Who is asking? Is depression expressing itself? Is depression curious? Probably not. Probably, depression doesn't give a damn.

But there is not an either/or absolute, because it's a matter of what one wants to think, what one finds acceptable to be. — unenlightened

Depression doesn't exist in some independent manner or fashion from the mind. It often has a manifestation in being itself. Take, for example, "I am depressed". The sufferer identifies with the depression to a significant extent. How does one disidentify from that?

It seems to me that depression can be learned out of or come out of, and no amount of disidentification will be of any use. It makes no difference if I am a set of symptoms or a label; because, this is just how I feel.

And, yes. I don't think disidentification is useful for treating depression...

On the actual topic at hand - no, I don't think we should have a psychology sub-forum. We don't have an electrical engineering sub-forum. This is philosophy site and I think it's probably best it remains one. — Pseudonym

Not everyone self identifies as a philosopher here, you are aware of that?

Anyone still interested in this reading group?

I can cover what has already been covered in some small snippets if necessary.

Edit: I'm thinking about skipping the entire picture theory part, due to its obscure content. Any ideas if this is a good idea?

If it is impartial to right and wrong then it cannot exist because within such a truly impartial space.. there is nothing to dis-identify from. — Marcus de Brun

There's always stuff that can be dis-identified from. It is just a matter of what content I want to disidentify from. It can or rather, should be impartial to what is right or wrong. After all, right and wrong are social constructs, which are the very thing that one disidentifies from.

There is nothing in ones identity that one needs to distance ones self from... nothing at all! The distance becomes pathology illness and unhappiness, because the distance the dis-identity is a move away from the truth of the self. — Marcus de Brun

So, people who are depressed, anxious, or some other ailment, have no use in trying to dis-identify from those labels and their negative connotations? I think not.

The problem with disidentification is that it sees a 'wrong' as wrong... — Marcus de Brun

No, it is impartial to right and wrong. It doesn't distinguish between the valence of right or wrong.

And what's wrong about that? Disidentification is a valuable tool to use when confronted with conflict, no?

But, I am leaning on the assumption that one cannot disidentify with things. Identification is just too powerful in the mind and deeply embedded within it to try and negate its own validity.

I do mostly agree with what unenlightened has to say, for the matter.

If you insist, then I think I lean towards being straight.

But, more about disidentification, please. Why is it utter BS in your opinion?

What makes you say it's BS, for the matter?

Well, then. Then I guess, quite unfortunately, we cannot have a dispute or discussion over the issue.

A shame really.

Yes, I understand this somewhat. To be honest I would call myself asexual. I am not driven (anymore, or much less so) to gratify feelings of lust or sensuality. I used to be attracted to women, and still am somewhat, though rather Platonically.

But, what are your thoughts on Disidentification? Is it BS in your opinion?

What is your sexual orientation? — Marcus de Brun

I'm not sure I understand the point of this strange question. Is your point that some things are simply what they are and cannot be changed no matter how much one disidentification applies?

You don't cure the depression itself maybe, but i think you can stop the feelings of guilt and shame assoiciated with labels that maybe prevent you from even starting to cure the depression itself. — ChatteringMonkey

Makes sense. I guess disidentification can only go so far. You can keep your hand warm near the fire but not so much as put it in the fire to keep it warm when already done once before to the detriment of the person .

Depression is part of who and what you are. — Marcus de Brun

Then there is only the ability to coping with it, yes?

I love my depression, it makes me hate the world and reminds me that the greater portion of humanity is deserving of little more than disgust and pity. As a consequence of this depressive view, the opposites; nature, animals, philosophy, art, litterature, food, old cars, whiskey, old buildings, culture mythology, my bicycle, and the rare encounter with an intelligent thinking human... fill me with consummate delight, a happiness and joy that makes the depression entirely worthwhile. — Marcus de Brun

How can you feel joy out of those things if your depressed? That seems contradictory, no?

Thanks for posting.

Yeah, it's a futile concept in my opinion to address internal problems of the mind such as depression and other maladies. You don't negate depression by not identifying with it, I think.

Another interesting point would be the Cartesian claim that I think therefore I am. One out not identify with thought to exist in general.

It's interesting because, in CBT, there's even an attempt at disidentification, at least not overtly. It's mainly to stop labeling oneself with various labels instead.

But, disidentification seems better suited to deal with other issues than mental health-related problems in my mind. I think it's best utilized to stop negative labeling, as per CBT, of various names or stereotypes. I think, that disidentification is too much to ask for in terms of trying to absolve oneself from depression, anxiety, or other maladies.

Thanks for the response.

But if I understand what you are saying, it may also be the cause of staying more depressed because that's what you come to expect (identify with). — ChatteringMonkey

Yes, that's what I was pointing out.

I'm not sure what the solution is here, because it would seem to disidentify you would need to build up an ideal self again that doesn't take depression into account, but then that runs the risk of backfiring if you happen to feel depressed again… — ChatteringMonkey

Yes, well, the point would be not to identify with a label and simply accept the symptoms of depression in this case. Is that possible?

Another thing that might help is the more general realisation that thoughts and identification are allways only mere abstractions. And abstractions are necessarily crude simplifications of what's really going on, and never the whole story... sort of a deflationary approach to though in general, so you don't take it so seriously anymore, either way. That's why they sometimes call it the chattering monkey in eastern philosophy, to reduce the importance it is typically given. — ChatteringMonkey

Interesting. So, identification is a crude simplification. Seems true. What do you mean by the chattering monkey analogy?

True, one would want to be prudent and logical while attempting to disindentify. Like someone said above, turning down the volume can help. — 0 thru 9

I'm not sure you can turn down the volume on 'depression', it's a lingering feeling that doesn't just go away. It's a persistent and deep mood so to speak.

This othering one might say is identification by negation - "I am" ... "not-depression", equates to "I have depression", or even "Depression has me". And in such case, dis-identifying with othered depression looks rather like identifying with depression. — unenlightened

This is interesting. So, how can you disidentify, at all, with depression? The otherness of depression eventually leads one to anti-depression; but, that is not fruitful in my opinion. Disidentification is, however.

When one goes to the doctor, they talk about symptoms and different feelings, culminating in the label or identifying oneself with depression.

In other words, how does one draw the exclusion between the two statements about being depressed and having depression?

That's already complex enough, but there can also be another form of negation, that denies the whole thing, as self or other. One might say that sometimes I am happy, and sometimes I am miserable, and it is not a thing I have, or a thing I am, but just a flow of existence. Perhaps that is what you mean by dis-identification? — unenlightened

I was thinking more along the lines or associating a state of mind with being itself. This is manifest in terms such as "I am...", non-temporally.

I wonder what you mean by dis-identify? — unenlightened

What I mean to say is that we have identifications that we abide by, as you've already mentioned of being male, British or what have you, and being sad or depressed. Going back to the OP, one learns to cope with XYZ (depression as an example). Dis-identification abolishes the need for coping with some thing and instead allows one to live as a set of symptoms instead of a label.

Yes, it's built into us to identify with things and such matters; but, again I reference my previous post, about the limitlessness of disidentification. Does it just continue forever?

I agree. Transpersonal psychology seems like an interesting offshoot. But, what about setting limits on disidentification. It seems to me that there are no limits on this idea, and it falls on itself. If I reach the logical end of disidentification, which would be not identifying with myself, then what's left to do?

@unenlightened, what do you have to say about all this, if I may humbly ask?

So, let me reiterate my position.

One has the symptoms of "X", and those symptoms point towards a label or diagnosis, such as X itself.

How does one stop this process or begin disidentification when presented with symptoms of depression (just as an example)? I don't know if that is possible, as it seems like something one does automatically and without forethought.

Joots is a word coined by Douglas Hofstadter in Godel, Escher, Bach. It means, stands for, "jump out of the system." I've found it at times a powerful idea. — tim wood

How does one jump out of depression? That's quite impossible, I think. "I jooted myself out of depression." If anyone knows then please let us know!

@Jake

So, take this for example:

The inherent nature of mind is to process thought.

To attempt the cessation of thought goes against what is natural.

The goal, therefore, is not the cessation of thought.

The goal is cessation off identification with thought. — Wu Hsin

How do you disidentify with a thought at all?

If the treatment of topics pertaining to law is any indication, the treatment of topics pertaining to psychology wouldn't be well received particularly if someone with formal training participated.

Just saying. — Ciceronianus the White

I don't quite understand what you mean by this. Care to expand?

There are techniques - tricks, if you will - for dealing with this. In short, you just have to do it, whatever it is. Intervention that can get you over the hump is worth considering. And you might consider - or revisit because you likely have considered - issues of anger (including rage). It's axiomatic to me (maybe only me) that depression is inward-directed anger that properly should be outward directed.

So-called clinical depression is a dfferent animal, and for that you need professional animal control. — tim wood

So, you disagree that disidentification is a useful therapy in combating depression? It seems to me that, at least initially it might not be of great use; but, it would be important in the long term not to identify with depression too closely. How does one even begin disidentification with depression if they experience the symptoms constantly? It seems like as long as one identifies with their depression, then they are or will be stuck in a rut. Therefore, something else might be needed to combat the depression, such as the therapy of sorts. I don't believe that willing oneself out of depression is possible at first.

"Depression" is a term that can mean different things. Ambiguity lies in usage. MIs-use is - can be - problematic, beyond mere error. I do not doubt that, if you say your'e depressed, you're depressed. But that's not a ticket or a license, it's a condition. To call it "depression" is simply to pass through the main door - you haven't really got anywhere. Now you have to figure out the details, in a sense find out which inner door you have to pass through - and the wrong door is of no use. — tim wood

I feel as though it is quite obvious when you experience depression. It's a dysphoric mood of sorts. In the case provided in the OP, the mood has been experienced long enough that it seems normal to the depressive. I don't need to list the list of symptoms; but, they are quite apparent to the depressive in most cases. I do know that psychiatrists often mistake a temporary setback or existential angst or some passing malady for depression. Do you know how to disentangle temporary setbacks, loss of a loved one, and such from plain depression? Is it simply the length of time that one feels depressed that dictates if it is depression indeed?

Near as I can tell, disidentification is getting out from under being mislabeled, whether by self or others, whether by group or as an individual. — tim wood

How does one know one is being mislabeled? Is that a conscious process?

Ok, I agree that I may not be clear on what you mean by the term disidentification. Clarify if you wish. — Jake

Disidentification simply means, as tim wood has provided, freedom from being labeled by oneself or others. What about the process of disidentification? Do you think you could add to that?

The volume of thought can be managed through simple mechanical exercises. It's like working to get a flat stomach, we don't really need to understand anything, we just need to patiently do the situps. — Jake

Yes; but, depression indicated a dysfunction of being able to perform simple tasks. It simply robs us of willpower to be able to do simple tasks. Not in all cases though; but, the majority of cases experience anhedonia and lack of energy and a diminished power of the will.

if the discussion is about disidentification, then let's leave depression behind, at least until we understand disidentification. — tim wood

Fine then, depression is a term laid with ambiguity, at least until it is experienced. So, then what do you have to say about disidentification?

But, disidentification is not similar to what you are describing. Disidentification is a passive process of the mind. I mean, the chromic depressed person who identifies with their depression too strongly is going to not be able to address the activity partly due to their depression. So, how do you overcome this process of the mind that tells the depressive that they cannot address their depression?

Is it not that the faithful simply refuse to admit the uncertainties are uncertain, yet, as the quote suggests, the faithful must recognize at some level their faith is of an uncertainty. — Hanover

You edited your post so, I'll readdress the edited part.

What about the fact that philosophy gave birth to all the humanistic fields that have attained, through the scientific method, certainties and even truths. Yes, we can bash psychology and religion for being far out there; but, philosophy does begin in wonder, and the (un)-wondrous mind would be of little use to any field of study.

If as Kierkegaard said, "Faith is holding onto uncertainties with passionate conviction," then how is philosophy distinct? — Hanover

I don't have an answer to that one. Sounds about right to me, but, the quietism in me tells me that is wrong to some degree. We go along changing our convictions in life, hopefully, to some degree, so taking that quote on a hard reading would be too short-sighted. I don't think you can argue with that.

Good question. I would say yes and maybe not exactly. “Yes” meaning giving the existential aspects some thought and significance (which all of us philosophy-lovers already here do, I think). And “not exactly” meaning that maybe there is a fuzzy area that is both existential and clinical or medical. Or psychological, ethical/intential, and physical all rolled together in one big ball. — 0 thru 9

This is what I'm trying to decipher. It is through disidentification that those two distinctions fall apart and the dichotomy disappears. That's the profundity of the whole thing. It makes life easier to handle without the labels and stereotypes, identity politics, you name it, literally. It abolishes the artificial mental compartmentalization that we construe when growing up based on past experiences and whatnot. In some sense, it's ego-dissolving and transcending or liberating. Maybe I'm exaggerating; but, you get the gist I think.

This (in a very general way ) is the type of stuff I was getting at with the Self/Other awareness and identification ideas. Having some kind of way of approaching the tidal wave of life. Which can make a person feel like they are drowning, and might actually be fatal in many cases. — 0 thru 9

Yeah, give me some time to digest it, and I'll come around to figuring out your POV on the matter.

It’s life... the triumphs and struggles of being human.

It is individual and particular... the unique situations one finds themself in, and the strategies used to cope with them.

It’s our civilization... as I noted above, there is much toxicity a person has to deal with in twenty-first century culture. — 0 thru 9

I'm pretty much in agreement here. Nothing to add. But, I don't quite see how civilization factors in, it just sort of rolls along and one content person or Stoic?, Buddhist?, Hedonist? doesn't really find any need to change it. We take what we need and try and always ask for more.

I think this is where the mythic realm of art really can shine when at its best. The hero’s journey which we all are on, whether we accept it or not. Movies, novels, songs, paintings, poetry, etc. I have listed a few that have given some form to feelings that moved me in this thread. — 0 thru 9

Yes, we all love drama. It distracts from the mundane things we have to do. Some people don't like drama, and that's perfectly fine unless some asshole wants to create it.

Another work that inspires is Pink Floyd’s The Wall (movie and album). A dramatized survey of a life from childhood to adulthood, struggling not to be consumed by insanity. Many other examples. Please feel free to add some that you find enlightening or moving! Thanks again for your replies. :smile: — 0 thru 9

I'm 2001: A Space Odyssey, guy, haha.

Didn't really work on the old forums. I should know, since I was assigned to moderate that sub forum there. — Ying

Wow, thanks for your service, heh. Guess not then.

It's all interesting as far as it goes, but given how hard it already is to cultivate and maintain substantial philosophical discussions here, I wouldn't support the proposal. — StreetlightX

My proposal is simply to invite more trained professionals to frequent the forum when issues pertaining to psychology arise. Or to put it more bluntly, we need more psych majors on the moderation team in my opinion.

That's my take. I don't expect the moderation team to be able to maintain such a distinction from arising, as that would be a monumental task.

Thanks for your consideration.

In case anyone is wondering where the term "disidentification" was founded or propounded, then there's a Wiki on a movement started by Roberto Assagioli, called Psychosynthesis where disidentification is promoted to create a more holistic human being instead of identity... stuff.

I arrived at this idea through my own labors; but, psychosynthesis is a very intriguing psychological movement in my opinion. It is self-defeating, though. :chin:

Links:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychosynthesis
http://www.psychosynthesispaloalto.com/pdfs/SevenConcepts1.pdf
http://synthesiscenter.org/articles/0011.pdf

I just meant to differentiate between a specific medical situation/condition and a general existential crisis or malaise which many people seem to go through at some point in their life at least. In some, maybe the more acutely aware, this crisis could seem to last almost their entire adult life. And perhaps some successfully learn to deal with it, using it as an opportunity to understand life, reality, humanity, etc. — 0 thru 9

Ah, now I see. So, your point was to talk about issues (existential crisis, malaise, loss of loved one) in isolation or excluding pigeonholing label (depression, OCD, etc.), correct?

I think that on one hand terms like “depression” or “OCD” are relevant and specific, and possibly even helpful. But as an existential feeling... in some ways at least... depression, anxiety, OCD, and other feelings and behaviors are kind of part of the same spectrum of symptoms. — 0 thru 9

I don't quite see what your getting at here, sorry if I'm being a dunce; but, care to elaborate?

[...] put in a positive way, children seem in general to be very aware of the “connectedness” of things. They are in the moment, in the flow of life. Thus they often seem to have wisdom beyond their years. Adults gain the critical knowledge of individuality, but often lose the sense of immersion or connection with anything beyond oneself. — 0 thru 9

Care to elaborate on this process? How does it come about that from connectedness people's sphere of interest shrinks to a smaller size to only (often) only encompass one's small dominion of sorts?