I think the point you are missing is that absolutely everyone has depression.
And if more and more on a spacecraft are suffering from hypoxia it could very well mean there's a problem with a ventilation system somewhere, even, if the crew have a few known hypochondriacs onboard.
The thing that bothers me is the attitude. I'm sick and tired of people, especially young, healthy people going on and on about how incapacitated they are by some trauma. I can accept if someone suffers from depression and needs special limits on how much he has to performs, but first I want to see what you do, not what you can't do. If you tell your therapist it would be absolutely impossible to go out of the house, he will say that absolutely everyone can go out for 5 minutes. Then you go out and normally 5 minutes turn into 1 hour and afterwards you feel better. If you come back after 5 minutes, I would considere it still a minor success and leave you alone. But don't expect me to believe your level is 0, except if you are an 70 year old ex heroine addict.
This is what I find interesting about the use of language.
How many times do you hear someone say back to someone else "I'm sorry, I can't do that" compared to "I'm sorry, I won't do that". You ask for help, or someone asks you, you know which one to expect.
We like to think we have less choice than we do, because it protects us from furthering a conflict when we don't want to do something, but how much of this is a symptom of the same problem we're facing?
has some superficial truth because of capitalism's shared bs, I don't think it's the same to know you're useless for the rest of a day, vs. "I don't know if I'll ever be my old self again."
That's not capitalism's bs, that's decent, conscientious and industrious people knowing they should do more and those qualities are inverting and doing more harm than good when those qualities are good in and of themselves.
I see this the most in my family. No one can make a standard higher or demand more from us than we do ourselves. We are a terrible martinet to ourselves and we'd be disgusted and shocked by if we saw someone treating someone else that way.
Casting virtue on work and suffering is just secular Protestantism, the dominant spirit of our times.
In my experience the dominant spirit of our times is that one deserves to be happy and that happiness is our natural state - if you are not happy something is wrong with you, and you need to work on becoming happy.
Happiness is just one facet of the human condition and obsessing about one facet fucks one up. We all know that. If it wasn't so addicts would be heralded as saints worthy of emulation by all.
Suffering can be a virtue, just as happiness can be a glorious joy, but it depends on what kind. The man who refuses all help and carries everything by himself rather than humbling himself to use a vehicle to do more without breaking his body is just as bad as the lazy fuck who drives everywhere and goes out of his not to exert his body.
It's not helplessness to know firsthand that an act of self-flagelation does no one any good.
That is true, but you know yourself if pessimism is a demon always gnawing at your heart.
Dogs can be depressed. I have personally witnessed this when working with blind people during my Zivildienst. Guide dogs quite often develop severe psychological illness and need to be taken out to play by someone who is not the blind person. In that regard, I think dogs are the worst example you can take, because their psychology is the most similar to humans in the animal kingdom. If you completely deny a dog the ability to do the things that are natural to him, which is often blocked by training, he will become very much depressed.
Dolphins also get depressed and even suicidal when separated from other dolphins. There was a very interesting episode in Jacques Cousteau, where a dolphin stopped eating until they gave her a companion.
It's safe to saw the more intelligent the living being, the more prone to depression it can be.
Related I believe in some way is that the more intelligent a living being is, the more capacity for malevolence there is, though I'd say that's largely restricted to Mankind, chimp murder gangs and dolphin rape gangs not withstanding.
Burn-out comes from "too much forced, unwanted activity" instead of "too much thought". I would say that a depressed person that realizes they are blocked by pessimism and takes on too many things will relapse into burnout. So it's more about doing a few things that are in your nature and not necessarily doing too many things that you don't want.
There's more than that: The opposite of over-exertion isn't rest,
it's atrophy.
All those true blue, excuse making lying fucks are no getting off easy, they are suffering in other ways, and sadly don't even realize it.
I am just of the group who wants to relentlessly keep pushing to at least do something, because I don't believe that many people are really incapable of doing anything.
[/QUOTE]
And the world needs folks like you, just temper it with mercy. Same goes for the merciful on the other end, they need to temper their mercy with hardness.
I see what you mean, but my point was simpler, and was not referencing productivity or the work ethic.
It was this: You may be depressed, but you're less depressed while writing these posts, by sole virtue of you being engaged in the mental act of concentrated focus and the physical act of putting the words into the screen. The moment you stop and think, though -- that's when it gets worse.
There are those though that are drained by this, or rather, this is simply not the best use of their resources.
I've run into their with chronic pain:
It will not shut up.
I can appreciate the pain doc for pushing concentration on other things as a means of distracting one from pain, but for me the pain pulls and taxes my concentration making things far harder than they are. I can deal with that doing things I need to do, but for others, I notice a decline. I've practically stopped playing games as a result and many other forms of relaxation.
The simile I for this sort of thing is like being locked in a room with a broken fire alarm that can't be turned off, then being told to meditate or distract yourself to make the sound go away. You might be able to do that for awhile, but then years go by and your mountain is eaten away like rain drops falling on it over millions of years.
It's interesting that you bring up positing ideas. Supposedly on average, when men have a problem, they're looking for advice and solutions; and when women have a problem, they're wanting to feel understood/heard. (And thus, a propensity to misfire when working with the opposite gender. Though this is a generalisation, I find it a very interesting one.)
There's also that both need the other in some degree. Women need advice and solutions and not to feel understood/heard and men need to the opposite. Anyone who doubts that about a guy, consider a decent hard working dude who feels underappreciated at his job that has resentment and bitterness infect his life, something that could easily be dispelled by a little acknowledgement from his superiors even if he gets nothing tangible from it but a pant on the back.
Someone might have a shit job, but hearing someone agree it's shit, but it needs done can make a big difference here and there.
I would even say in this regard our experience is largely determined before the fact. Often when I have completely convinced myself that I will succeed every experience that comes from it will be easy, productive and positive. Whereas if I have strong doubts I am doomed to inactivity, or give up before really trying.
This is the evil of abuse and chronic misfortune. It jams pessimism down your throat.
But I had to think that this is largely Jack London's philosophy. Imo London was an extremely sentimental, alcoholic and possibly depressed person, who was fascinated with wolves and any kind of action, and created himself as the perfect man of adventure.
Pascal was a deeply ill man his entire life who died at 39 and should have died earlier. An autopsy of his body afterwards showed lesions in many parts of his body, though no illness has been determined.
Nietzsche had his illnesses, and IMO, sought liberation from them. Pascal embraced them. He was not pessimistic, he came to terms with his lot in life and did what he could be more than just a sick man.
As someone who's suffered from chronic illness for over 25 years and wasn't certain of being alive at my age, I can commend both for what they accomplished in their lives, but Pascal had an optimism to his life despite the cards he was dealt.