“We, as a species, only got as far with curing bodily ailments, providing food for the homeless, creating a higher degree of welfare for those with their numbered disabilities as scratching the surface. For isn’t that what a physical fault relates to, the body? Beneath the pained, starving, or paralyzed flesh, a human being is an entity most hidden.”– Modern Romanticism
A plethora of issues that a human might face can be extended beyond the boundaries of their flesh, residing within themselves, not of the organs, muscles, nor their bones; for this metaphor compares to their mind. A person’s mind, misunderstood and often misjudged, remains complex to the sociological individual who will tackle all physical-related, existent issues. In comprehending a physical fault, we tell it as an existing one. Though, to the metaphysical or psychological problem, we can find ourselves better off to admit it does not exist. Can we find it necessary to change the term “cancer” to something other than cancer? Though, we’ll find it necessary to change the term shell shock several times to the point of keeping it as PTSD. We’ll say it is necessary to denounce the term “dork” or “retard” for a replacement term, since these examples have been misunderstood and also misjudged. With cancer, we comprehend its deadliness because of its blatant visibility. All can comprehend the sociological extent of it, because cancer does not directly target the psychology of those afflicted by it. There is no need to change the term “cancer” to something other than cancer.
Non-physical, psychological issues are misunderstood because they are deemed often as invisible. If psychology can be understood as more valuable than sociology, it is because when a world gets structured through the train of progress to seek solutions for the physical, bodily issues, it begins to neglect the more difficult, complex faults of the mind. An advocating group can gather together for a meeting on a problem that pertains directly to society. To their mission’s statement, it will be clear. However, if another group advocates on a fault pertaining not to society, though to psychology, their statement will be unclear merely because that group will be unclear of themselves of what solutions are available.
Whether it is the separation of church from state that sent away into history’s textbooks the horrifying methods for capital punishment, or it is the debate between mental illness and firearms access, comprehending psychology as more valuable than sociology is simply an admittance of what will receive negligence whenever a world has been formed to tackle issues it can better understand. The separation of church from state is no different than the debate between those who believe the individual is faulted for the gun or those who believe that the gun must be restricted of its ease of access. This lack of difference comes from the understandable difference between mind and body, or the difference between psychology and sociology. We can all deem progress as relevant when it tackles faults pertaining to social aspects and elements. Though, negligence of psychology and faults of the mind will be paramount when we forget what originated all physical faults to begin with. The mind does control the body. The voice controls the audience. The singular person before a podium conquers and directs the herd before them. There is worship and reverence, though sociology is simply the aftermath of psychology. Sociology would not be possible without psychology, just as an issue with mentally ill individuals being a sociological problem among police forces would not be existent without the emptying of mental asylums.