EPTI guess there should be a differentiation between 15 year old girl depression (which is what you seem to be talking about?) and real depression, which is a real issue?
Measuring Ability to Reason - Page 6
| Blogs > Liquid`NonY |
|
FragKrag
United States11538 Posts
I guess there should be a differentiation between 15 year old girl depression (which is what you seem to be talking about?) and real depression, which is a real issue? | ||
|
ChristianS
United States3177 Posts
On July 03 2012 05:07 skipgamer wrote: I've been trying to come up with a good reply to this blog post for about an hour now. It's not been an easy thing to do that's for sure because I have many opinions based of what has been said. I'll try to keep this attempt short and sweet: Why go to a mental health professional if you are unwilling to accept their suggestions or at least understand that their opinions are based off their experience? Doesn't the simple act of visiting them in the first place imply that you (or the law, or whoever drove you to them) believe(s) their ability to reason, or more to the point; their ability to judge your ability to reason is greater than yours in your current state? Not necessarily. you go to them for their expertise, and they make suggestions based on their expertise. But they are not infallible, nor can they necessarily reason about your personal issues better than you can. And because of the trust in the relationship, they might sometimes be inclined to exploit their informational advantage; economists have highlighted this phenomenon pretty frequently. The standard example is realtors selling your house for less than its worth because they don't make much more money spending the effort to find better buyers, and they could make more money ending the sale process early and starting in on selling another house. Not that professional opinions are totally worthless, but the fact that you went to a professional does not mean that it is somehow illogical or erroneous to not take their advice. | ||
|
Ropid
Germany3557 Posts
On July 03 2012 05:07 skipgamer wrote: I've been trying to come up with a good reply to this blog post for about an hour now. It's not been an easy thing to do that's for sure because I have many opinions based of what has been said. I'll try to keep this attempt short and sweet: Why go to a mental health professional if you are unwilling to accept their suggestions or at least understand that their opinions are based off their experience? Doesn't the simple act of visiting them in the first place imply that you (or the law, or whoever drove you to them) believe(s) their ability to reason, or more to the point; their ability to judge your ability to reason is greater than yours in your current state? The example in the blog was different, I feel. It seemed to be described as if the professional did not reason, while disagreeing with the decision that was discussed. Perhaps the professional was not able to construct good arguments, instead relying on a gut feeling or a fixed standard opinion for the decision, thus objectively being worse at something one would call "reasoning". Perhaps his opinion was reasoned well inside his mind, but he was not able to express himself, or he was simply lazy. | ||
|
emythrel
United Kingdom2599 Posts
The flip side of it however is that for most depressed people, the problem isn't systemic or untreatable (i.e a mental disorder such as bi-polar, schizophrenia et al) but a lifestyle one, after all an otherwise mentally and physically healthy person is usually depressed because of their living situation, relationship, job or some other factor over which they can exert some control. Usually they need to make some sort of change or they will continue on a downward spiral. Being that their judgement is impaired, going to see a professional and getting help is probably the best course of action rather than making a paradigm shifting decision by themselves. my .02 (probably not worth the virtual paper its written on lol) | ||
|
barkles
United States285 Posts
In terms of some "objective" measure of reasoning ability, there is no (moderately successful) attempt in the field of psychology as far as I know. This is probably due to the fact that no one wants to try to classify "objectively" better choices, and truthfully most probably don't believe such a classification is possible. Most of what psychologists specializing in decision making do is in measuring how deviations from "neutral" states of mind affect decisions. A couple of others in this thread have mentioned cognitive biases, and this is really the literature that is closest to what you're asking about (if I am understanding your request correctly). Perhaps what you're interested in is the effect of being in a state of negative affect on decisions against a neutral state and additionally what level of regret persons in each category feel about the decisions that they have made. This is probably the research that would be used to justify an attempt to remove someone from a position to make decisions for themselves: "I recognize that you are in (emotional and/or physical) state X, so research suggests that if you make decision Y you will regret it later. Therefore, I will attempt to not allow you to make decision Y for yourself." If this is the line of research that you feel would best answer your question, I can talk to a colleague of mine who is a specialist in this area and provide more details. EDIT: Also, having re-read the original post, I must take some issue with your treatment of "reasoning ability". My impression is that you view ability to reason as a one-dimensional construct (for example, you state that a person with very above average reason may have their reason impaired and still be able to reason as well or better than the average person). I see no reason (pardon the pun) to believe that reason is so one dimensional. I think it is much more likely that if we were able to measure reason, we would find it to be a many-dimensional thing, with different impairments or benefits pushing decisions in many different directions. | ||
|
smokeyhoodoo
United States1021 Posts
On July 03 2012 08:18 FragKrag wrote: Um, I don't understand how you can doubt depression's impairment of judgement/reasoning if it can convince people to such extremes as suicide, drug abuse, etc. I guess there should be a differentiation between 15 year old girl depression (which is what you seem to be talking about?) and real depression, which is a real issue? You misunderstood the blog. In my depressed state I was able to understand it. Compromised me > healthy you. Therefore I should retain the right to make my own decisions. Comprende? | ||
|
CtrlShiftAltGrrrrrrr
544 Posts
On July 03 2012 08:18 FragKrag wrote: Um, I don't understand how you can doubt depression's impairment of judgement/reasoning if it can convince people to such extremes as suicide, drug abuse, etc. I guess there should be a differentiation between 15 year old girl depression (which is what you seem to be talking about?) and real depression, which is a real issue? this post is so full of fail on so many level i wont answer just quoting it i dont even want to comment on this blog too much but american psychiatric institution is well known for being abusively patronising in the rest of the world so i really hope you arent put in an extreme situation, you are obviously really smart anyway and manage to go forward with your life | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States43527 Posts
First, while I've never been depressed or seen a psychologist, I would hope that you would be guided to make the best-informed decisions possible, and merely to continue to evaluate and re-evaluate yourself and your life (as everyone should constantly do), rather than have any other person (be it a friend, family member, or "professional") explicitly take away your freedom to make your own decisions. While I don't have the level of experience that you do, I feel that you're slightly exaggerating the level of loss that you have in your life by merely reaching out for help. Second, as depression is a serious emotional state and mood disorder, it's only natural that depressed patients are more likely to jump to a conclusion that's consistent with their normal behavior and experience instead of weighing all possible options (which may reveal more optimal choices). That's why guidance (and eventual recovery) is suggested in the first place, and why depression is taken so seriously. Your analogy of a very smart depressed person still making better decisions than a less intelligent clear-headed person still stands, but such a disparity is not necessarily commonplace, nor is it necessarily relevant (as ultimately, you have the final word on your own decision, and everyone involved in your life wants you to be as clear-headed as possible at the end of the day). So in reality, it's really all about the fact that a non-depressed Nony is always going to be a better decision-maker than a depressed Nony,. | ||
|
FragKrag
United States11538 Posts
| ||
|
NeMeSiS3
Canada2972 Posts
My general argument is that , in the process of removing depression via "treatment" which actually secludes the depressed person from being the "social norm" we actually not only sustain depression, we further it's position upon the person inflicted by it. By taking away the ability for the depressed persons ability to reason via drugs, we in effect create a social norm that it is alright to drug patients no matter the severity. The key to effectively neutralizing depression is similar to any placebo type personality disease/disorder--you don't tell someone to stop eating because they think they're fat, so you shouldn't tell a depressed person to stop being depressed because they're depressed...--is to remove the negative context society places on the individuals effected. "He has such a good life, I can't believe he's depressed" "He's depressed? People have it so much worse" "How can someone even be depressed" "Depressions not real, they're faking" are all examples of mindsets created by influenced by societies lack of acceptance, and furthermore lack of proper understanding. To conclude, depression is such a vague and near impossible to compare placebo(or personality disorder) that one needs to delve deeper into it's root (cause/effect) and produce a more adequate measure. The social norm of drugging and placing people in a negative context who suffer from this disorder, not only increases the depression of the affected individual, but sustains it, and the key way to solve this problem is to find the root of the depression--whether it is something that happened in the past, or fears of the future--and correct it there. Placing people under this "cushion" of drug induced logic is more of an impairment than a solution. Anyway, that's my perspective. On July 03 2012 11:53 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Two things in response to Nony's rant: First, while I've never been depressed or seen a psychologist, I would hope that you would be guided to make the best-informed decisions possible, and merely to continue to evaluate and re-evaluate yourself and your life (as everyone should constantly do), rather than have any other person (be it a friend, family member, or "professional") explicitly take away your freedom to make your own decisions. While I don't have the level of experience that you do, I feel that you're slightly exaggerating the level of loss that you have in your life by merely reaching out for help. Second, as depression is a serious emotional state and mood disorder, it's only natural that depressed patients are more likely to jump to a conclusion that's consistent with their normal behavior and experience instead of weighing all possible options (which may reveal more optimal choices). That's why guidance (and eventual recovery) is suggested in the first place, and why depression is taken so seriously. Your analogy of a very smart depressed person still making better decisions than a less intelligent clear-headed person still stands, but such a disparity is not necessarily commonplace, nor is it necessarily relevant (as ultimately, you have the final word on your own decision, and everyone involved in your life wants you to be as clear-headed as possible at the end of the day). So in reality, it's really all about the fact that a non-depressed Nony is always going to be a better decision-maker than a depressed Nony,. I would like to argue a few of your points. First point, you conclude that he is "slightly exaggerating" the level of loss by reaching out for help, but this in itself is not the point Tyler (if I read clearly enough) was trying to impress upon you. It is my opinion, that Tyler was trying to simply speak about the social acceptance of drugs and "don't worry so much" mentalities that industry professionals have. You can say that "reaching out for help" is always going to be the right alternative, but when the help actually attempts to not only correct your disorder, but change your ideology, something is fundamentally wrong. You could argue, that your ideology is flawed and that is why the course must be corrected, but that isn't the topic for debate. So to conclude with your first point, the "exaggeration" is actually a rather apparent truth in the attempts by professionals to "correct" depressed peoples ideologies, and in effect, dumb them down. Second point, you concluded in your final statement that "a non-depressed Nony is always going to be a better decision-maker than a depressed Nony", I would also argue that perhaps your views are in fact, take no offense, rather ignorant on the topic. You concluded that "depressed patients are more likely to jump to a conclusion that's consistent with their normal behavior and experience instead of weighing all possible options (which may reveal more optimal choices)", which by all means, may very well be true. and you move on to disregard his analogy (most likely personal) of a very smart depressed person "still making better decisions than a less intelligent clear-headed person", as it is not "commonplace, nor is it necessarily relevant". Furthermore, you move on to say that he ultimately has "the final word on his decision" but then counter that point by saying everyone "wants him to be clear-headed". The argument that I am trying to get across is that does he truly have his own decision? The entire time you posted, you placed your opinion in a subjective enough way to state that you believe that it is his decision to "choose" between being a non-depressed Nony and a depressed Nony, and as I already quoted, you state (paraphrased) that obviously Tyler being less depressed will increase his mental capability to make sound decisions, but in effect of "curing" his disorder, through drugs (the most likely option), would he still have the mental capacity he had before hand? They say ignorance is bliss, but to an intelligent person, ignorance would in turn, relate to hell. That again, is my personal opinion, you may refute what I said at anytime, I will remain active in this thread as long as it continues to be an adequate discussion. EDITED: If anyone saw my first paragraph, it was related to a "teacher" in leadership class, I actually rewrote my first paragraph and continued on, because I wanted to play my own opinion on the topic, I didn't want to misrepresent that persons beliefs on the topic. Sorry if that confused anyone hahaha. Furthermore, note this thread that I created recently http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=340132 The thread (linked above) describes a topic which is in buddhist philosophy which was actually the main reason to, for lack of a better term, curing my depression disorder. | ||
|
Golbat
United States499 Posts
When it comes down to it, take what anyone else says with a grain of salt, especially when what they're talking about directly relates to you. | ||
|
Chocolate
United States2350 Posts
On July 03 2012 12:34 FragKrag wrote: While I was reading the blog it seemed like NonY had no idea what the problems of a truly depressed person are. ??? Nony has been dealing with depression himself for a pretty long time, where have you been? He says that recently he has been feeling a lot better because he started a new medication and has begun seeing a new psychiatrist, but I wouldn't classify his depression as some 15 year old girl "Why won't Kyle ask me out?" idiocy. | ||
|
FragKrag
United States11538 Posts
On July 03 2012 12:40 Chocolate wrote: ??? Nony has been dealing with depression himself for a pretty long time, where have you been? He says that recently he has been feeling a lot better because he started a new medication and has begun seeing a new psychiatrist, but I wouldn't classify his depression as some 15 year old girl "Why won't Kyle ask me out?" idiocy. yeah that's why I editted it out | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States43527 Posts
On July 03 2012 12:34 NeMeSiS3 wrote: I would like to argue a few of your points. First point, you conclude that he is "slightly exaggerating" the level of loss by reaching out for help, but this in itself is not the point Tyler (if I read clearly enough) was trying to impress upon you. It is my opinion, that Tyler was trying to simply speak about the social acceptance of drugs and "don't worry so much" mentalities that industry professionals have. You can say that "reaching out for help" is always going to be the right alternative, but when the help actually attempts to not only correct your disorder, but change your ideology, something is fundamentally wrong. You could argue, that your ideology is flawed and that is why the course must be corrected, but that isn't the topic for debate. So to conclude with your first point, the "exaggeration" is actually a rather apparent truth in the attempts by professionals to "correct" depressed peoples ideologies, and in effect, dumb them down. Second point, you concluded in your final statement that "a non-depressed Nony is always going to be a better decision-maker than a depressed Nony", I would also argue that perhaps your views are in fact, take no offense, rather ignorant on the topic. You concluded that "depressed patients are more likely to jump to a conclusion that's consistent with their normal behavior and experience instead of weighing all possible options (which may reveal more optimal choices)", which by all means, may very well be true. and you move on to disregard his analogy (most likely personal) of a very smart depressed person "still making better decisions than a less intelligent clear-headed person", as it is not "commonplace, nor is it necessarily relevant". Furthermore, you move on to say that he ultimately has "the final word on his decision" but then counter that point by saying everyone "wants him to be clear-headed". The argument that I am trying to get across is that does he truly have his own decision? The entire time you posted, you placed your opinion in a subjective enough way to state that you believe that it is his decision to "choose" between being a non-depressed Nony and a depressed Nony, and as I already quoted, you state (paraphrased) that obviously Tyler being less depressed will increase his mental capability to make sound decisions, but in effect of "curing" his disorder, through drugs (the most likely option), would he still have the mental capacity he had before hand? They say ignorance is bliss, but to an intelligent person, ignorance would in turn, relate to hell. That again, is my personal opinion, you may refute what I said at anytime, I will remain active in this thread as long as it continues to be an adequate discussion. Thanks for taking the time to respond to my post. Replying to the first point critique: I agree with you that there can definitely come a point where the level of instruction or advice that anyone gives a person can become too invasive or no longer helpful. Obviously, there are two scenarios here: 1. The patient is mentally capable of making his own decisions at the end of the day 2. The patient is not mentally capable of making his own decisions at the end of the day And Nony (and others in the thread) have brought up good points about how it's quite hard to assess such things, and I'm quite fine with just focusing on situation #1 and not assuming a catch-22 of any sort. And with such a case, I think it's in the patient's best interest (if he ever asks for help) to merely be made aware of all his options (something that a professional can help him do, as medical and psychological treatments can be alternatives to trying to live with the disorder), and then allow that patient to make the final choice after he's been made aware of all possible risks and rewards and every other factor and variable that could possibly be known. And again, there's almost no way that he could know everything without professional help. And keep in mind that the doctors can't force pills down his throat. And just to be clear, I don't assume that there is one special drug that can cure depression at the cost of something else (e.g. mental capacity). Sometimes it comes down to figuring out the lesser of two (or more) evils. And this is actually something I can relate to... not because I have clinical depression, but because I have mild Tourette's syndrome and so I have a neurologist and have decided to take medicine to help control (not cure- unfortunately) my tics. The worst side-effect is the occasional slowing down of mental capacity, which makes me want to ditch the pills from time to time... but there aren't many alternative treatments that are as effective, and not using anything at all brings back more (and more severe) compulsions that distract from daily life anyway. And as an educator, intelligence is one of the things I value most highly above everything else, so it's an incredibly hard decision. There's no nice, neat answer. So based on circumstances, you weigh your options (after first learning about them from an expert), and make an informed decision. And then maybe you switch and try something else if Option A didn't work out as planned. Sometimes you just get dealt an imperfect deck of genetic or environmental cards, and you work with what you've got. It's certainly easier said than done, but that's what you've got to do. So if Nony has to choose between depression and something he values more than his depression, that will be the difference between treatments. But he definitely has the final word on whether or not to take whatever pills he's prescribed or general advice he's offered. Sacrifices are probably going to be made either way; nearly everything comes with side-effects and possible risks. Hopefully he finds something that works well with fewest losses to his general well-being. | ||
|
Sablar
Sweden880 Posts
IQ goes down during a depressed state. Not by much, and not enough for it to matter regarding decision making. Probably the people doing the tests just aren't very motivated. | ||
|
BuuurN
United States60 Posts
that is all | ||
|
Entirety
1423 Posts
Yes, depression affects your decisions. You might make totally different decisions if you weren't depressed... but you ARE depressed, and that's the only thing that matters. This is reality, comparing your current decisions with hypothetical decisions is completely useless. Basically, what I'm saying is that you should work with your decisions RIGHT NOW, not any decisions you might have potentially made if you were not in the situation you are undoubtedly in right now. Essentially, the psychiatrist is saying that "normally, you would make different decisions... on that basis, we're going to say that your current decisions go against what you 'truly' want"... which is irrelevant. | ||
|
VPCursed
1044 Posts
I wouldn't ask an angry person if they'd be willing to do be a favor.. and similarly I wouldn't expect a depressed person to make a rational call when it came to making a decision that affects him and others around him.. it's illogical, it's not a matter of cognition and ability to solve a logical problem.. but the ability to think like a rational human being who shares common emotion, emotion is involved in all** decisions we make.. surely it would be unwise to make a decision.. we would make decisions we don't normally make. | ||
|
thrawn2112
United States6918 Posts
saying that a depressed person wouldn't make the same choices that they would if they weren't depressed could possibly be an irrelevant issue. people change constantly; when in your life have you ever been the same person at two different instances of time? should the logic of "well you're not yourself right now" be applied across the board to every situation where any person is "not himself?" i've done a lot of things that to me seemed fun and worthwhile that many people would see as irresponsible and a waste of time. i'm going into the army, and i've had to come to terms with the possibility that once i get out, i may be a completely different person and no longer find value in the same things i find value in now. while at first this worried me, i realized that if i am indeed a different person with a different set of preferences, at that point in time i will still be able to make my choices as i see fit and be able to get the same potential happiness out of life according to my new preferences/values. however, i realize that this analogy is very different from the situation nony is talking about. my example showed more of a slow progression of mental states and personal values, while the issue at hand is more about the short term bi-polar sort of personality swings that somebody going in and out of depression goes through. somebody using my logic might rapidly go back in forth in way they make choices (not reasoning ability, some choices have little to do with reason) and that's where my argument falls apart. regardless of this, i still think it's important that people not use phrases such as "that guy isn't himself right now." if he's not himself, who is he? if it's in your nature to have drastic mood swings, well that's just who you are. if it's in your nature to have drastic mood swings and, being aware of it, seek decision-making guidance during times when you are unhappy with your mental state and therefore rely on others to help make choices for you, well then that is who you are. no matter what influences causes a person to make choices they are still themselves, the idea that they are anything different than themselves is absurd. telling somebody that they aren't themselves is one of the most arrogant and condescending things you could possibly do. relevant youtube clip: link | ||
|
Railxp
Hong Kong1313 Posts
Conventionally, people consider "the right decision" to be one thatl is 1) possible to be explained logically step by step 2) most commonly agreed upon as "right". But of course, the idea decision cant be known unless you're omniscient, because you don't know what you don't know. Step 2) of listening to the mass consensus is an attempt to counteract this, because hopefully more people's opinions means more options will be considered. Of course this has it's faults too. Trying to live up to the bar of perfect-decision-making-at-all-times is just self torture. | ||
| ||
