Maybe it would help to focus on being more comfortable in situations where you're not in control? — Terrapin Station

Well, I have set myself up for a situation that I have no need to control anything. I'm on disability and have no desire to change things as they stand. This attitude is essentially, a huge "f*ck you" both to others and myself. A super-volition if you will.

I'm not saying you like it. I think the deeper point of games people play is that it reveals that patterns and habits which are difficult to break usually have some pay off. — fdrake

In this regard, I lack insight into my own condition, and I really have no idea who would be able to discern the chaff from the wheat. All I have are a diagnosis that is being addressed individually with medication.

To be quite honest, I see this as a philosophical issue. Namely, as to whether attitudes can be psychologized in any way. I'm assuming that they can't.

If you're serious, then you need to find a good ("good" as in good and not bad) mental health professional, probably a counselor/therapist and probably not a medical doctor. — tim wood

I don't have the luxury anymore of choosing my therapist or psychiatrist. Anyway, I've seen my fair share of head shrinkers and pill pushers here and in Europe.

I was never able to discern a common theme over the span of my duration of visiting those people.

In short, why is control even more important than life to you? — Terrapin Station

Deep question. Goes back to how my father blew up our already meager family relationship. In short, given my upbringing, I've become averse to either being in control (over the fear of losing control), and not being in control (over the fear of losing control).

It's a no-win attitude that is exacerbated by my depression. (insight achieved?)

All I got out of the concept of "games people play" was the wrong assumption that the depressive likes the game her or she plays. In most cases, the depressive simply hates playing games at all. In my case, I never cared for establishing a relationship.

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/480/site-guidelines

That's about all you need to know.

Regards.

:strong:

One of the first steps is to be frighteningly honest with yourself. — fdrake

Tried that. Talked with my therapist, and he has the attitude of being honest with me when I am not with myself as much as I should.

But, when depression robs you of any desire to get better, then what do you do? Cope?

Apart from my personal experiences with that topic I think that people should not kill themselves until they have reached the age of about forty. A lot of things can happen when you are young (and 29 is still young), but when you have reached age 40 you have seen what is in stock for you. The rest can be extrapolate from the way travelled so far — Matias

Well, forty isn't that far away. But, if anyone has been in depression, they know that time tends to drag out quite a bit, and sometimes weeks feel like months, and months feel like years. I will probably make a final decision when my mother passes away, which I hope will come about as far away into the future as possible. Having at least one person that cares about you makes everything worthwhile in my mind.

I will continue on this haphazardous existence that fate has dealt me, I don't want to encourage suicide although the thought is appealing as hell (pun intended?).

Best of luck to you.

My simplistic understanding is that sometimes it is best to hit the bottom in order to bounce up again ... but sadly it’s not without pain and not without risk. Generally speaking fear can be extremely debilitating. I personally think most of people’s day-to-day woes are a repercussion of ‘fear’ - which is, in my experience, 95-99% misleading and/or stupefying. — I like sushi

I have been living on rock bottom for about 4-5 years. No income, on disability, nothing really accomplished, even college not completed. I mean, I don't mean to come off as a slob; but, I really did try throwing myself at trying to accomplish something since I moved back to the states 10 years ago. College, military service, maintaining a simple job, been there done that. Now, that I am on disability, it's figurately rock bottom for me, and the only way forward is upward. Yet, I often repeat to myself in a mantra, that I have everything I could wish for and that I should be more appreciative or grateful for what I already have.

What am I getting wrong here?

Take control. This requires change. When there is nothing left I think it is worth trying some drastic change in order to shake things up and then to build structure and control out of such circumstances.

At worst such change will put the previous ‘lack of control’ in perspective. — I like sushi

One of the few things that I learned about depression is that it is mainly a lack of sense of control in one's life that contributes to the malaise. Yet, I have meager income and little that I can do about my current situation. I have thought about moving out; but, have no savings or money I can spare to move out of the country. Ideally, I want to return back to Europe and live out my days over there.

But, the issue is that somewhere back in the recesses of my mind, there is a part of "me" that drags me down and observes me in this precarious state and when "it" sees the opportunity, then it lunges forward and chastizes me for choosing to live. When I don't listen to this part of me, it tends to manifest in bad decision makings, such as seeking out drugs or some such matter. It really wants things its way...

It sucks, or this part of me needs to go away for me to move on in life, yet it is there.

Have you ever had depression?

I feel like throwing my life away at the moment. I have no reason to live, (pretty much disabled for life given my diagnosis), and looking forward to death. I have my mother whom I don't want to impose more grief on; but, life seems so uninteresting, that I am seriously contemplating suicide. It has been on my mind for some 15 years now, and it's getting really tiring waiting on death to knock on my door.

I mean, we all die eventually? So, what's the problem with suicide?

That's certainly possible, there is an element of subjectivity in justice, you can get different results with different lawyers. I think your mother and you should try to pick a lawyer that you feel comfortable with, that you feel is on your side, and then it will be easier to bring the judge on your side too. — leo

It's too late for that now. We are at the endgame of this divorce, and my mother's lawyer is what he is. I'm really sad about this whole situation and want to be over it already.

Why doesn't the following persuade the judge to give your mother a favorable share? — leo

Well, at this point I'm not even sure if our lawyer is on our side, given his attitude. He said he mentioned it to the judge; but, when we had a meeting in regards to a settlement to be achieved, we still got a 50/50 judgement from the judge. So, I'm pretty effin lost right now.

Tiff is here!

Praise the Lord!

:up:

To a moderator:

Please delete this topic. I started a more general one about the logic of emotions recently, which I was hoping on addressing here; but, think in a separate thread would be more useful.

What do you think, @unenlightened?

I'm having a lot of feels recently.

Anger is a broad term. — Frotunes

How so? It's just an emotional response, I think.

Being angry means different things for different persons. The stoic idea is not about feeling the emotion of anger, but to quickly control it, and to not react destructively from anger towards the object of the anger, mainly because that rarely solves the problem but can often make it worse by impairing rationality. — Frotunes

I understand that. But, don't emotions contain their own set of logic? That's what I'm trying to imply here.

If the purchasing powers are close to equal, that sounds correct. But they have to be close to equal, at the same time. If I can suddenly buy a Ferrari and a mansion, but the bourgeoisie is now buying spaceships and planets, then I am still reaching for the pitchfork and torches. Will the majority of people ever be satisfied as the "under" class? — ZhouBoTong

Well, the standard of measure should be the human happiness index. If buying a Tesla Model 3 is within the means of the proletarian, then I can't imagine a better product a bourgeoisie could purchase that would increase satisfaction.

But, I mean... You do agree that the welfare of the proletariat is getting better? My analysis in the OP points towards a future, where having astronomical sums of money doesn't correlate with increased wellbeing. I'm thinking about how to put this another way. If the purchasing power of my money increases to the point of being able to afford the same goods as my bourgeoise counterpart, then that would seem to imply that instead of the rift between the two growing apart, they are actually converging.

Please keep in mind, that even if the money bag has a lot of capital, then that still is irrelevant to the contrasting effect it has to the poor bloke given that the same goods can be attained at a lower cost to both parties. But, I do concede that the money bag will have an absolute advantage over the proletariat in terms of expanding his or her influence in terms of job creation or self-sufficiency through investing in the market.

I'm back & I'm fine. I feel just like THX now. — Kippo

Kippo! Haha. You are fine. But, I've been having second thoughts myself about restricting where I try and rationalize things about myself. It seems to me, that anywhere else but here is full of negativity and bad responses. Anyway, I've been having second thoughts myself about entirely quitting the internet apart from posting here...

Best regards.

Who is this by the way, you are running around claiming I'm autistic and insecure several times, I think you should probably just say who you are. — Maw

A troll that needs validation...

Sure though, I can always get on meds. — THX1138

I think that would be a first good step. Good luck! :up:

There's nothing more that I can say here given those statements. I suggest addressing them honestly with your county psychiatrist.

Still, I hope you get a home or abode to stay in given the unfortunate predicament.

Here's an elegant picture of the struggle and strife of identity formation for a schizophrenic:



In my view, most get stuck on phase "struggling for control" as long as there is a profound dissonance with the perceived stigma of the diagnosis, which tragically is reaffirmed by many people who have no idea what schizophrenia actually is.

A psychiatrist doesn't know better what schizophrenia is, they just know who to lump into the schizophrenia box by applying the criteria, and who to lump into some other box by applying some other criteria. — leo

Are you serious? You must have some simplified view of opening up the DSM-5 and checking how many reported symptoms to fall into some category of mental illness, right?

Again, feeling bad and having delusions is enough to be labeled as schizophrenic. Now what is a delusion? A belief contradicted by reality. But who gets to decide what reality is? If you have philosophized some, you would know that people and social consensus play a great part in defining reality. — leo

Ok, here's the brief schtick. Schizophrenia isn't only composed of delusions. There are phases in the life of a schizophrenic. Such as prodromal periods, frank psychosis, and eventually a persistent struggle to form an identity. Now, tell me how any of these phases of the illness can be discerned online in a quick manner, baffles my mind...

So, fundamentally, if you feel bad and you have beliefs that do not follow the consensus (and as a result you behave in ways that do not follow the consensus), you're labeled as schizophrenic. — leo

This simply does not follow and I don't even know what you are trying to say here.

As to why coming to accept your diagnosis was a relief to you, I would say some of the reasons are likely that you came to agree with some authority you were previously in conflict with for not accepting what they told you, and that you put down your defenses and agreed to let people help you, but I don't know your story so there are probably reasons I don't know about that pertain to your particular case. — leo

OK, quick psychology 101... Schizophrenics are notoriously difficult to treat. They have their own theories about how their unstable view of the world "really" functions; be it the Illuminati, alien lizards, or their neighbor eavesdropping on their phone and internet. Shit like this is REALLY hard to treat since they seem life-threatening to the person experiencing these thoughts or delusions.

Now even deeper, a schizophrenic's identity is constantly changing due to their fluctuating existence. Perhaps, the singular best thing for the prognosis of a schizophrenic (apart from taking medication) is to accept their disabled identity and work from there.

Just an addendum to the previous post. Many of the factors contributing to the designation of being a "proletarian" in Marx's days have all but disappeared. Worker alienation? Pretty much gone. etc..

And what is it about the class situation that Marx observed that is so different today? — Bitter Crank

Well, every manager understands that shit-paid jobs and unhappy workers don't contribute to productivity. Furthermore, the demand for labor has gone up significantly since Marxs' time. At the very least, these two factors contribute to better wages and economic growth. I'm not sure about this; but, Marx incorrectly assumed that wants and desires can be satisfied, which if you go the grocery store and see a multiplicity of superior and inferior goods, then that's all that needs proving in regards to the issue.

People do not feel much gratification in being told that their lives are shitty compared to the people who rule over them, but their lives are really quite grand compared to people who lived 150 years ago. — Bitter Crank

So, when will things start appearing as rosy and good for your tastes? Just wondering what kind of standards for social mobility you have in mind here?

These elements of the class structure are still in operation, but have changed. — Bitter Crank

Class has not disappeared. It is as deterministic and pervasive as ever. — Bitter Crank

Yes; but, let's not kid ourselves. Class structure may as well still exist; but, not in the same manner as when Marx was describing the socio-economic's of Germany or England some 152 years ago.

The situation of our current proletariat is dramatically better than back then, many thanks to education and the rungs of the social ladder being not as far apart. Despite the outcries of liberals today of stagnant wages and lesser social mobility than say the 1950's, we do have a pretty progressive tax system, low-cost education for the poor through subsidized loans, a generous package offered by the military if one wants to go down that route, and a booming economy.

Economic downturns are inevitable, one has to accept that fact under a capitalist socio-economic system.

While that's sometimes claimed, that's not quite what Marx thought, and most of the misunderstanding of Marx is due to the same problem, a misinterpretation of the word 'proletariat'

This was a very old concept, since Roman times in fact, of a class of people who have rights to vote in a democracy but who are illiterate. It is to the advantage of the bourgeoisie to limit education, and therefore over time the class of illiterate increases until its decisions dominate the republic. The proletariat are easy to manipulate, and therefore do not vote in their favor. Some may argue that the process is well underway in the USA, perhaps for good reason. — ernestm

Well, I'm just going to come off as trite here; but, the US is a classless society. The only discriminating factor you get in the US is an educational achievement. But, the poor get a free ride in terms of accessibility to cheap subsidized loans provided by the government. The situation with college loans is really skewed to say the least, once you pass the threshold from economic poverty to affluence.

This may come off as an incredibly bland question; but, didn't Marx consider the deleterious effects of competition on "surplus value"?

How did he address this glaring fact that anyone would spot out?

But, here's the thing that you or Marx missed out on. Namely, that advancements in technology and resulting productivity increases via automation, AI, and the rest would cause the same luxurious lifestyle of the bourgeoisie, to be available even with the income of a proletariat worker, given enough time and possibly credit... So, essentially this renders class struggles as irrelevant. This has been happening for a great while already.

So, following this logic, there will be some point at which productivity increases saturate. I mean, they can't just keep on rising indefinitely. Therefore, when that sort of scenario happens, is when socialism becomes a viable alternative.

Yes; but, if the economic conditions are not ready to introduce pure socialism or even utopian communism, then it will fail. What I described in the OP is an operational rationale, under economic terms, for the state of affairs that would precipitate a successful socialist state.

So, I may have been using the terms too broadly. I still feel as though the logic is sound in the OP, according to Marxist economics.

Which texts are you referring to?
There are a lot of interpretations. Some argue the reverse of what you are saying about "phases." — Valentinus

I'm under the impression that this is the standard interpretation of Marxist economics. Anyone care to chime in about this?

How will/would the working class move society towards socialism? By organising the power of the working class in opposition to capitalists, and towards a society friendlier to the needs of the people. — Bitter Crank

Well, yes. That's the ad hoc method done through revolution. However, a more progressive measure would be done by reaching a point where deflationary tendencies causing printed money to become more valuable... A rising tide lifts all boats, as they say.

Wrt. to the rich, since money is becoming more valuable, their power may as well grow, hence under our current FED guidelines of monetary policy, we have to maintain inflation at a stable and low level, as the top priority for the FED to do.

It seems nonsensical to me. I have no reason to believe that Marx was exhausting the possibilities of how we can do things, and I have no reason to believe that Marx was ferreting out anything like scientific principles or logical principles or implications. — Terrapin Station

Well, this is a common misconception about economics. Marx couldn't have fathomed about the deflationary tendencies of progress in technology. Anyone correct me if I'm wrong on this, @fdrake?

If your primary concern toward me is authentically in regard of my mental wellbeing, Wallows, I appreciate your effort, even if I don't for the most part agree with how your perceive it and in turn, find is the most appropriate solution. — THX1138

Well, just coming out clean. I lived in denial of my diagnosis for some 10 years. Taking my antipsychotic was a chore. But, finally coming to accept my diagnosis was a relief in many ways. Anyway, the internet is too full of armchair psychologists and psychiatrists. It's pretty hard to come to terms with such a profoundly (flawed) view of oneself, and when I see people asserting such nonsense that can't be assessed in a 10-minute dialogue legitimately, is when I cringe.

There was a question posted on StackExchange about this issue. I'm just sharing what the Barcan Formula is all about: