Like in a lot of social science stuff, causalities are mixed up. People who can align their goals and life plan with their surrounding environment are less lik

Like in a lot of social science stuff, causalities are mixed up. People who can align their goals and life plan with their surrounding environment are less likely to suffer from “depression”. I never understood the concept of depression. In the definition lies the key of the problem. It looks like depression is an incapability to adapt / fit or an inability to use the given circumstances and integrate them into the own life or make use of them. The problem has more than one side. Since therapeutics can’t change the environment, and it’s easier to try to change the single “patient”, that’s the focus of the “therapy”. Even if that means to break the patient. Social systems integrate people, to make use and make value of them. And if that does not work, to take them out under controlled condition. The other side of the “depression” problem is estrangement. Modern social science neglects the concept of estrangement. It is easier and more profitable to publish self-referential and tautological articles and follow the stream. Opportunism and system conformity are the driving forces of most social structures – that does not exclude the academia.