Edit 2020-10-28: Added anchor tags. No substantive changes.
So what you are saying is that the advice is to soldier up is enough to lift the spirits of the depressed ones.
No, my advice is that “depression” falls into the category of “First World Problems”, for people with at least a bit too much comfort. Being “depressed” is a self-indulgence and luxury that is unaffordable to people in poor countries, and to poor people in rich countries.
If you are clinically depressed no amount of cheering will lift your spirits up.
Who suggested “cheering”? I say, to the contrary, a sure means of curing “depression” is
starvation. If you are desperate for food, then either your survival instincts will kick in, and you will fight to the death to obtain food—or you will soon be dead. Either way, you will not be depressed!
The statement was offensive for me because it sounded inconsiderate,
My statement
was inconsiderate. I do not care if anybody was offended. Reality is harsh.
Or if you really want to play the offence game:
I am offended by whiny brats. Because, if you want to consider suffering a badge of honour like a good Christian lamb, I am a saint:
I have suffered more than anybody who gets “depressed”. Hunger (
real hunger), homelessness, severe and painful illness... Been there, done that. Never begged, never scammed, never stole—even though I did
really need it. And I only survived because I have a hardened, “do or die” attitude. If, in my darkest hours, I had indulged in self-pity, then I would have died—and I would deserve it!
So, fuck you to anyone who takes their minor life problems as a pity-party excuse. I’ve had it worse. And others have had it much worse than I have, without the pity-party.
Reality is harsh.* nullius pleases nobody.
The following is funny to me. It seems relevant. I will just stick it here.
Idiots suffering the Dunning-Kruger effect, especially those who claim that dropping acid is mentally healthy, shall direct their laughable allegations of my ignorance
>/dev/null.
Thus, to give one case example in ten thousand that spring to mind, no psychiatrist in his right mind would pay credence or even attention to the findings, as uncovered by Hans Eysenck some years ago, that patients undergoing psychoanalysis have an improvement of 44 per cent, those subject to the effects of other psychotherapy recover at the rate of 64 per cent, and those to whom nothing whatsoever is done, who receive no treatment at all, are cured at a rate of 72 per cent.
Aghast when the news first struck with its initial shattering impact, psychiatrists quickly rallied, closed ranks, adapted very well, and conducted their own surveys, which unfortunately only confirmed Eysenck’s mordant findings. At this point and with a sigh of profound relief, there being nothing else a true scientist could do under the circumstances, psychiatrists the world over dismissed Eysenck and his findings on the grounds that Eysenck is a racist sonuvabitch.
Although psychoanalysis has fallen in popularity (and I do mean
popularity), I would suggest that not much has really changed in the past 38 years. Otherwise, we would not be seeing the awful findings of such meta-analysis as, for example, that done by the
Reproducibility Project. (
N.b. that the Reproducibility Project consists of peer-reviewed studies by credentialed mainstream researchers; they have been
trying to cure their field of a plague of irreproducible results!)
Evidence-based medicine is a promising trend in recent times, but it seems to be applied the least in psychiatry. IMO.
spoiled brats who have it relatively easier, so they whine about “depression” and/or kill themselves over trivialities.
To hell with self-pity.
In the course of my life, I have had a few people announce to me their intentions to kill themselves. I didn’t taunt them. I just coolly gave my stock answer to all suicide threats: “Go ahead. It is your right. I will not stop you. Your such decisions are none of my business, though I do suggest that you should first execute a last will and testament.”
None of them went through with it—at least, not so far. It’s amazing how the ardour to embrace death can cease, when it is found to be not a way to get my attention, much less my sympathy.
If any of them were actually to kill themselves, I would be unmoved. If a weak-minded fool kills himself over some triviality, then I do
not care—whereas if somebody’s life is genuinely so horrid as to be unendurable, then I have no right to condemn that from my position of
relative comfort!
Anyway, it’s not my body—not my life—not my decision.
That is a matter of principle.“Nihil melius aeterna lex fecit quam quod unum introitum nobis ad vitam dedit, exitus multos.” — Seneca,
Epist. mor.“Qui mori didicit, servire dedidicit.” —
Ibid. That was the big, bold quote in my signature until three days ago: ‘Who learns to die, unlearns to serve
[in the sense of slavery].’
Prevention of suicide is immoral.
