Does Depression Have an Evolutionary Purpose? (2017)

Post by leakybit » Wed, Jan 24, 2018, 12:43 AM UTC

k__ wrote: post #25

danharaj wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> this evolutionary mechanism is thrown for a loop in an existence where survival is assured, and meaning becomes the main spectre psychologically. Most people who suffer from depression because of environmental factors have no real substantial changes they can make to their life that would resolve the root issue of their depression. I could "fix" my depression once I had an independent high paying job that let me li…

"I could "fix" my depression once I had an independent high paying job that let me live anywhere and choose to live in the way I need to live in order to be happy." My girlfriend works in a psychiartry for people with depression and she told me that it has nothing todo with success.

Post by pron » Wed, Jan 24, 2018, 12:57 AM UTC

DoreenMichele wrote: post #68

pron wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not at all what I meant. What I meant was that there is no reason whatsoever to presuppose that every existing phenotypical quality is adaptive.

The article is simply asking, essentially, "Since depression is so common, what if it is adaptive? What if there are circumstances under which depression actually improves your odds of survival, even though that seems counter-intuitive?"

Post by DoreenMichele » Wed, Jan 24, 2018, 1:17 AM UTC

pron wrote: post #73

DoreenMichele wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article is simply asking, essentially, "Since depression is so common, what if it is adaptive? What if there are circumstances under which depression actually improves your odds of survival, even though that seems counter-intuitive?"

I understand that, just as I understand that there is value in religion, but that doesn't make it science. Yet evolutionary psychology poses as science. All of evolutionary psychology is "can we come up with an interesting interpretation to present quality X as adaptive?" Interesting, maybe, but not science.

Post by rubicon33 » Wed, Jan 24, 2018, 1:29 AM UTC

ZenoArrow wrote: post #69

rubicon33 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To clarify my point... Exercise, good sleep, healthy diet, a social life, and a career, are some pre-requisites before you get to start talking about being CLINICALLY depressed. Situationally depressed, sure. But I'm making a distinction between someone who is depressed because they aren't meeting some basic needs (of which exercise is one), and the type of depression that persists DESPITE meeting these basic needs.…

> "Quite the contrary, those types of people DO exist and have found relief visa vi standard modes of care (CBT, and medication)." If a clinically depressed person tries both medication and exercise, and finds exercise helps them more, does that bother you? Are you suggesting that they can't have been clinically depressed?

Post by rwnspace » Wed, Jan 24, 2018, 2:17 AM UTC

pron wrote: post #73

DoreenMichele wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article is simply asking, essentially, "Since depression is so common, what if it is adaptive? What if there are circumstances under which depression actually improves your odds of survival, even though that seems counter-intuitive?"

I understand that, just as I understand that there is value in religion, but that doesn't make it science. Yet evolutionary psychology poses as science. All of evolutionary psychology is "can we come up with an interesting interpretation to present quality X as adaptive?" Interesting, maybe, but not science.