4 ms·

Okay, we know that CBT works for depression, yeah? CBT postulates that your thoughts cause your emotions. Part of the therapy is identifying and refuting nega

Okay, we know that CBT works for depression, yeah? CBT postulates that your thoughts cause your emotions. Part of the therapy is identifying and refuting negative thoughts like, "You're worthless!" Well, if other people are telling you that you're worthless, in one way or another, then it has the same effect. It doesn't matter how much CBT you do, if everyone is around you is telling you that you're worthless, you're going to stay depressed, because that kind of treatment makes you feel angry, sad, and ashamed. You can't just reason your way out of it.

eivarv 11y ago
Your own thoughts and other people's communication do not have the same effect in the context you're describing. You could agree or disagree with what other people say (or whether it matters), for one, while the unreasonable thoughts and irrational thought patterns associated with depression is part of your own perspective in this case. These negative thoughts are identified by and refuted because of the fact that they are irrational, resulting from erroneous thinking. Also, your own thoughts and beliefs would cause or motivate your emotions, but the external forces you describe would necessarily have to be interpreted by you (i.e. pass through the lens of your thoughts and beliefs). It would not be other the other people's criticism that leads to any emotion, but rather your thoughts about it, according to CBT. Depression (clinical, major depressive disorder) is also something wholly different than feeling angry, sad and ashamed, and is (generally) in fact not a results of bad treatment or other external factors.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- cactusface 11y ago
  http://www.google.com/search?q=environmental+factors+depression http://www.google.com/search?q=environmental+factors+depress...
  - eivarv 11y ago
    I don't know if you've actually read any of the credible results from the google query you link to, but there being environmental factors (including triggers and contributing factors) to depression does not mean that depression is a response to external events in the way that "normal"/healthy emotions are - which is what I'm getting at in the previous comment. You might want to take a look at what the American Psychological Association and the American National Institute of Mental Health have to say about the case [0, 1], the University of Maryland's patient education article [2], Saveanu and Nemeroff's paper "Etiology of depression: genetic and environmental factors" [3], and clinical criteria (like DSM and ICD). [0]: http://www.apa.org/helpcenter/understanding-depression.aspx http://www.apa.org/helpcenter/understanding-depression.aspx [1]: http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/publications/depression/index.shtml?rf=32471#pub5 http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/publications/depression/index... [2]: http://umm.edu/health/medical/reports/articles/depression http://umm.edu/health/medical/reports/articles/depression [3]: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22370490 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22370490
- javert 11y ago
  Correct. You are clearly dealing rationally with a complicated topic, and for someone to just spit in your face about it (the Google link comment) is incredible. There is a sibling comment to your own addressing this.
  - eivarv 11y ago
    Thanks! While the comment you're referring to is in poor tact, I think it's also kind of telling. I've discussed a few similar topics on HN, and I'm sad to see that the ignorance surrounding mental illness is pervasive here as well. What's worse is that most of the erroneous assumptions could be corrected by a cursory reading of the Wikipedia pages of respective diagnoses.
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
    - cactusface 11y ago
      Well, my response certainly was short and snappy, I'll give you that. I know that not taking the time to properly explain myself may come across as naive and can be frustrating to deal with. It's just that I'm not up for a lengthy debate about psychology. In fact, people often treat me like I'm naive about things, even in situations where I have a lot of experience. It's like a disarming technique I learned or something, plus it just makes me uncomfortable to be recognized as good at things. I would rather just do good things. So... are you guys in therapy? It's been really helpful for me.
      - eivarv 11y ago
        TLDR; It's not so much that it seems naïve, as it is about not providing any reasoning, sources or data to back it up - thereby not being reliable. Also, tone is hard to convey on the internet. While I think many would agree that the answer is short and snappy, I don't really care and I don't take it personally. And it's not about you "not taking the time to properly explain" yourself, nor your experience - and I say this in an apathetic, and not an antipathetic sense. It's about your non-answer response to my pointing out your invalid assumptions (and thereby faulty reasoning) about CBT and depression, which indicates that you either couldn't or wouldn't argue your point. This makes it have very little to no value in a discussion, where one ideally makes logically coherent and well reasoned arguments (perhaps even backed by data), since no one can assess any claim properly without the application of skeptical inquiry. Also, as javert pointed out, the response appears overtly patronizing. Additionally, I think that participants in discussions pertaining to mental illness (amongst other subjects) in particular have a unique responsibility (i.e. a moral obligation) to back their claims up and rely upon knowledge, as the subject is fraught with ignorance - which results in all sorts of negative outcomes for those affected (see stigma and history of societal views of mental illness, provably ineffective treatments leading to avoidable suffering, etc.) If you were not up for a "lengthy debate" about psychology, I have a hard time seeing your previous contributions in this thread as anything other than the airing of an opinion for its own sake followed by closing of the ears. And an opinion holds no merit by virtue of being an opinion. You also have yet to comment upon a single point I've made in either comment, and the only response is a google query presented as a retort - the results for which don't even make the point you set out to make, as far as I can tell. I'm sorry if this comes off as cranky - I'm really not!
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
javert 11y ago
That isn't correct, exactly, and your response to someone else who tried to point this out that only contained a link to a naive google search is really offensive. (Because it is patronizing, because it trivializes a complex issue, because it poses as a retort without actually being one.)
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]

eivarv 11y ago

Your own thoughts and other people's communication do not have the same effect in the context you're describing. You could agree or disagree with what other people say (or whether it matters), for one, while the unreasonable thoughts and irrational thought patterns associated with depression is part of your own perspective in this case. These negative thoughts are identified by and refuted because of the fact that they are irrational, resulting from erroneous thinking. Also, your own thoughts and beliefs would cause or motivate your emotions, but the external forces you describe would necessarily have to be interpreted by you (i.e. pass through the lens of your thoughts and beliefs). It would not be other the other people's criticism that leads to any emotion, but rather your thoughts about it, according to CBT. Depression (clinical, major depressive disorder) is also something wholly different than feeling angry, sad and ashamed, and is (generally) in fact not a results of bad treatment or other external factors.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
cactusface 11y ago
http://www.google.com/search?q=environmental+factors+depression http://www.google.com/search?q=environmental+factors+depress...
- eivarv 11y ago
  I don't know if you've actually read any of the credible results from the google query you link to, but there being environmental factors (including triggers and contributing factors) to depression does not mean that depression is a response to external events in the way that "normal"/healthy emotions are - which is what I'm getting at in the previous comment. You might want to take a look at what the American Psychological Association and the American National Institute of Mental Health have to say about the case [0, 1], the University of Maryland's patient education article [2], Saveanu and Nemeroff's paper "Etiology of depression: genetic and environmental factors" [3], and clinical criteria (like DSM and ICD). [0]: http://www.apa.org/helpcenter/understanding-depression.aspx http://www.apa.org/helpcenter/understanding-depression.aspx [1]: http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/publications/depression/index.shtml?rf=32471#pub5 http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/publications/depression/index... [2]: http://umm.edu/health/medical/reports/articles/depression http://umm.edu/health/medical/reports/articles/depression [3]: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22370490 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22370490
javert 11y ago
Correct. You are clearly dealing rationally with a complicated topic, and for someone to just spit in your face about it (the Google link comment) is incredible. There is a sibling comment to your own addressing this.
- eivarv 11y ago
  Thanks! While the comment you're referring to is in poor tact, I think it's also kind of telling. I've discussed a few similar topics on HN, and I'm sad to see that the ignorance surrounding mental illness is pervasive here as well. What's worse is that most of the erroneous assumptions could be corrected by a cursory reading of the Wikipedia pages of respective diagnoses.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - cactusface 11y ago
    Well, my response certainly was short and snappy, I'll give you that. I know that not taking the time to properly explain myself may come across as naive and can be frustrating to deal with. It's just that I'm not up for a lengthy debate about psychology. In fact, people often treat me like I'm naive about things, even in situations where I have a lot of experience. It's like a disarming technique I learned or something, plus it just makes me uncomfortable to be recognized as good at things. I would rather just do good things. So... are you guys in therapy? It's been really helpful for me.
    - eivarv 11y ago
      TLDR; It's not so much that it seems naïve, as it is about not providing any reasoning, sources or data to back it up - thereby not being reliable. Also, tone is hard to convey on the internet. While I think many would agree that the answer is short and snappy, I don't really care and I don't take it personally. And it's not about you "not taking the time to properly explain" yourself, nor your experience - and I say this in an apathetic, and not an antipathetic sense. It's about your non-answer response to my pointing out your invalid assumptions (and thereby faulty reasoning) about CBT and depression, which indicates that you either couldn't or wouldn't argue your point. This makes it have very little to no value in a discussion, where one ideally makes logically coherent and well reasoned arguments (perhaps even backed by data), since no one can assess any claim properly without the application of skeptical inquiry. Also, as javert pointed out, the response appears overtly patronizing. Additionally, I think that participants in discussions pertaining to mental illness (amongst other subjects) in particular have a unique responsibility (i.e. a moral obligation) to back their claims up and rely upon knowledge, as the subject is fraught with ignorance - which results in all sorts of negative outcomes for those affected (see stigma and history of societal views of mental illness, provably ineffective treatments leading to avoidable suffering, etc.) If you were not up for a "lengthy debate" about psychology, I have a hard time seeing your previous contributions in this thread as anything other than the airing of an opinion for its own sake followed by closing of the ears. And an opinion holds no merit by virtue of being an opinion. You also have yet to comment upon a single point I've made in either comment, and the only response is a google query presented as a retort - the results for which don't even make the point you set out to make, as far as I can tell. I'm sorry if this comes off as cranky - I'm really not!

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

javert 11y ago

That isn't correct, exactly, and your response to someone else who tried to point this out that only contained a link to a naive google search is really offensive. (Because it is patronizing, because it trivializes a complex issue, because it poses as a retort without actually being one.)

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]