According to Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker, depressed people tend to have a more realistic perspective than "normal" people. Normal people tend to be too optimistic. He conjectures that post-partum depression was an adaptive feature of female psychology: a new mother among our Pleistocene ancestors had to evaluate the baby's prospects of survival, given the circumstances at birth. If the baby had obvious physical or mental issues, or if the mother was unattached to the father or to relatives who could help her, it might be better to kill the baby before any bonds of attachment arise. If being in a depressed state helped the new mother to evaluate the situation she faced more realistically - and also helped her to carry out a grim decision were that warranted - it would tend to be selected for. A normally optimistic mother, or a typical observer, would tend to want to keep the baby and hope for the best - often to their, the baby's, and the community's detriment.
Depressed people are not in the "planning mode." They aren't looking for solutions. Rather, they are brooding about the situation, grasping its nuances, evaluating the situation. If depression helps a person to put off planning while they more accurately evaluate the situation they face, it would be beneficial in the kinds of cases under consideration here, too. The depressed person automatically employs the strategy that "Rip" figured out consciously and somewhat experimentally. By contrast, normally optimistic people tend to think that doubling down on the same plan, or tinkering around the edges, is going to make things better.
Maybe this is why artists tend to be angst-filled, raised in families or milieu with a lot of tension and conflict. The kind of aimless noodling characteristic of depression becomes second nature to these people. They are evaluating the situation before executing a plan, and thinking outside the box. Maybe that's why upper-middle-class English literature majors from Ivy League schools rarely become great creative writers: they know all of the formulas for effective writing, but don't search outside the box for the next new thing.
In politics, the normally optimistic median voter will tend to go with the establishment, asking only for minor policy adaptations to current circumstances. A depressed, disenfranchised voter, by contrast, will have a better evaluation of the situation, realizing when the system is broken and requires a more radical fix. What normal people see as "killing the baby" (i.e. voting for Trump), they will see as a radical but necessary correction. Tweaking the system will only leave us in the malaise we are already in, or slip us down further into the slough of despond.
You are such an incredible writer Dan, on top of everything else going on in that superhuman brain of yours. The knowledge that leads to the detail that leads to an appreciation of a superior character we walk alongside to learn from, mad respect.
Thank you, love this. It reminds me of the process of writing a song inspired by thoughts or feelings. The goal is not "writing a song." It's exploring, playing, trying things out. So, another aspect of creatively exploring the problem space without plans or solutions: letting go of the fear and stress the problem is causing is essential. There needs to be an open mind, play even. That can take discipline too, of a different sort than following orders, more like the self-discipline of artists. In a situation when the solution of the problem really must emerge because the problem is dire, it is even more essential to find this calm and creative space that does not focus on solutions at all.
According to Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker, depressed people tend to have a more realistic perspective than "normal" people. Normal people tend to be too optimistic. He conjectures that post-partum depression was an adaptive feature of female psychology: a new mother among our Pleistocene ancestors had to evaluate the baby's prospects of survival, given the circumstances at birth. If the baby had obvious physical or mental issues, or if the mother was unattached to the father or to relatives who could help her, it might be better to kill the baby before any bonds of attachment arise. If being in a depressed state helped the new mother to evaluate the situation she faced more realistically - and also helped her to carry out a grim decision were that warranted - it would tend to be selected for. A normally optimistic mother, or a typical observer, would tend to want to keep the baby and hope for the best - often to their, the baby's, and the community's detriment.
Depressed people are not in the "planning mode." They aren't looking for solutions. Rather, they are brooding about the situation, grasping its nuances, evaluating the situation. If depression helps a person to put off planning while they more accurately evaluate the situation they face, it would be beneficial in the kinds of cases under consideration here, too. The depressed person automatically employs the strategy that "Rip" figured out consciously and somewhat experimentally. By contrast, normally optimistic people tend to think that doubling down on the same plan, or tinkering around the edges, is going to make things better.
Maybe this is why artists tend to be angst-filled, raised in families or milieu with a lot of tension and conflict. The kind of aimless noodling characteristic of depression becomes second nature to these people. They are evaluating the situation before executing a plan, and thinking outside the box. Maybe that's why upper-middle-class English literature majors from Ivy League schools rarely become great creative writers: they know all of the formulas for effective writing, but don't search outside the box for the next new thing.
In politics, the normally optimistic median voter will tend to go with the establishment, asking only for minor policy adaptations to current circumstances. A depressed, disenfranchised voter, by contrast, will have a better evaluation of the situation, realizing when the system is broken and requires a more radical fix. What normal people see as "killing the baby" (i.e. voting for Trump), they will see as a radical but necessary correction. Tweaking the system will only leave us in the malaise we are already in, or slip us down further into the slough of despond.
You are such an incredible writer Dan, on top of everything else going on in that superhuman brain of yours. The knowledge that leads to the detail that leads to an appreciation of a superior character we walk alongside to learn from, mad respect.
Great story. Thanks for sharing. I personally try to apply this kind of fundamental reversion to the basic questions when facing tough problems.
Thank you, love this. It reminds me of the process of writing a song inspired by thoughts or feelings. The goal is not "writing a song." It's exploring, playing, trying things out. So, another aspect of creatively exploring the problem space without plans or solutions: letting go of the fear and stress the problem is causing is essential. There needs to be an open mind, play even. That can take discipline too, of a different sort than following orders, more like the self-discipline of artists. In a situation when the solution of the problem really must emerge because the problem is dire, it is even more essential to find this calm and creative space that does not focus on solutions at all.
I like the analogy! Makes perfect sense.
It's amazing how many military stories like this can help large corporations.
Really really interesting article.
Nice.
Fantastic