It is certain that the plumbing company wants to say: we, the business, take care of and repair drains. It is very uncertain that it wants to say something else by its words "Drain care and repair" on its van.


I call this the Cartesian solution because in his foundational text Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes describes how he found that many beliefs of his are false and how he decides to treat every belief which he can doubt as false, so that he is only left with indubitable beliefs.


The Wittgensteinian solution
This solution involves trying to be in line with the surrounding community. The surrounding community does not interpret the plumber's van as saying, "To get going as a business was very difficult and we had to overcome this level in which there is opposition and it drains care and repair." Or even if some individuals privately do, that is not the official interpretation within the community. One tries to be in line with the official interpretations of the community! Be too far out-of-step with the surrounding community and one will probably be declared mad. (But what is it to be in line with the community exactly?! Because this is not my approach, I have not troubled myself to properly clarify this matter. Here is an attempt, using a concept from John Rawls: one takes a representative person and never interprets in a way that they would not.)


This solution is inspired by Wittgenstein's response to a problem of sequences. Imagine that a person is counting 2, 4, 6, 8, 10. They add 2 each time until they get all the way to 1000. What is going to happen now? If they continue, we assume that they will say, "1002" and we think that this is the correct way to continue, given the sequence. But what if they say, "1004, 1008, 1012, 1016…" suddenly adding 4. Wittgenstein thinks there is nothing we can say except, "This is the way we do things here: 1002, 1004, 1006… This is our custom. This is how we as a community continue the sequence." (Or that is a watered-down Wittgenstein. I don't wish to get involved in disputes over how exactly to make sense of Wittgenstein.)
My particularist solution
I call my solution particularist because it does not involve a general approach to all non-normal perceptions: in general focus on the certain or in general try to be in line with the community. Instead, in my approach, each non-normal perception is dealt with separately. What is this non-normal perception of a message by the business about a problem it had to overcome? Maybe set it aside as surely a mistaken perception (or interpretation, if perceptions cannot literally be mistaken), maybe not. What about this message of a closet in which we place charismatic people, after they have been popular for a while? Maybe set it aside as surely wrong, maybe not.


I feel my solution is very risky compared to the two taken from legendary philosophers. (One may end up paying attention to quite a few of these non-normal perceptions and also talking about them.) But one has to try new things in philosophy, isn't it? Yes!


References
Descartes, R. (translated and edited by John Cottingham) 1996. Meditations on First Philosophy, with Selections from the Objections and Replies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rawls, John. 1999 (revised edition). A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Belknap Press. Available at:


Wittgenstein, Ludwig. (translated by G.E.M. Anscombe). 1967. Philosophical Investigations. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Available at:




Further reading
For more (supposedly) delusional material see also:
Edward, Terence Rajivan. 2025. Delivering what you needed "yesterday": extract from a faux French philosophical novel. Available at PhilPapers:
https://philpapers.org/rec/EDWDWY
Edward, Terence Rajivan. 2025. Sainsbury's supermarket and Derrida. Available at PhilPapers: https://philpapers.org/rec/EDWSSA


And for a solution to a specific delusion, if it is that, see:
Edward, Terence Rajivan. 2025. So you never believed you were Simone de Beauvoir? Available at PhilPapers: https://philpapers.org/rec/EDWQYN