4 ms·

> I don't agree at all with the first argument What if some of the commonly known positive effects of exercise, such as battling depression, are actually psych

> I don't agree at all with the first argument What if some of the commonly known positive effects of exercise, such as battling depression, are actually psychological effects of that discipline and motivation rather than physical fitness? I find it hard to argue this can't be the case.

lagadu 9y ago
Nobody is suggesting that a pill should replace exercise in all scenarios; most of us do it because it's damn enjoyable which is why there are so many different forms. Depression is a problem that would exist regardless, the difference is that with a pill existing depressive people would only be depressed instead of depressed and suffering from the other problems caused by lack of exercise.
philipkglass 9y ago
Then that would be another point in favor of actually exercising, if the pills don't hit enough of the same biological systems to mimic the anti-depressive effect. I'm not rejecting any benefits of exercise that can be empirically demonstrated. I just want to distinguish "X has historically been the best way to achieve Y" from "X is virtuous, and should not be neglected even if technical progress provides easier ways to achieve Y." There is virtue in working hard to achieve good outcomes, but not in working harder than actually necessary to achieve those same outcomes. (If you want to do things a harder way than strictly necessary because it's a fun pastime for you, that's fine too. Then the experience itself rather than the end state is what you are seeking.)
- arnarbi 9y ago
  Ah fair enough, I misunderstood. I agree doing things for the sole reason of being virtuous doesn't make sense. Although I do think the origin of "virtue" is because some things had good general effects, but nobody was able to explain why or how. Of course the concept has been abused since then.
  - edanm 9y ago
    Some societies found it virtuous to kill anyone not of the right race/religion. Some societies found/find it virtuous to genitally mutilate women. I'm not sure we can come up with a principled way to distinguish the "good" kind of virtuous from the "bad" kind of virtuous without just deciding by ourselves what is virtuous and what isn't, at least to some degree.
    - costcopizza 9y ago
      Yeah, but 'some' is different than most. It's pretty dang universal to feel "good" after putting in effort to achieve something.
watwut 9y ago
If that would be true, then anything that requires discipline and motivation would help with depression. That is not the case - regular washing dishes or reading or most crafts don't have the same reported effect. That being said, the help with depression is not because you become physically fit. Exercise works even if you train in an ineffective way. It has more to do with chemistry (e.g. endorphins) in your brain then with overall result.
otakucode 9y ago
Well, it's not germane to the discussion. The issue of whether there are positive psychological consequences of discipline and motivation and whether there are positive moral implications of virtue are completely unrelated topics. Pancakes taste good with maple syrup, but it doesn't do much to address the thing the first argument actually says. In terms of ways in which "discipline" and "motivation" might provide benefits such as battling depression... I could see arguments both for and against as plausible. Feeling that restrictions on your actions are entirely of your own choosing is tremendously helpful at reducing the negative consequences of harmful stimulus, that is supported by research. I am unaware of any research that says it can actually tip the needle the other direction and make a negative stimulus into a positive, but it could be possible. Then again, there are a billion other ways in which our volition is infringed upon on a daily basis by society flagrantly which probably contribute far more to depression and anxiety and similar problems than anything minor like what limits you might put on yourself, so taking away just that bit should probably not be a noticeable change. The problem most people have with "virtue" arguments (and I share in this) is that if there is a REASON something should be avoided, then the reason suffices. If there is no reason, then you are inherently wrong to advocate that other people avoid it. And trying to paper over the situation with societal shame is just repugnant.
- r00fus 9y ago
  The discussion is about benefits of exercise being replaced by a pill. Whether the mood/psychological benefits come (or don't) with the pill as opposed to exercise, I think is germane to the discussion.

lagadu 9y ago

Nobody is suggesting that a pill should replace exercise in all scenarios; most of us do it because it's damn enjoyable which is why there are so many different forms. Depression is a problem that would exist regardless, the difference is that with a pill existing depressive people would only be depressed instead of depressed and suffering from the other problems caused by lack of exercise.

philipkglass 9y ago

Then that would be another point in favor of actually exercising, if the pills don't hit enough of the same biological systems to mimic the anti-depressive effect. I'm not rejecting any benefits of exercise that can be empirically demonstrated. I just want to distinguish "X has historically been the best way to achieve Y" from "X is virtuous, and should not be neglected even if technical progress provides easier ways to achieve Y." There is virtue in working hard to achieve good outcomes, but not in working harder than actually necessary to achieve those same outcomes. (If you want to do things a harder way than strictly necessary because it's a fun pastime for you, that's fine too. Then the experience itself rather than the end state is what you are seeking.)

arnarbi 9y ago
Ah fair enough, I misunderstood. I agree doing things for the sole reason of being virtuous doesn't make sense. Although I do think the origin of "virtue" is because some things had good general effects, but nobody was able to explain why or how. Of course the concept has been abused since then.
- edanm 9y ago
  Some societies found it virtuous to kill anyone not of the right race/religion. Some societies found/find it virtuous to genitally mutilate women. I'm not sure we can come up with a principled way to distinguish the "good" kind of virtuous from the "bad" kind of virtuous without just deciding by ourselves what is virtuous and what isn't, at least to some degree.
  - costcopizza 9y ago
    Yeah, but 'some' is different than most. It's pretty dang universal to feel "good" after putting in effort to achieve something.

watwut 9y ago

If that would be true, then anything that requires discipline and motivation would help with depression. That is not the case - regular washing dishes or reading or most crafts don't have the same reported effect. That being said, the help with depression is not because you become physically fit. Exercise works even if you train in an ineffective way. It has more to do with chemistry (e.g. endorphins) in your brain then with overall result.

otakucode 9y ago

Well, it's not germane to the discussion. The issue of whether there are positive psychological consequences of discipline and motivation and whether there are positive moral implications of virtue are completely unrelated topics. Pancakes taste good with maple syrup, but it doesn't do much to address the thing the first argument actually says. In terms of ways in which "discipline" and "motivation" might provide benefits such as battling depression... I could see arguments both for and against as plausible. Feeling that restrictions on your actions are entirely of your own choosing is tremendously helpful at reducing the negative consequences of harmful stimulus, that is supported by research. I am unaware of any research that says it can actually tip the needle the other direction and make a negative stimulus into a positive, but it could be possible. Then again, there are a billion other ways in which our volition is infringed upon on a daily basis by society flagrantly which probably contribute far more to depression and anxiety and similar problems than anything minor like what limits you might put on yourself, so taking away just that bit should probably not be a noticeable change. The problem most people have with "virtue" arguments (and I share in this) is that if there is a REASON something should be avoided, then the reason suffices. If there is no reason, then you are inherently wrong to advocate that other people avoid it. And trying to paper over the situation with societal shame is just repugnant.

r00fus 9y ago
The discussion is about benefits of exercise being replaced by a pill. Whether the mood/psychological benefits come (or don't) with the pill as opposed to exercise, I think is germane to the discussion.