Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Androgeos Exeunt on May 10, 2012, 09:19:52 pm
-
I saw Dilmah reading this (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/brilliant-pupils-logical-suicide-1188778.html) article on Facebook, so I did a Google search and read it myself. Fascinating.
Anyway, for you tl;dr folks, here's the short-short version: a genius boy weighed the pros and cons of life using his tiny dynamo, decided it wasn't worth the trouble, and killed himself because "the mathematics he has used are indisputable".
I'd conclude that he's a complete and arrogant nutjob and did the right thing for himself, but I thought I should ask the community the same question anyway, since there are some pretty intelligent people here, not just in terms of logic.
-
His 'reasoning' was rationalization - this kid was depressed and needed help. It's tragic he didn't get it.
-
of course it aint worth living, only instinct for self preservation and the desire to see others suffer keeps me going. people who are happy seem surround them selves with enough bull**** to act as a buffer zone against grim reality. and that is something i cannot tolerate. so i do my best to remove the bricks from their walls.
-
The fact that he came to that conclusion should tell us how seriously messed up modern society is.
There are a wide number of causes that one could rightfully blame. Sadly, none of these issues in society will be addressed properly, and instead something that was probably not a significant cause will get scapegoated.
-
Life is not worth living without Snuffy.
-
The article doesn't show the math. :no:
-
A lot more people would off themselves if they didn't care doing so would hurt close relatives. There are situations where close relatives wouldn't care and of course, some people don't have any close relatives left.
I have pondered the question "What makes life worth living?" many times. While I know many answers to the question, none of them apply to my own life. Not currently anyway. While I'm not suicidal, I can see why people want out.
I'd categorize people as follows:
- People who are happy for their material success. They are driven, wealthy people.
- People who are happy for having people who they love and love them back.
- People who have neither, but who are not yet suicidal. Their life is full of shades of gray.
- People who are somewhat suicidal but don't commit the action because they still have something little to live for, usually another person or people he/she does not want to hurt.
- People who are suicidal because they have nothing to live for, no material success or nobody to love and more importantly, nobody to love him/her back.
- People who are suicidal even though they have something little to live for. Extreme cases who want out even if it hurts other people.
Living just for the sake of living is no life. But on the other hand, unless you live you never know what's around the corner. If I didn't have people I care about, I'd probably be gone already too.
-
His 'reasoning' was rationalization - this kid was depressed and needed help. It's tragic he didn't get it.
Unless of course the police reading his diaries start killing themselves too. :p
-
>>>diaries posted to internet
>>>wave of mass suicide sweeps the industrialized world.
>>>all according to keikaku
-
Unless of course the police reading his diaries start killing themselves too. :p
Well, you're assuming the police are rational too.
-
I just woke up and was confused to see a poll without snuffalupagus as an option.
As far as the thread topic is concerned, it seems to me that his mathematics neglect the potential for fourth-dimensional appearance of quasi-externally induced changes in factors that appear to traditional euclidean analysis to be constants, viz, there is a finite but existent potential for circumstances to develop in which I, as the person analyzing the relevant psychohistorical factors, not only become significantly more wealthy (because frankly, it'd be hard to get much less wealthy, but that's another story) but find the means and motive to put that wealth to use in the creation and execution of a plan to become a costumed hero, perhaps themed around a nocturnal rodent of some sort, which end result is significantly valuable enough, however unlikely, to remain a worthwhile investment of the effort required to not commit suicide like a freaking punk.
Also, I've done this entire post using only three sentences, which, though overabundantly supplied with comma splices (and parenthetical inserts), are technically grammatical, a feat that I feel is frankly fantastic.
-
His 'reasoning' was rationalization - this kid was depressed and needed help. It's tragic he didn't get it.
It's easy to say someone doesn't get it while looking from outside in.
Meanwhile, I look from the inside out, and I get it
-
The article doesn't show the math. :no:
True, but I don't think most laymen would understand it.
-
His 'reasoning' was rationalization - this kid was depressed and needed help. It's tragic he didn't get it.
It's easy to say someone doesn't get it while looking from outside in.
Meanwhile, I look from the inside out, and I get it
See - I've been there and I decided that it was the most irrational thing I could do under the circumstances. Okay, I'm no genius but I'm a decent science student, I know the score with logic and rationalisation.
That and I found Dylan Thomas, and "Do Not Go Gentle Into That Good Night" struck a chord with me for a variety of reasons.
-
If he came to logical conclusion based on data available to him and made a conscious decision about ending his life, you can't really blame him. I wonder what his reasoning was though, it's easy to make an error in such a personal matter.
Anyway, I have one certain thing to live for: ambition. I want to do something that will put my family name into the annals of history, and this time not as minor nobles from a backwater country, but as scientists and/or businessmen. Admittedly, the recession messed up by plans for the latter a bit (hopefully, it'll be over when I start trying to make money), but there's still a lot to discover in physics. Either way, you'll all hear of me someday. :)
-
His 'reasoning' was rationalization - this kid was depressed and needed help. It's tragic he didn't get it.
It's easy to say someone doesn't get it while looking from outside in.
Meanwhile, I look from the inside out, and I get it
No, you're just spouting nonsense.
-
"Genius" is overrated.
As for his logic, didn't read the article but I could make an argument either way.
Also, The E, is that attitude really necessary?
-
I'm kinda with The E on this, Unknown Target - Okay, he could've been far more tactful, but very rarely is life bad enough to justify suicide in a supposed 1st World Country.
-
Yes, it is. deathfun has shown himself to be nothing but a common troll on issues that do not involve the merits of various kinds of booze, as such I do not see why I shouldn't call him out for his nonsense. If you look closely at his post, it does not say anything of significance, and bears no relationship with the post snippet it supposedly is responding to. He does not elaborate any point he might have, and tries to cover it up with cutesy phrasing.
Thus, I have to conclude that he is spouting nonsense.
-
He is indeed. And if he does it again he'll find himself unable to post on Gen Disc.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLgNZ9aTEwc
-
His 'reasoning' was rationalization - this kid was depressed and needed help. It's tragic he didn't get it.
It's easy to say someone doesn't get it while looking from outside in.
Meanwhile, I look from the inside out, and I get it
No, you're just spouting nonsense.
Interesting, because I read it in the context of this post (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=80668.msg1602855#msg1602855) from a while back (quoted below for convenience) and deathfun's reply (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=80668.msg1602866#msg1602866) further down that thread. Thus I didn't see it as quite so nonsensical, even if still far from an ideal post.
*snip*
I joke about suicide all the time, what does that make me?
Suicide is a tragic act, but it's not one with a large culture of permissivity...though it, too is definitely socially contagious, and if you joke about it all the time: are you okay? You've made remarks about feeling socially isolated and alone.
-
Yes, it is. deathfun has shown himself to be nothing but a common troll on issues that do not involve the merits of various kinds of booze, as such I do not see why I shouldn't call him out for his nonsense. If you look closely at his post, it does not say anything of significance, and bears no relationship with the post snippet it supposedly is responding to. He does not elaborate any point he might have, and tries to cover it up with cutesy phrasing.
Thus, I have to conclude that he is spouting nonsense.
Then perhaps I should mention that about a year ago, I did exactly what this kid did. I didn't have a shotgun, but enough rum to kill myself twice over
Unfortunately, half a bottle later wasn't enough to kill me, so here I am
It isn't a cutesy phrasing. It's experience
I've been in the exact same mind set, so I'm within his box of thinking. General isn't, he's outside of it looking in with a condescending attitude. Perhaps he thought of seeking help, but realized that all he'll get is "Get over yourself" or "here's some prozac"
Know where I get that from? Shrink number one wanted to give me meds. Person number two told me I was being melodramatic.
Person three understood where I was coming from, and she's the only one who's been helping
That's the thing isn't it. You cannot seek help from anyone who isn't in the same mindset as you, in the same box. They can't help you because they don't understand **** about what's going on inside your head
This thread is exactly where I belong, so is that ****ing better?
-
See, my personal experience (which includes bouts of near-suicidal depression) runs counter to that. In all instances, the help I've received from people "outside" was crucial in not actually going through with it, and getting over it. I also know (again, from personal experience) that someone who is determined to commit suicide will not be stopped, by anyone. I agree with Battuta that whatever this kid was going through, it was avoidable if it had been picked up by the people around him and if they stepped in to help.
-
Sounds like a Vulcan to me
-
That's why I don't hold psychology in high regard. How can you make a science out of something that is completely different for every person? You're both speaking from experience, and I think you're both both right and wrong at the same time. Each person requires an individual approach, what helps one person might push another over the edge. Whatever works for you isn't guaranteed to work on other people. Somebody who wants to help a depressed person should "feel" how to do it, not rely on any stiff rules. Emotions are often illogical and a logical approach to an emotional person doesn't work too often.
This boy actually seems like an exemplary stoic. He's done the math, came to a conclusion and did what the logic dictated. At least, that's what he said, and most likely what he thought. This might have been driven by emotions afterall, but we'll never know.
-
Have you ever talked to a psychiatrist, Dragon? Have you ever required professional psychological help? Because it sure sounds like you don't.
-
Have you ever talked to a psychiatrist, Dragon? Have you ever required professional psychological help? Because it sure sounds like you don't.
Well, I actually did (though admittedly, those weren't long conversations). Through the entire conversation, I could clearly see this person was "trained" to talk to people. She didn't change anything.
Considering everything, I most likely require professional help by some standards. I don't intend on getting it, since I'm comfortable with myself and not a threat to other people. That, and I'm rich enough to be eccentric instead of crazy. :)
-
In other words, you were unable to look past your preconceptions of what a psychiatrist is and does and were thus unable to actually talk with that person.
Now, granted, personal chemistry is immensely important in these issues; if the person you are talking to is unable to find the right approach with you, then there's little chance of making progress. However, I submit to you that that is a failure on the part of the practitioner, not of the science behind it.
-
Maybe I have yet to meet a good psychiatrist. Considering the backwater I live in, this is a likely explanation. Maybe someday I'll meat one who'll prove me wrong, and it will undoubtedly be an interesting experience.
-
See, my personal experience (which includes bouts of near-suicidal depression) runs counter to that. In all instances, the help I've received from people "outside" was crucial in not actually going through with it, and getting over it. I also know (again, from personal experience) that someone who is determined to commit suicide will not be stopped, by anyone. I agree with Battuta that whatever this kid was going through, it was avoidable if it had been picked up by the people around him and if they stepped in to help.
Personal experience
That's the key isn't it
It isn't his experience. We aren't in his mind, we are only in ours
I don't agree that it was avoidable, but I don't agree that it was unavoidable either. I don't know enough of his life to make that call
What I can say, is that when you can make logic out of your death, there's not much that anyone can do to see you different.
The other thing being, is nobody noticed. He was sociable, smart, appeared to have no problem whatsoever. These are the same people who end up saying to themselves "Had I noticed something"
Noticed what? He was perfectly normal. A flawless facade
As for psychs, I've been to four. None of them helped, and I don't live in a backwater place
Edit: Just realized The E complimented me (somewhat) on my posts relating to alcohol
-
As I mentioned, our personal experiences don't matter here, only his. Maybe it wasn't a facade and he really was that stoic. Though he might have failed to see benefits dealing with his problems could bring (for example, if he was bullied, then getting rid of the bullies would be a good and perfectly logical thing to do).
-
**** me, this is the worst thread on the entire forum. This is like a 2009 thread. Clots of armchair shrinks who don't know the difference between a psychologist and a psychiatry and think they have a special perspective on depression.
Depression is a tragic, treatable mental illness. The treatment is sometimes very simple - exercise, social contact, meaningful work - and sometimes nearly impossible. The human mind is incapable of purely rational thought, and this young person's decision to kill himself had nothing to do with 'rationality'. If he'd just lived a few years longer he probably* would've been fine.
If you are depressed, you must let yourself talk about it. It's an incredibly common condition and nothing to be ashamed of, but it is also not something you should tell yourself is normal or logical. Depression colors every thought and action you take in ways that will seem impossible once you're out of the soup. Depression induces learned helplessness - a mental morass that traps you in the same self-destructive behaviors.
Psychiatrists and drugs don't need to be your first step. Talk to your friends and family. Encourage them to check in on you constantly and to work with you to kick you out of bad habits. Go to the gym with a partner, on a routine schedule. Find ways to pare down chronic stress - if you're a student, or in economic trouble, this is unfortunately going to be a big contributing factor.
If you have a friend who was mentioned suicidal thoughts and suddenly cheers up, keep an eye on him or her. This can be a sign that they've worked out a suicide plan and have committed to it.
Again: most of the people on this forum have probably grappled with depression. I have, I know The_E has, I don't read deathfun posts but I guarantee he probably has. It is not a permanent curse.
This boy actually seems like an exemplary stoic. He's done the math, came to a conclusion and did what the logic dictated. At least, that's what he said, and most likely what he thought. This might have been driven by emotions afterall, but we'll never know.
This boy killed himself for the same reason as any other young person. He just had better ways to articulate his reasoning. The decision to take your own life isn't predicated on your own personal logic engine, it's predicated on the material you feed into that engine.
-
i kinda think true psychiatry is a dying artform. they use the perscription pad instead of psychoanalysis, which is a long, drawn out process requiring much care and effort from both psychiatrist and patient (and a fat paycheck to cover the bill). these days, especially if your poor, you only get to see an actual psychiatrist when they change your meds, they dont do any analysis at all. the rest of the time you see a psychologist, or a therapist, someone whos really just a trained talker, but without the educational background necessary to perform psychoanalysis proper.
-
Psychoanalysis is possibly crap that might just make things worse (there's some evidence that dwelling on problems just deepens depression), and psychiatry is currently struggling to move beyond 'i hit it with my SSRIs' as a clinical strategy. Treatment of depression has a lot of analogies to treatment of cancer - lots of unjustified triumphalism and a failure to recognize that the target disease is extremely complex and differs enormously from patient to patient.
-
i kinda think true psychiatry is a dying artform. they use the perscription pad instead of psychoanalysis, which is a long, drawn out process requiring much care and effort from both psychiatrist and patient (and a fat paycheck to cover the bill). these days, especially if your poor, you only get to see an actual psychiatrist when they change your meds, they dont do any analysis at all. the rest of the time you see a psychologist, or a therapist, someone whos really just a trained talker, but without the educational background necessary to perform psychoanalysis proper.
This. My sister was prescribed meds at fourteen and was stuck in a 2 year rut as a result. This was after <6 months of seeing this particular psych too. Was compounded when her medication was changed over a few times and her understandable bad reaction to it. There's more to it than that, obviously, but the use of prescription pads a little too keenly ****s **** up big time.
Anyway, I too thought this was a tragic article when I stumbled upon it on FB. The premise of suicide being the rational option though is something I feel I can empathize with, at least to a very minute degree in light of some recent life-events. Needless to say, awareness of mental illness, its symptoms and how best to support people with it is something every society would benefit from. I've come across far too many guys who needlessly come across as sacks of ****e, asking questions synonymous with 'Why don't they just snap out of it?' and the like. :banghead:
-
Not enough information in the article to really judge it either way. I have no doubt that the vast majority of suicides are caused by problems that could be remedied rather than merely finding it the logical thing to do, but suicide isn't fundamentally very illogical either so I can't really dismiss it as a real possibility.
-
Suicide is not a matter of logic at all. Logic is a process, a tool. At some point you need to establish axioms and operate on data external to the system. You can't determine the value of life from first principles.
e: An 'intelligent boy' could conclude, logically, 'I am miserable, and I do not see any way to alleviate my misery, so it is better to die than to live in misery'. That's logical. But he's feeding in external data which is not determined by logic - 'I'm miserable', or 'entropy will devour everything', or 'the impermanence of all effort makes effort futile' - and his 'rational' systems are inevitably tainted by affective processes.
If you start from the right assumptions you can logically justify just about anything.
-
Psychoanalysis is possibly crap that might just make things worse (there's some evidence that dwelling on problems just deepens depression), and psychiatry is currently struggling to move beyond 'i hit it with my SSRIs' as a clinical strategy. Treatment of depression has a lot of analogies to treatment of cancer - lots of unjustified triumphalism and a failure to recognize that the target disease is extremely complex and differs enormously from patient to patient.
thats because its supposed to be a long drawn out process. problems occur when you try to fast track it and take shortcuts (also you cant help someone who doesn't want to be helped, as the patient is part of the process). you need to establish a baseline personality assessment through observation, and use that baseline to test hypotheses about why the patient is not all there. that is the only way to approach the problem scientifically. if you give them pills you're not working the problem(s), only supplying another way to suppress it and the mental turmoil that surrounds it. granted so long as they stay on the pills they are fine, but if they should ever go off, for whatever reason, then you're right back to where you were. my mom has been on pills for most of her life to control her mood. though recently, she has come off of them for other health concerns (they were "destroying her liver"). now shes a total lunatic, breaking things and yelling off into space all the time. its not pretty.
-
At risk of looking like a tool...
I'm no psychiatrist or psychologist, and I don't claim to be. However, I do have some basic ASIST (Applied Suicide Interventions Skills Training), and spent a couple of years in high school acting as a member of a group of students with the training, trying to help those of our peers planning to commit suicide to not do so, and to get them to local supports as much as possible.
Now I would be lying if I said that the procedures always worked, or that the local support was always what the person needed, or that I have more than a shallow working knowledge of the science. But I can say with conviction that no person can truly accurately weigh the pros and cons of living vs. dying for themselves, especially when one's state of mind is depressed or otherwise pointed towards suicide.
Much like what Battuta just mentioned, logic really isn't part of it. Logic, given the right assumptions, can justify suicide with almost no effort. I saw that fact over and over again with suicidal individuals I worked with.
-
At risk of looking like a tool...
I'm no psychiatrist or psychologist, and I don't claim to be. However, I do have some basic ASIST (Applied Suicide Interventions Skills Training), and spent a couple of years in high school acting as a member of a group of students with the training, trying to help those of our peers planning to commit suicide to not do so, and to get them to local supports as much as possible.
Now I would be lying if I said that the procedures always worked, or that the local support was always what the person needed, or that I have more than a shallow working knowledge of the science. But I can say with conviction that no person can truly accurately weigh the pros and cons of living vs. dying for themselves, especially when one's state of mind is depressed or otherwise pointed towards suicide.
Much like what Battuta just mentioned, logic really isn't part of it. Logic, given the right assumptions, can justify suicide with almost no effort. I saw that fact over and over again with suicidal individuals I worked with.
not empty quotin this
-
I've changed my mind from the education-related threads based on what I'm reading here - basic psychology should be a mandatory course of study for everyone.
The rush to medication without accompanying interpersonal treatment methods is not ideal for patient outcomes - prescription pads alone are a bad thing - but depression is fundamentally a chemical illness. Modern anti-anxiety and anti-depression medications do work extremely well for the majority of patients. The trouble arises when these drugs are prescribed by general practitioners (medical doctors) without accompanying follow-up by a psychologist or psychiatrist (FYI, two different professions folks; psychiatrists can prescribe medications, psychologists can't).
A huge proportion of the population suffers from depression, be it mild, moderate, or severe, at some point in their lives. The majority of people will experience it, if they have not already (though it is predominantly expressed in your teens and early twenties). A number of people here have pointed out that they've experienced it; I've also experienced a mild case myself about 12 years ago. Depression is a treatable, physical illness. This kid can claim logic all he likes, but Battuta is correct - it's not logic, it's rationalization. Cleverly-written, perhaps, but its still rationalization. It's also not that surprising as depression tends to disproportionately affect people that score higher in intelligence tests.
It's also not surprising in the slightest that most people around this kid didn't notice anything amiss - typically, suicide most commonly occurs as depression is getting better. It's one of the tragic ironies of 2nd gen SSRIs and even some of the most modern anti-depressants - they so effectively address depression that they move patients rapidly from severe depression (where the ability of an individual to form and carryout planning processes is suspended) to mild depression (where the core depression still exists, but plan-forming and action cognitive processes re-establish themselves). Most suicide do not occur in severely depressed people, but rather in mildly-depressed people who are actually getting better. How irrational is that? This kid was most likely severely depressed (which family may have noticed), then appear to get better and return to normal - which wasn't really a return to normal, but a rationalization that enabled him to form a plan for suicide and carry it out.
Also, psychoanalysis is bull****. Psychotherapy (counseling) as a whole is not, but Freud's nonsense has been pretty thoroughly discredited as a medium for treatment of any kind of mental illness.
-
Having spent a lot of my life suffering from very large, almost bi-polar swings between moods, yes, I'd tend to agree that the worse phase is 'dawn', when you are just waking up from a low phase. When you are at your full-on depressed phase, you don't actually care enough to kill yourself, but when you are on the way out, you realise what you have just been through and that, thanks to the nature of many depressions, you'll be heading back there soon.
To be honest, I should probably have been on anti-depressants since my father died, but I've found an odd thing happening as you approach 40, in that you start thinking 'Sod it, I've got maybe 30-40 years left, and that'll pass before I know it, so we're all committing suicide faster than we think anyway.". Not cheerful, but it becomes more painfully true as time passes.
Thing is, there is a greater and greater reliance on chemical means to treat a chemical imbalance, my experience in the UK is that it is a lot cheaper and faster to prescribe pills than to go through the entire psychologist waiting list, which can take up to a year. It's a weakness in the NHS to be honest, we have vast numbers of people off work with long-term depression, because depression is merely treated like eczema, it just needs the psychological equivalent of Savlon.
-
Suicide is not a matter of logic at all. Logic is a process, a tool. At some point you need to establish axioms and operate on data external to the system. You can't determine the value of life from first principles.
e: An 'intelligent boy' could conclude, logically, 'I am miserable, and I do not see any way to alleviate my misery, so it is better to die than to live in misery'. That's logical. But he's feeding in external data which is not determined by logic - 'I'm miserable', or 'entropy will devour everything', or 'the impermanence of all effort makes effort futile' - and his 'rational' systems are inevitably tainted by affective processes.
If you start from the right assumptions you can logically justify just about anything.
Well, all I was really saying was that as far as I'm concerned, suicide isn't always a bad thing and that I don't know enough about this particular case to be able to say whether I think it was a good or a bad decision.
-
Poll needs another option: "I don't know, but I choose to act as if it is worth living in the hopes of positive reinforcement."
Right now, it feels like I'm stuck in the Red Queen's Race (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Red_Queen%27s_race) for the last five years. But then again, I've got two young kids, my wife has zero sex drive while she's nursing, and I'm surviving on such a minimal amount of (frequently interrupted) sleep that it shouldn't be any surprise that I'm not exuding enthusiasm for life out of every pore right now. In fact, the next person that tries to "cheer me up" is getting a steel-toed boot to the head.
Mostly, I stay perpetually annoyed because it is less debilitating than feeling helpless. You can endure a surprising amount of bull**** with enough piss and vinegar.
*You know what, nevermind, ignore all that. Really, this is all just venting, not serious or even worthwhile advice. I just can so clearly remember a time when my answer would have been an emphatic, "Hell yes! Life is definitely worth living," and I'd really like to be back there again. I'm just ****ING TIRED OF BEING TIRED. And intellectually, I can even stand back and look at this post and realize it is just attention whoring and not worth posting, but I wrote it, it is written, so there it is.
-
And intellectually, I can even stand back and look at this post and realize it is just attention whoring and not worth posting, but I wrote it, it is written, so there it is.
Talking about feeling beat down is important. It's not attention whoring.
-
I'm just ****ING TIRED OF BEING TIRED.
Amen. My little guy turns 6 months in a week and, while sleep is getting better, I still spend the majority of my day exhausted. I'm not even the one getting up at night to feed him either. I seriously suspect the reason that early childhood seems such a blur to parents is because if you remembered it all in vivid detail, no one would ever voluntarily have more than one child =)
-
If you start from the right assumptions you can logically justify just about anything.
Proof that life is worth living:
Lemma: We must show a human life is not wasteful.
Assumption1: Time is infinite denoted T
Assumption2: Human life expectancy is finite denoted H
Since infinity minus a finite constant is infinity we note that T - H = T
Therefore the amount of time a human spends dead is unaffected by the decision to continue living.
We conclude a human life is not wasteful.
Proof: We must show life is worth living.
Assumption3: The quality of existence is defined as the summation of the absolute values of all experiences. Let Q denote the total quality of existence in a human life.
Q = |e1| + |e2| +|e3|+ ...+|en|
where e1 is experience 1 and n is the number of experiences in a human's life.
Assumption4: The quality of existence without consciousness is 0.
Assumption5: A quality of existence at 0 is the most undesirable level of quality.
As the time of a human life moves from 0 to H, a human will accumulate a number of experiences, each experience bringing Q to a greater value.
|e1| < |e1|+|e2| < |e1|+|e2|+|e3|<...< |e1|+|e2|+|e3|+...+|en| where n represents the number of experiences in a human's life.
By our lemma, since a human life is not wasteful a human ought to live as long as possible to accumulate as many experiences as possible to raise quality of life Q.
We conclude by saying that all the experiences a human has through their first steps, the emotional ties they have with one another, intellectual stimulation, and the purposeful experience of assisting others makes life worth living.
-
Article is tl;dr, but from what I gather here it's going on about the futility of all life. We're all going to die some day, let's just be up front about it. Death is a nagging ****tard we can't escape from. Yet it's not going to kill everyone all at once. This is where I have issue with such arguments is that they focus solely on the individual; it is the epitome of arrogance to state that life is not worth living, for it gives no thought to the totality of the work of the human race. Alone, the human is meaningless, and will die unnoticed. When brought together, what one does for benefit can be enjoyed by others, and the value of action multiplies, lasting throughout time, each little bit adding to our legacy, making it ever greater.
And then comes the (supposed) end of the universe. But what the hell, that's gonna happen at t = infinity, so I give no ****s.
Also, word, bigchunk1, word.
-
Mate, I don't think the totality of the work of the human race plays much of a role when you're feeling ten feet below ****. I'll spare you my lengthy opinion and simply recommend you read the article - I think you missed the mark a little, here.
-
Okay, just did, shorter than anticipated. I thought they would launch into his logic and what not, and it'd be like 5 pages long. Surprisingly they don't mention his actual thought process at all (unless I missed something, likely), at which point I must agree with Battman, this was definitely rationalization, and I am definitely off the mark.
I guess people can just read the above and know it is my ladder for climbing out of the well. I've been down there before, that got me out, and (I hope) will keep me from falling back.
-
If you start from the right assumptions you can logically justify just about anything.
Proof that life is worth living:
Lemma: We must show a human life is not wasteful.
Assumption1: Time is infinite denoted T
Assumption2: Human life expectancy is finite denoted H
Since infinity minus a finite constant is infinity we note that T - H = T
Therefore the amount of time a human spends dead is unaffected by the decision to continue living.
We conclude a human life is not wasteful.
Proof: We must show life is worth living.
Assumption3: The quality of existence is defined as the summation of the absolute values of all experiences. Let Q denote the total quality of existence in a human life.
Q = |e1| + |e2| +|e3|+ ...+|en|
where e1 is experience 1 and n is the number of experiences in a human's life.
Assumption4: The quality of existence without consciousness is 0.
Assumption5: A quality of existence at 0 is the most undesirable level of quality.
As the time of a human life moves from 0 to H, a human will accumulate a number of experiences, each experience bringing Q to a greater value.
|e1| < |e1|+|e2| < |e1|+|e2|+|e3|<...< |e1|+|e2|+|e3|+...+|en| where n represents the number of experiences in a human's life.
By our lemma, since a human life is not wasteful a human ought to live as long as possible to accumulate as many experiences as possible to raise quality of life Q.
We conclude by saying that all the experiences a human has through their first steps, the emotional ties they have with one another, intellectual stimulation, and the purposeful experience of assisting others makes life worth living.
Assumption 5, after reading assumption 4, is somewhat of a leap. You are also assuming that every experience is positive. And while I applaud your hatred of sleep, I'm not sure many people will do so. :p
-
Assumption3: The quality of existence is defined as the summation of the absolute values of all experiences. Let Q denote the total quality of existence in a human life.
Q = |e1| + |e2| +|e3|+ ...+|en|
where e1 is experience 1 and n is the number of experiences in a human's life.
You are taking the absolute value of "en." That forces negative and positive experiences to both have positive weight in the accumulation of "quality of existence." Not sure I agree with that. One can envision the most horridly painful existence imaginable and it would still be considered "positive" in light of this equation, when I would not consider that to be the case at all. If your sum total of existence is one accumulated misery after another, wouldn't your net quality of existence be negative?
Note: I'm mostly playing devil's advocate here, as I do appreciate the sentiment, bigchunk1.
Amen. My little guy turns 6 months in a week and, while sleep is getting better, I still spend the majority of my day exhausted. I'm not even the one getting up at night to feed him either. I seriously suspect the reason that early childhood seems such a blur to parents is because if you remembered it all in vivid detail, no one would ever voluntarily have more than one child =)
Every child is different, and every relationship is unique. But I think the exhaustion of the first couple years, for the parents at least, must be universal or near enough as makes no odds. Some parents are just better at putting a good face on it. Me, I'm too exhausted to care. Mama is at least as bad off if not worse, seeing as she'll sleep right through baby2 waking up and crying. Going upstairs and fetching him is my job.
Nights like last night are particularly bad because there was a huge storm blowing through complete w/ tornado warnings. Baby2 was already asleep, and I had to wake him up to bring him downstairs. He didn't go back to sleep for quite awhile because the whole night-time routine was blown. Baby1, in the meantime, never got to sleep in the first place and was freaking out about the howling wind and rain. She wouldn't / couldn't calm down until I gave in and let her sleep in our bed. But between the two of them setting each other off, I ended up retreating to the couch. Again. FML.
-
Life looks boring when the way not to be bored hasn't been found. I mean, it is necessary that life will always be the same (except some events) ; but to humans, there is always a way to find an occupation.
As a rule, these occupations would be listed as follow :
-> keeping up some relations between you and friends - it can either be by having a trip, or by playing some MMO game -
-> having some challenges (it can be sports, mathematics, informatic (developing, modeling), or whatever (like stitching :P) )
-> diving in some universes (game, films, books..)
-> this is not exhaustive
However, I think there must be a good balance between each of them ; the aim is not to feel yourself useless, and to always have something to do (assuming that doing nothing can be an activity :rolleyes: )
-
15, impressionable age, and the mention of "logic" ... it would be interesting to find out what kind of stuff he has been reading, whom he has been talking to on- and offline, et cetera.
-
Depression is a tragic, treatable mental illness. The treatment is sometimes very simple - exercise, social contact, meaningful work - and sometimes nearly impossible. The human mind is incapable of purely rational thought, and this young person's decision to kill himself had nothing to do with 'rationality'. If he'd just lived a few years longer he probably* would've been fine.
Exercise... check
Social contact... check
Meaningful work... check
No improvement in the fracture state of mind
If you are depressed, you must let yourself talk about it. It's an incredibly common condition and nothing to be ashamed of, but it is also not something you should tell yourself is normal or logical. Depression colors every thought and action you take in ways that will seem impossible once you're out of the soup. Depression induces learned helplessness - a mental morass that traps you in the same self-destructive behaviors.
Talk about it... check
And yet here I am, even after admitting what I did here, not feeling any bit different. Hand me a gun and I'll demonstrate that
Psychiatrists and drugs don't need to be your first step. Talk to your friends and family. Encourage them to check in on you constantly and to work with you to kick you out of bad habits. Go to the gym with a partner, on a routine schedule. Find ways to pare down chronic stress - if you're a student, or in economic trouble, this is unfortunately going to be a big contributing factor.
Bad habits? I wake up, have breakfast, enjoy a little gaming, go to work, finish work, come back, watch some television or animate, play games, go to bed, repeat
On my day's I have off, I generally stay one day in the house, and the other doing stuff out and about, either with friends or just myself. I'm on a very routine schedule. I know exactly what I'm doing at precise times in the day. I'm neither stressed nor in any economic trouble
And yet my frame of mind is still the same from a year ago
If you have a friend who was mentioned suicidal thoughts and suddenly cheers up, keep an eye on him or her. This can be a sign that they've worked out a suicide plan and have committed to it.
The one thing I can agree to
-
Being atheist is suffering.
...
I'll get my coat.
-
Being atheist is suffering.
...
I'll get my coat.
No, that's okay. This thread would be improved by derailing into a religion ****slog.
-
No, that's okay. This thread would be improved by derailing into a religion ****slog.
QFFT.
-
No, that's okay. This thread would be improved by derailing into a religion ****slog.
preach it, brutha
-
Talking about feeling beat down is important. It's not attention whoring.
Only really works when someone's listening, and actually understands
But no one actually does
-
Okay, just did, shorter than anticipated. I thought they would launch into his logic and what not, and it'd be like 5 pages long. Surprisingly they don't mention his actual thought process at all (unless I missed something, likely), at which point I must agree with Battman, this was definitely rationalization, and I am definitely off the mark.
The article is a pretty standard news story and as such is the length of a one-page paper. Even if they wanted to go into his thought process, they wouldn't have the space to do so. My first thought when I read your previous post was "my God, has the human attention span really become this short?"
I've changed my mind from the education-related threads based on what I'm reading here - basic psychology should be a mandatory course of study for everyone.
The intro to psych course that I took barely covered mental illness, since there wasn't enough time left at the end for it.
I'll probably also get the "armchair shrink" label stuck on me, but from what I can tell, there are at least two types of depression: either stemming from someone's general life situation or as a reaction to a specific event or set of events in someone's life, such as a loss of some kind (where "loss" is meant broadly). [I suppose there's also the "not obviously rooted in life circumstances" type, but that's a separate topic.] The article gives you very little to go off of, but there doesn't seem to have been any particular event in the young man's life that triggered his depression.
But yes, what everyone else said about how you can justify anything with logic, given suitable premises.
Furthermore, while medication isn't necessarily an appropriate first treatment or an appropriate treatment for every case, the sort of generic suggestions like
Talk to your friends and family. Encourage them to check in on you constantly and to work with you to kick you out of bad habits. Go to the gym with a partner, on a routine schedule. Find ways to pare down chronic stress - if you're a student, or in economic trouble, this is unfortunately going to be a big contributing factor.
really do come across as condescending. What if the person in question doesn't have friends for whatever reason, let alone a partner to go to the gym with? Or even family, for that matter? And if the depression is more closely related to a specific event or events rather than one's life situation, these sorts of suggestions are even less helpful and thus even more insulting.
No, that's okay. This thread would be improved by derailing into a religion ****slog.
Probably, although I wonder if the general reaction of some of the typical "voices of reason" on the thread partly stems from the fact that the personal experiences of other posters aren't necessarily lining up with their pronouncements.
-
The decision to take your own life isn't predicated on your own personal logic engine, it's predicated on the material you feed into that engine.
This does not preclude the possibility that suicide or suicidal behavior can be a rational choice. Indeed it would seem to explicitly affirm it if your view of reality is reasonably correct and yet you make the choice anyways; something we are not able to confirm or deny here.
-
If you're insulted by broad advice, akin to 'wash your hands' and 'stay hydrated', I'm not sure what to tell you. I was very clear that depression varies extraordinarily between individuals.
Eating a balanced diet won't cure someone's malignant sarcoma, but that doesn't make it bad general advice. Is it then 'condescending'? Did you think I was suggesting that exercise, friendship, and happy thoughts would cure depression in 100% of cases?
Probably, although I wonder if the general reaction of some of the typical "voices of reason" on the thread partly stems from the fact that the personal experiences of other posters aren't necessarily lining up with their pronouncements.
Please. :rolleyes: When the pronouncement is as broad as
The treatment is sometimes very simple - exercise, social contact, meaningful work - and sometimes nearly impossible.
I don't know where the heck you're getting this from. How is 'depression can be really hard to beat' meant to be condescending? To reuse the above analogy - the fact that some people get lung cancer through other pathways does not mean it's a bad idea to avoid smoking.
-
That also contradicts what you said earlier now doesn't it
"Oh he just needed help" - First post you made to "It's sometimes simple, but sometimes nearly impossible"
The first post you made was highly condescending
But of course this falls on deaf ears
Much like everything else I try talking about
Not so simple talking to people who don't listen or understand now is it
-
its decided, deathfun is the male equivalent of i am zack
-
Not sure whether to argue with deathfun or just ignore him...
It's pretty sad that this boy ended up dying. Warning signs for mental problems can be hard to pick up on. Look at those school shooters, who seemed fairly normal until they snapped. I don't see why depression couldn't present in a similar fashion in some individuals, where they outwardly appear normal until they've killed themselves.
I think the key is that our culture needs to be more open about accepting depression. If there wasn't so much stigma about being depressed (oh, tough people won't baw about feeling down), maybe people wouldn't be so keen to hide it or deny it until it gets to the point where they're planning their suicides.
As for psychiatry/psychology, it's unique in that it's the only discipline in which it has been shown that talking with patients as the sole treatment can improve patient outcomes. This of course completely depends on the caregiver-patient relationship and the general competencies of the caregiver. It's a shame that this often suffers because sessions (usu. with psychiatrists) are not long/frequent/good enough to build up these relationships to their full potential. There's usually no economic incentive for psychiatrists to actually sit down and do full fleshed-out psychotherapy sessions. Much more money to throw on some drugs and get the next patient in the room. (At least, this is what I've heard, living in North America)
And on top of that, pharmacological treatments are actually kind of blah (though much better than nothing), since many (almost all?) of the medications for depression have pretty meager benefits over placebos in drug trials.
-
I've gotta pull you up on that last one. Cognitive Behavioural Therapy and the likes do their bit in helping, in my observation, but as MP-Ryan pointed out earlier I believe, they need to work hand-in-hand with medication.
My sister has a seratonin deficiency, plus I think two others whose names I can't pronounce/nor remember. CBT and talking to a patient won't change that.
-
If you're insulted by broad advice, akin to 'wash your hands' and 'stay hydrated', I'm not sure what to tell you. I was very clear that depression varies extraordinarily between individuals.
Eating a balanced diet won't cure someone's malignant sarcoma, but that doesn't make it bad general advice. Is it then 'condescending'? Did you think I was suggesting that exercise, friendship, and happy thoughts would cure depression in 100% of cases?
The advice isn't bad exactly, although by being generic it has to be somewhat impersonal, which is why it stumbles on the sorts of scenarios I mentioned before. And yes, the way I read your advice, it did indeed sound like you were passing it off as a cure-all.
Probably, although I wonder if the general reaction of some of the typical "voices of reason" on the thread partly stems from the fact that the personal experiences of other posters aren't necessarily lining up with their pronouncements.
Please. :rolleyes: When the pronouncement is as broad as
The treatment is sometimes very simple - exercise, social contact, meaningful work - and sometimes nearly impossible.
I don't know where the heck you're getting this from. How is 'depression can be really hard to beat' meant to be condescending? To reuse the above analogy - the fact that some people get lung cancer through other pathways does not mean it's a bad idea to avoid smoking.
Actually, what I had in mind when I wrote that was deathfun's reply (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=80818.msg1607679#msg1607679) to your post. Yes, he can be difficult (to say the least), but he still has a point here, which happens to fit with my comment above that generic advice might fit the situations of specific individuals poorly, which can then lead those individuals to resent both the advice and the one giving it, even if it's generally good advice and the one giving it means well.
Might I add that I generally appreciate the voices of reason in GD :) since they do tend to help make General Discussion make sense. I agreed with pretty much everything else you said (hence my not bringing those things up); I just didn't think that your advice was adequately qualified by the disclaimer that generic advice (or any set of advice, really) has its limitations.
EDIT: Slight clarification.
-
When deathfun expressed his, uh, views on rape I asked him if he felt depressed or lonely and possibly in need of help or a place to speak. He said he was fine and just wanted to stir up ****. I slapped him on ignore and haven't read one of his posts since.
I don't think this generic advice will ever* hurt outside of extraordinarily specific situations. It may not be nearly enough for some - even many - people, but it's a good foundation to work from, and it's the logical first step in an escalating response or a plan of maintenance. This is not, of course, to say that anyone feeling down, or especially anyone with a lot of suicidal ideation, should stop there. Social support, pharmaceuticals, behavioral therapy, professional help - all avenues of treatment nobody should feel ashamed for seeking.
-
i tried to get help once. but there was none to be found, something about needing insurance. so i just said **** em. now i troll parking lots of medical facilities with an ice pick looking for expensive tires to poke.
-
When deathfun expressed his, uh, views on rape I asked him if he felt depressed or lonely and possibly in need of help or a place to speak. He said he was fine
I didn't believe him :) or at least there was a lingering trace of doubt. Those two posts (your question and his response) also stuck in my memory: you might have noticed that I brought them up earlier in this thread (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=80818.msg1607569#msg1607569) when The E accused deathfun of spouting nonsense.
I slapped him on ignore and haven't read one of his posts since.
Consider turning the ignore off for this thread.
I don't think this generic advice will ever* hurt outside of extraordinarily specific situations. It may not be nearly enough for some - even many - people, but it's a good foundation to work from, and it's the logical first step in an escalating response or a plan of maintenance. This is not, of course, to say that anyone feeling down, or especially anyone with a lot of suicidal ideation, should stop there. Social support, pharmaceuticals, behavioral therapy, professional help - all avenues of treatment nobody should feel ashamed for seeking.
In the context of depression at least (dunno about other illnesses), generic advice can give someone the impression that you don't understand their particular situation -- or, even worse, that you have no real interest in understanding it -- and can thus lead them to shut you out, regardless of how much you actually do care or how sound your advice is overall. This is especially true if you don't add something to the effect of "yes, I know this won't magically make everything better, but I think they're steps in the right direction," and double especially if some part of what you say happens to fit poorly with their situation, such as if you encourage them to get help from their friends when they don't have any -- they might just decide to ignore everything else you say because of that part alone. You wouldn't run into that pitfall if your advice weren't generic.
Does that help?
-
e: really this whole long post seems to be dancing around one issue:
and double especially if some part of what you say happens to fit poorly with their situation, such as if you encourage them to get help from their friends when they don't have any -- they might just decide to ignore everything else you say because of that part alone. You wouldn't run into that pitfall if your advice weren't generic.
If I were talking to someone who didn't have any friends, don't you think it would be a good idea to get a sense of why they're feeling depressed, who they have to support them, and what they're already doing to deal with it before giving advice?
I think we can both agree that's good practice. Had it occurred to you that that wasn't done here because this was a forum post addressed to no one in particular, outlining basic good habits for battling depression - akin to simple sanitation, hydration and bed rest for fighting disease? It won't beat cancer or ebola, but that doesn't make it bad advice.
Respectfully: it seems absurd to suggest that no one should ever give general advice because it might not work for one specific case. You worry about the specific case when you're dealing with the specific case. These are good life habits for almost everyone.
the rest of the post as it was:
I'm not sure exactly what you're saying. You're suggesting that my advice, addressed to literally no one in particular in a freely viewable thread on the Internet, concerning basic, empirically validated strategies for combating depression in its most general form, might be too general for any one of the [n] permutations of depression, where [n] is the number of depressed people in the world?
What actionable advice am I supposed to take from that? I see only two responses to what you're saying:
1) Write a specific action plan for each individual with depression who could conceivably view this thread, so that they won't shut me out because I've haven't gotten to know their specific situation
2) Never give advice on general action against depression because of the risk that someone might...think it doesn't apply to them?
Good hygiene, bed rest, and and hydration will beat most year-to-year illnesses. Should we stop advising people to pursue these strategies out of fear that they'll become infected nonetheless and then refuse to listen to you when you prescribe antibiotics?
My advice was extremely clear on this point: the severity and pathology of depression varies from person to person. These strategies are safe bets for healthy life in general and they come at extremely low cost; they are, in fact, all essentially free. If you don't like or can't pursue one of the strategies, whether because you're physically handicapped, have no friends, or suffer serious insomnia, simply move on to the next strategy, including clinical intervention.
This is especially true if you don't add something to the effect of "yes, I know this won't magically make everything better, but I think they're steps in the right direction,"
Where are you getting this implication from? It seems to stand in direct opposition to everything discussed so far in this thread, which has repeatedly highlighted the fact that the very nature of depression - a neurochemical disorder - sometimes requires pharmaceutical or intense behavioral treatment, and that people shouldn't be ashamed to seek this help.
if some part of what you say happens to fit poorly with their situation, such as if you encourage them to get help from their friends when they don't have any -- they might just decide to ignore everything else you say because of that part alone
This is basic advice for healthy living. Depression is not schizophrenia or a cognitive deficit. It does not make someone conflate 'I have no friends' with 'I can't run' or lead them to think 'I better stick to lifting weights, and never talk to a professional about my constant suicidal ideation' because someone on the internet made a forum post. If they have no friends, no social support structure, a physical handicap, and raging sleep cycle disturbances, there's nothing stopping them from saying 'well, Battuta's advice isn't going to work for me' and moving on to another tactic.
Your concern seems predicated on the identity of some particular reader. Did you think it was addressed at a specific individual? In that case I can understand your worry - but it is extremely difficult to tailor advice to the target audience when the target audience is, as in my post, nearly everyone who has ever suffered a depressive episode. This is the advice I would give in the course of a conversation with anyone worried about depression, whether they have suffered a death in the family, a trauma, or simply a creeping fugue induced by chronic stress, fatigue, or unhappy heredity. That doesn't mean it's the only advice.
Sticking to a consistent sleep cycle, regular exercise and eating habits, regular social contact, and some kind of meaningful flow state work or play to deal with stress is good practice no matter who you are. It won't work for everyone, and it won't do a damn bit of good for some people, but the costs involved are minimal and there is rarely reason not to pursue these lines of attack even while going for urgently needed behavioral or pharmaceutical intervention. This is basic self maintenance, something I'm sure we've all struggled with. It doesn't hurt to reinforce.
To bring this back to the thread topic: odds are that the child in question would have led a happy, successful life within five or ten years. This suicide was a completely tragic, senseless waste, and the best we can hope now is that people can learn something from it - whether a way to eliminate the causes that drove him to it, internal or external, or at least a better awareness of what to look for.
-
this happened in 1998
And the death is the latest in a recent series of apparent child suicides.
Earlier this week, an inquest heard how a choirboy was driven to hang himself by school bullies who burned him with cigarettes, attacked him in class and branded him a homosexual.
Darren Steele, 15, was found by his mother hanging from a cord tied to a window in his bedroom at the family's home in Burton upon Trent, Staffordshire.
In August, an inquest decided 13-year-old Kelly Yeomans, of Allenton, Derby, killed herself with a painkiller overdose after she was bullied for being overweight.
And that same month, A-level student Tony Dwyer, 18, of West Bridgford, Nottingham, fell to his death from a multi-storey car park a week before getting his exam results.
These are all great examples of cases where sleeping well and exercising clearly isn't going to do much good for you. It would be cool if we had a little more information on the titular case here than 'he wrote in a diary and killed himself', but without that, it's hard to do anything but fall back on the basics.
-
@Ghostavo Admittedly, the proof is pretty sloppy as it relies on a lot of assumptions. I was just sort of having fun and making the point that using mathematics and logic to weigh decisions that involve meaning and personal preference tend to break fairly easily if not carefully treated. A classical example is René Descartes beginning with the statement "I think therefore I am" as an axiom and ending with the statement that god exists. There is no one hit KO when it comes to these things... and I think it's sad that this kid died before living long enough to rethink his logic. It appears to be a common tragedy with suicide, to forgo the opportunity to evolve your beliefs.
Assumption3: The quality of existence is defined as the summation of the absolute values of all experiences. Let Q denote the total quality of existence in a human life.
Q = |e1| + |e2| +|e3|+ ...+|en|
where e1 is experience 1 and n is the number of experiences in a human's life.
You are taking the absolute value of "en." That forces negative and positive experiences to both have positive weight in the accumulation of "quality of existence." Not sure I agree with that. One can envision the most horridly painful existence imaginable and it would still be considered "positive" in light of this equation, when I would not consider that to be the case at all. If your sum total of existence is one accumulated misery after another, wouldn't your net quality of existence be negative?
This was an oversimplification in the proof to prevent it from becoming pages long. If you don't make every experience increase the quality of life, that implies that there exists experiences which cancel out the previous experiences you had. If you continually have negative and positive experiences of equal magnitude then by the formula, Q would be 0 and life would not be worth living (according to the formula). If you were to redefine a more complicated yet more accurate formula, you would have to break it up into cases and justify for each case that your formula will be non-zero. A summation of absolute values is probably the easiest way to avoid a case by case proof.
Personally, well, I want to believe that positive meaning can be derived from any experience, even bad experiences. I'm sure people who have felt pain in their lives just want to forget certain experiences so I am unsure if I outright believe assumption 3. However, again if we believe negative experiences decrease quality of life one could trace a slippery slope to conclude that certain lives are too painful to live through, at least by using this oversimplified single variable model.
Edit: Ok, after thinking about this a bit more the forumula is not dependent on positive vs. negative as much as distance from 0. Absolute 0 is like death (assumption 4), nothing is happening it is like you have not lived. Each experience in your life, positive or negative brings you further away from death in that you recieve them and feel them. By the logic of the proof the more time you spend living and having those experiences the higher your quality of life will be. It's like the more you live the more undeath like your life will have been. :nervous:
-
I've gotta pull you up on that last one. Cognitive Behavioural Therapy and the likes do their bit in helping, in my observation, but as MP-Ryan pointed out earlier I believe, they need to work hand-in-hand with medication.
My sister has a seratonin deficiency, plus I think two others whose names I can't pronounce/nor remember. CBT and talking to a patient won't change that.
Oh yeah, for sure. I never said that pharmacological approaches were bad (on the contrary, I recognize that they're a staple of good treatment plans), just that they usually aren't good enough to be used as "solo" type treatment, which can sometimes be the case. Clearly though, I didn't convey that properly in my first post.
-
I'm just ****ING TIRED OF BEING TIRED.
See? You don't even pay attention any more.
its decided, deathfun is the male equivalent of i am zack
I actually thought she was quite a lady to discuss things with.
Furthermore, while medication isn't necessarily an appropriate first treatment or an appropriate treatment for every case, the sort of generic suggestions like
Talk to your friends and family. Encourage them to check in on you constantly and to work with you to kick you out of bad habits. Go to the gym with a partner, on a routine schedule. Find ways to pare down chronic stress - if you're a student, or in economic trouble, this is unfortunately going to be a big contributing factor.
really do come across as condescending. What if the person in question doesn't have friends for whatever reason, let alone a partner to go to the gym with? Or even family, for that matter? And if the depression is more closely related to a specific event or events rather than one's life situation, these sorts of suggestions are even less helpful and thus even more insulting.
Sometimes, the only thing an individual suffering from depression needs is somebody - anybody - to talk to. You may not think it is very helpful, and it certainly won't be for most, but every little bit can make a difference, right? For all you know, having somebody to talk to is the trigger an individual needs to recover.
-
Respectfully: it seems absurd to suggest that no one should ever give general advice because it might not work for one specific case. You worry about the specific case when you're dealing with the specific case. These are good life habits for almost everyone.
Sure, it's useful, generic advice, the kind of stuff you'd find in a pamphlet. But at some point, it'll have to reach someone, and if the advice at that point is just a verbatim or near-verbatim copy, well, don't be surprised if that person reacts the way deathfun did.
As for actionable advice from what I said, certainly give advice, but do so with care, even when directed to the nameless, faceless reader. Acknowledge that your advice is generic, if nothing else. With an illness like depression, given the stigma attached to it and the very fact that it is a mood disorder, even that simple acknowledgment makes a difference. You might call it tact. It was especially notable in this situation in that someone actually was responding to your advice and calling its value into question, but you didn't see it. If you haven't turned the "ignore deathfun" off for just while reading this thread, consider doing so.
But yes, back to the OP.
To bring this back to the thread topic: odds are that the child in question would have led a happy, successful life within five or ten years.
Probably.
This suicide was a completely tragic, senseless waste
Certainly.
and the best we can hope now is that people can learn something from it
Pretty much.
whether a way to eliminate the causes that drove him to it, internal or external,
It looks like all we have to go off of in this case is those five diaries. "Difficulties in coping with life" could mean anything, though.
or at least a better awareness of what to look for.
As the article said, there were no external indicators. People can be remarkably good at masking their feelings.
These are all great examples of cases where sleeping well and exercising clearly isn't going to do much good for you. It would be cool if we had a little more information on the titular case here than 'he wrote in a diary and killed himself', but without that, it's hard to do anything but fall back on the basics.
Fair enough.
Furthermore, while medication isn't necessarily an appropriate first treatment or an appropriate treatment for every case, the sort of generic suggestions like
Talk to your friends and family. Encourage them to check in on you constantly and to work with you to kick you out of bad habits. Go to the gym with a partner, on a routine schedule. Find ways to pare down chronic stress - if you're a student, or in economic trouble, this is unfortunately going to be a big contributing factor.
really do come across as condescending. What if the person in question doesn't have friends for whatever reason, let alone a partner to go to the gym with? Or even family, for that matter? And if the depression is more closely related to a specific event or events rather than one's life situation, these sorts of suggestions are even less helpful and thus even more insulting.
Sometimes, the only thing an individual suffering from depression needs is somebody - anybody - to talk to. You may not think it is very helpful, and it certainly won't be for most, but every little bit can make a difference, right? For all you know, having somebody to talk to is the trigger an individual needs to recover.
Certainly, although having someone to talk to and having someone to give you advice are completely different things.
-
I don't see why depression couldn't present in a similar fashion in some individuals, where they outwardly appear normal until they've killed themselves.
This is true
I think the key is that our culture needs to be more open about accepting depression. If there wasn't so much stigma about being depressed (oh, tough people won't baw about feeling down), maybe people wouldn't be so keen to hide it or deny it until it gets to the point where they're planning their suicides.
I can agree somewhat to the stigma around it, although it isn't the case for everyone.
When deathfun expressed his, uh, views on rape I asked him if he felt depressed or lonely and possibly in need of help or a place to speak. He said he was fine
Yes, because I'm going to openly state that I've already tried killing myself once before. This is also a great example of the general mentality of most everyone else
"Are you okay?"
"I'm fine"
"Okay"
Even when the person CLEARLY ****ING ISN'T
odds are that the child in question would have led a happy, successful life within five or ten years.
Back to topic: Your definition of 'happy' might not correlate with his definition. Happiness is a relative and person specific idea. There is no all encompassing truth to seeking it as each individual has a different thought of what makes them happy
or at least a better awareness of what to look for.
Do tell. What would you look for in a person who has appeared the same way for the past ten years of his life?
It would be cool if we had a little more information on the titular case here than 'he wrote in a diary and killed himself', but without that, it's hard to do anything but fall back on the basics.
I do agree with this
its decided, deathfun is the male equivalent of i am zack
I don't understand the reference
I actually thought she was quite a lady to discuss things with.
I'm assuming you mean the person I referred to prior
Sometimes, the only thing an individual suffering from depression needs is somebody - anybody - to talk to. You may not think it is very helpful, and it certainly won't be for most, but every little bit can make a difference, right? For all you know, having somebody to talk to is the trigger an individual needs to recover.
Talking does little. Actions do more
It's far more helpful to have a friend who've you have consulted in than a psych. A good friend who actually understands what mindset you're in because they're in the same damned boat
That alone creates a bond of which is strengthened by action following it. You don't hang out with your psych, you talk to your psych, and then you pay him. That's the most impersonal thing I could ever imagine. Paying someone so you can talk to them
-
As the article said, there were no external indicators. People can be remarkably good at masking their feelings.
I'm not sure this is true.
-
its decided, deathfun is the male equivalent of i am zack
I don't understand the reference
I actually thought she was quite a lady to discuss things with.
I'm assuming you mean the person I referred to prior
Try this Google search (http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Ahard-light.net%2Fforums+iamzack) and this forum profile (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?action=profile;u=8830), although this thread (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=74569.0) is probably enough to give you the idea.
EDIT: Although if the thread says that kara banned her on February 14 of last year, why does her profile list her as last active on August 1?
-
i dont think banned blocks you from logging on, it just prevents you from doing anything. of course ive never been banned so what do i know.
-
As the article said, there were no external indicators. People can be remarkably good at masking their feelings.
I'm not sure this is true.
I can assure you, it is
-
Not to drag this into a battle of semantics, but I think Battuta was addressing the first sentence.
-
As in there might have been warning signs that everyone around him missed? Perhaps. But it's impossible to say from that one article.
-
As the article said, there were no external indicators. People can be remarkably good at masking their feelings.
I'm not sure this is true.
I can assure you, it is
its kinda somewhere in the middle. there are indicators but many of them are usually so subtle that they go unnoticed by most people. there are some people who can pick up on them, and there are those who have it down to a science. im not sure if this is more an innate ability in some people or something that can be learned. its certainly not something i can do.
-
As the article said, there were no external indicators. People can be remarkably good at masking their feelings.
I'm not sure this is true.
I can assure you, it is
its kinda somewhere in the middle. there are indicators but many of them are usually so subtle that they go unnoticed by most people. there are some people who can pick up on them, and there are those who have it down to a science. im not sure if this is more an innate ability in some people or something that can be learned. its certainly not something i can do.
Hmm, good point you raise there
As for innate ability or learned... it could be both. Given enough time, you could end up being like the person from "Lie to Me" noticing every slight detail
Not to drag this into a battle of semantics, but I think Battuta was addressing the first sentence.
Oh... well nevermind then
-
i dont think banned blocks you from logging on, it just prevents you from doing anything. of course ive never been banned so what do i know.
It does block you from actually visiting the forum, yes.
And yes, I got banned once. I might have had a bit too much sugar at some point.
-
I'm a bit late for this thread but this one and the following discussion caught the eye:
I've changed my mind from the education-related threads based on what I'm reading here - basic psychology should be a mandatory course of study for everyone.
I agree. Mine in the college did not do much, and I don't remember much from it. And I'm not even sure if it is scientifically valid anymore. Worst part of it was the person who taught it doubled with religion teaching, making the course pretty much an exercise of reading memory - and me doubting whether I ever heard anything that wasn't religiously colored there, invalidating the idea of the course.
In reality, the teaching should actually be earlier than in college (around the age of 12-13 possibly?), but what is the exact content that should be taught there? This in itself is probably worth another topic already.
I mourn the loss of a smart person
-
its sad the number of people who blame "demonic possession" as the cause of mental illness. there are a lot of people in bible thumper circles who think that psychology is entirely bogus.
-
its sad the number of people who blame "demonic possession" as the cause of mental illness. there are a lot of people in bible thumper circles who think that psychology is entirely bogus.
And, you know, these guys (http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/104274/what-scientologist-actually-believe). (btw, you can't find this clip via youtube search, anymore, despite there being about 200 copies of it, at one point) [/threadjack]
---
I'm seriously interested in how this guy reached his conclusion. I think it's a travesty that we can't see 'the math' that the article mentions.
-
What I wonder is how he was able to use mathematics to weigh the pros and cons of living. It's probably beyond my comprehension to begin with.
-
What I wonder is how he was able to use mathematics to weigh the pros and cons of living. It's probably beyond my comprehension to begin with.
No, not really; he just misapplied the tools of mathematics and failed to examine his axioms and assumptions. Insufficient rigor.
-
What I wonder is how he was able to use mathematics to weigh the pros and cons of living. It's probably beyond my comprehension to begin with.
I think say he used statistics. You can prove a lot of different things using right statistics and careful wording. That's why there are three kinds of lie: Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics. :)
I could most likely think of a fact-based, technically correct and logical proof that life is not worth living, and then come up with similarly correct proof that it's worth it. I don't feel like doing that now, but if I do, I'll post about it.
Besides, just look at American presidential campaign. If you're applying statistics to something subjective or with a blurred meaning, you can get any result you want.
-
I could most likely think of a fact-based, technically correct and logical proof that life is not worth living, and then come up with similarly correct proof that it's worth it. I don't feel like doing that now, but if I do, I'll post about it.
The question of "worth" itself is inevitably subjective and ultimately arbitrary - rendering any calculation based on it a farce.
It's rather the other way around entirely: How you have learned to define what is "worth" experiencing and what is "worthless" will to a large extend define how much you enjoy life.
A junkie, for instance, has learned that everything but their next fix is worthless. The word junkie in this case does not necessarily refer only to substance abuse.
Personally I find that some rudimentary knowledge about sociology, biology and psychology that allows one to understand how we "tick" goes a long way to allow oneself to steer towards a balanced happy life.
What I absolutely despise is ignoramuses that blame fate, god or other people for their own inability to take care of their inner balance while they keep repeating the same mistake over and over and over on some kind of downward spiral of idiocy, lamenting the injustice of the world at every turn.
Now do not take me wrong... horrible things do happen to people and there is a lot of injustice in the world... but what I am talking about are perfectly healthy people with a job and often a loving family who are lacking only one thing: The ability to be happy. It's disgusting if you ask me. The holy grail of stupidity.
When I look at some very specific people at my workplace I feel like watching someone continually make the emotional aequivalent of a jump out of a window in order to break their leg... so they can ***** and moan how much it hurts... only to jump again right after the cast comes off... rinse and repeat.
Sorry for the rant... and I hope I did not offend anyone. My words are certainly not aimed at people with real tangible problems, stressful lifes or serious illnesses, but rather at that very specific kind of person that I appear to keep running into.. a person who really lacks for nothing but appears to have never learned how to appreciate what they have, who constantly *****es and complains about every minor issue while never appreciating the wealth of good things available to them.
Some people appear to simply be unable to enjoy even the best things that life has to offer.
/dons flame retardant suit :P