6 ms·

Actually the article right at the beginning asks the reader not to equivocate mental health with mental illness and heath, or rather wholistic well-being, is ac

Actually the article right at the beginning asks the reader not to equivocate mental health with mental illness and heath, or rather wholistic well-being, is actually almost entirely the proactive responsibility of the individual. The basic starting point is fitness which applies to mental health conditioning just as it does to physical exercise. To be fair to your point though the article does say we should shift our thinking on mental health to the same perceptions granted towards physical health. That should mean the mental health evaluation equivalent of a physical every four years. That is absolutely beneficial to everybody because even perfectly healthy people get regular physicals even when they are perfectly healthy.

CaptArmchair 6y ago
I'm always wary of anyone leveraging concepts such as "investing in mental wealth" or "focussing on self improvement" in order to pander 5 bullet methodologies. Even more so when the author interjects a plug, both shameless as well as irrelevant, for their own book - Beyond Coffee - in their argument. The fallacy hidden in the article is that each of us is completely in control over our physical and mental well-being. That your well being isn't an inevitability but a choice. If it's a choice, then this implies that making the right choices is 100% your own responsibility. Sure, the author does raise a number of fair points about mental healthcare and how some good daily habits affect your own well being. But then the author completely misses the mark in the conclusion. No two human lives are the same. Everyone's experience is uniquely different and shaped by an infinite number of events and circumstances past, present and future. Most of which humans don't even get to control directly. The idea of controlling your life and the optimistic view that one is able to mould it towards an ideal stems in Modernistic tradition. Human minds are doing poorly at self diagnosing, while it's very hard for others to spot the signs of mental health issues. Mental health is also deeply woven into the identity and the personality of individuals. Personal struggles are very much part of being an individual. Rather then pandering "we should invest in our mental wealth" or even "we should go for a yearly mental health check up", start by sitting down and listening compassionately to those around you first, without offering any practical solutions. If someone lost a loved one, they don't want to hear "maybe you should see a therapist" right off the bat, they are addressing you directly, and they hope you're just willing to listen and acknowledging their pain and not much more. If someone states they suffer depression, anxiety or PTSD, rather then arguing semantics, the more important questions to ask would be: Am I listening to this person, what are they trying to say and do I understand what they are saying? Finally, statements that start with "we should..." without backing up their claim, tend to rustle my Jimmies. Who's this "we" anyway? And why am I being dragged into the argument from the outset?
- austincheney 6y ago
  Nobody is contesting that uniquenesses apply to everyone. People should never self diagnose mental or physical ailments, but that also is not an excuse to ignore deliberate decisions to advance personal health. > If someone lost a loved one, they don't want to hear "maybe you should see a therapist" right off the bat, they are addressing you directly, and they hope you're just willing to listen and acknowledging their pain and not much more. While you directly address listening I think, more broadly, you mean to suggest active empathy. I fully agree and it’s a skill many people inadequately develop or practice.
- CrazyStat 6y ago
  > The fallacy hidden in the article is that each of us is completely in control over our physical and mental well-being. That your well being isn't an inevitability but a choice. If it's a choice, then this implies that making the right choices is 100% your own responsibility. This is nonsense. The author makes no such argument, you're just projecting it onto him. "Here are some things you can do to proactively manage your mental health, rather than ignoring it until you have a crisis" is in no way putting 100% of the responsibility on the individual.
  - CrazyStat 6y ago
    I was in an accident many years ago that split my chin and chipped or cracked about a dozen of my teeth, resulting in over $10k of dental work since. But when my dentist advises me to proactively manage my dental health by brushing and flossing daily I don't accuse her of fallaciously implying that I am in complete control of my dental wellbeing.
    - CaptArmchair 6y ago
      > I don't accuse her of fallaciously implying that I am in complete control of my dental wellbeing. Of course not. Your dentist does understand the difference between what you can do and can't do. But context matters. And I'd venture your insurance may hold a different idea about personal responsibility. The same applies to a self-described silicon valley angel investor, founder, podcaster, author and general start-up helper who writes about "investing in mental wealth".

CaptArmchair 6y ago

I'm always wary of anyone leveraging concepts such as "investing in mental wealth" or "focussing on self improvement" in order to pander 5 bullet methodologies. Even more so when the author interjects a plug, both shameless as well as irrelevant, for their own book - Beyond Coffee - in their argument. The fallacy hidden in the article is that each of us is completely in control over our physical and mental well-being. That your well being isn't an inevitability but a choice. If it's a choice, then this implies that making the right choices is 100% your own responsibility. Sure, the author does raise a number of fair points about mental healthcare and how some good daily habits affect your own well being. But then the author completely misses the mark in the conclusion. No two human lives are the same. Everyone's experience is uniquely different and shaped by an infinite number of events and circumstances past, present and future. Most of which humans don't even get to control directly. The idea of controlling your life and the optimistic view that one is able to mould it towards an ideal stems in Modernistic tradition. Human minds are doing poorly at self diagnosing, while it's very hard for others to spot the signs of mental health issues. Mental health is also deeply woven into the identity and the personality of individuals. Personal struggles are very much part of being an individual. Rather then pandering "we should invest in our mental wealth" or even "we should go for a yearly mental health check up", start by sitting down and listening compassionately to those around you first, without offering any practical solutions. If someone lost a loved one, they don't want to hear "maybe you should see a therapist" right off the bat, they are addressing you directly, and they hope you're just willing to listen and acknowledging their pain and not much more. If someone states they suffer depression, anxiety or PTSD, rather then arguing semantics, the more important questions to ask would be: Am I listening to this person, what are they trying to say and do I understand what they are saying? Finally, statements that start with "we should..." without backing up their claim, tend to rustle my Jimmies. Who's this "we" anyway? And why am I being dragged into the argument from the outset?

austincheney 6y ago
Nobody is contesting that uniquenesses apply to everyone. People should never self diagnose mental or physical ailments, but that also is not an excuse to ignore deliberate decisions to advance personal health. > If someone lost a loved one, they don't want to hear "maybe you should see a therapist" right off the bat, they are addressing you directly, and they hope you're just willing to listen and acknowledging their pain and not much more. While you directly address listening I think, more broadly, you mean to suggest active empathy. I fully agree and it’s a skill many people inadequately develop or practice.
CrazyStat 6y ago
> The fallacy hidden in the article is that each of us is completely in control over our physical and mental well-being. That your well being isn't an inevitability but a choice. If it's a choice, then this implies that making the right choices is 100% your own responsibility. This is nonsense. The author makes no such argument, you're just projecting it onto him. "Here are some things you can do to proactively manage your mental health, rather than ignoring it until you have a crisis" is in no way putting 100% of the responsibility on the individual.
- CrazyStat 6y ago
  I was in an accident many years ago that split my chin and chipped or cracked about a dozen of my teeth, resulting in over $10k of dental work since. But when my dentist advises me to proactively manage my dental health by brushing and flossing daily I don't accuse her of fallaciously implying that I am in complete control of my dental wellbeing.
  - CaptArmchair 6y ago
    > I don't accuse her of fallaciously implying that I am in complete control of my dental wellbeing. Of course not. Your dentist does understand the difference between what you can do and can't do. But context matters. And I'd venture your insurance may hold a different idea about personal responsibility. The same applies to a self-described silicon valley angel investor, founder, podcaster, author and general start-up helper who writes about "investing in mental wealth".