That would be like trying to define a vacuum to those living in the center of the Sun. 
âWell, it is ⌠emm ⌠not this ⌠I mean ⌠Emm⌠it just isnât any of this ⌠itâs emmm⌠just not HERE!â
I think there are plenty of terms that are exactly like that. Isnât good health just an absence of malady?
I think it is better not to think in a binary way. So I would answer no. YOu have someone who has no malady. They can walk and talk and do their work and so on and without the extra pain we associate with some maladies. But they have just enough energy for a not particularly challenging day. There is no spring in their step. (letâs say we are thinking of a 30 year old). They couldnât lift anything heavy - choose some threshold that the average person of the same sex could fairly easily lift. So they are not sick, but not particularly healthy. Too much TV watching. Not very good food.
In traditional Chinese medicine they would likely be diagnosable. But in Western med, they are, yah, OK. Then you could have examples to either side of this guy, a little less health, a little more.
Note: I am not trying to create more categories to give drooling pharmaceutical companies areas for medication, nor am I trying to create categories for insurance companies or on the other side scams.
An absence of crazy? Well, how about that for being definitive? Talk about a vague and ambiguous statement. 
Yes, mental illnesses are fabricated every year. Itâs all a very lucrative financial business donât you know.
Psychiatry as an arm of the state is very important in curving down and controlling the masses or population also.
Itâs used to reaffirm authority in peopleâs everyday life or existence. Itâs not enough to control people physically as authority must ensure mental obedience as well.
But that Chinese diagnosis would still be a malady they would describe him as having, right? Some synonym for listlessness, or something about his energies or whatever they got going on? It still seems to me that if you want to define âhealthyâ or âsaneâ without reference to malady, youâre going to wind up with this long (infinite?) list of things like âHis eyes work ok. His ears work ok. It doesnât hurt when he pees. Heâs not overweight.â and on and on and on. So when somebody says to me âdefine saneâ, all I can think of is âimagine a list of all the mental disorders. Imagine a person that doesnât have any of those. Thatâs saneâ.
Yeah, it is vague and ambiguous, thatâs why nobody does it. Itâs much much easier to define âinsaneâ as having one or a variety of conditions we know about, and âsaneâ as just being a general term meaning âyou donât show signs of those conditionsâ.
So which do you prefer, a state in which âcrazyâ people are locked up âfor their own goodâ and all that entails, or a state in which âcrazyâ people are released to fend for themselves (homeless, victimized or otherwise) and all that entails? I donât have an answer.
Not necessarily. It might simply be considered a less than optimum health. Nothing that a Western doctor would go near. They might even seek to improve the condition of a runner, for example, using adaptogens or tonics that could help raise someone above normal.
I sympathize with the shorthand. One problem off the top of my head is nearly everyone would be considered disordered if they had to run through the gauntlet of the DSM5. But if I shift away from the political type issue that raises, I think one can be puttering along in a lackluster way, or even a pretty decent way, but still be under optimal health. Mental health included. Not that one should separate the two. I mean only James is completely free of delusions, for example. The rest of us are just puttering along in pretty decent or lackluster ways. But you and I, at least, are not insane, despite a dash of neurosis hear and a mild delusion about ourselves there.
Yes. It belongs to the same fleecing system .
Exactly.
It brings a lot of money, thus a lot of more power to them.
I would say rather that the state is an arm of the corporations. If the corporations can create a market somewhere then they get the state to privatize something or market the corporate solution or validate the corporate solution as the only solution. The DSM5 privitizes pathology. Your mind is now a market for products.
Both statements do not contradict each other. Psychiatry as an arm of the state, and the state as an arm of the multinational corporations and banks.