Does Depression Have an Evolutionary Purpose? (2017)

The right kind of work for the right person can be uplifting; for example on the joys of being a professional carpet cleaner: https://web.archive.org/web/20030807105050/http://www.unconv... "More than a few people agree the best career would be one which provides challenge, intellectual stimulation, and rewards for quality work. Many however, would be surprised to discover they can have all of those benefits and more in some of the unlikeliest of careers. Case in point: I'm a professional carpet cleaner. Some people think this is a second-rate career. I don't agree with them. Carpet cleaning gives me challenges, intellectual stimulation, and many other rewards. To prove this, permit me to walk you through one of my work days."

On the other hand, much work isn't like that. See for example Disciplines Minds: http://disciplinedminds.tripod.com/ "The hidden root of much career dissatisfaction, argues Schmidt, is the professional's lack of control over the political component of his or her creative work. Many professionals set out to make a contribution to society and add meaning to their lives. Yet our system of professional education and employment abusively inculcates an acceptance of politically subordinate roles in which professionals typically do not make a significant difference, undermining the creative potential of individuals, organizations and even democracy."

Or Bob Black: https://web.archive.org/web/20161031034600/http://whywork.or... "Work makes a mockery of freedom. The official line is that we all have rights and live in a democracy. Other unfortunates who aren't free like we are have to live in police states. These victims obey orders or else, no matter how arbitrary. The authorities keep them under regular surveillance. State bureaucrats control even the smaller details of everyday life. The officials who push them around are answerable only to higher-ups, public or private. Either way, dissent and disobedience are punished. Informers report regularly to the authorities. All this is supposed to be a very bad thing. And so it is, although it is nothing but a description of the modern workplace. ..."

Or Mickey Z: "The Murdering of My Years: Artists and Activists Making Ends Meet"

Yet, some jobs are better than others. Some families are healthier than others. Once can wonder what the difference is? For creating better organizations, last year I put together a reading list here: https://github.com/pdfernhout/High-Performance-Organizations...

I also explore some related issues in terms of rethinking Princeton University (or any similar place) to be more health-promoting in this 2008 book-length essay I wrote: "Post-Scarcity Princeton, or, Reading between the lines of PAW for prospective Princeton students, or, the Health Risks of Heart Disease" http://pdfernhout.net/reading-between-the-lines.html

Perhaps E.F. Schumacher put it best in "Buddhist Economics": http://www.centerforneweconomics.org/buddhist-economics "The Buddhist point of view takes the function of work to be at least threefold: to give man a chance to utilise and develop his faculties; to enable him to overcome his ego-centredness by joining with other people in a common task; and to bring forth the goods and services needed for a becoming existence. Again, the consequences that flow from this view are endless. To organise work in such a manner that it becomes meaningless, boring, stultifying, or nerve-racking for the worker would be little short of criminal; it would indicate a greater concern with goods than with people, an evil lack of compassion and a soul-destroying degree of attachment to the most primitive side of this worldly existence. Equally, to strive for leisure as an alternative to work would be considered a complete misunderstanding of one of the basic truths of human existence, namely that work and leisure are complementary parts of the same living process and cannot be separated without destroying the joy of work and the bliss of leisure."

I agree otherwise though that in our society having money gives you more flexibility in the work you can choose --- as well as how you can address other needs in your life of the lives of those you care about when you are not working. Sometimes there is a tradeoff between money earned and job happiness -- but not always.

There are also other ways to meet needs besides having a job in the exchange economy (or maybe someday a basic income). There is frugality to reduce wants and needs. There is subsistence production to make things yourself and have the joy of crafting or living off the land (how most humans have lived for most of the time). There is the gift economy of getting things for free (like information on the internet) and giving back to the community somehow (again, something humans have been going as part of tribes for a long time). There is the planned economy we participate in as citizens and where government allocates money hopefully to specific worthwhile social purposes (though the money is obtained from the citizenry under duress via taxes). Sadly, some people also turn to theft for whatever reasons. So, there are a variety of options, some better, some worse, depending on an individual's situation and what is feasible in a specific society.

Try reading "The Untethered Soul" by Michael Singer and/or "Letting Go" by David Hawkins. Depression could be partly due to an acquired habit of always paying attention to fear based thoughts (like lacking xyz), which came from evolution. The cure is to raise the emotional level of thoughts to love for self and compassion for others (by having compassion for others, you give it to yourself). Another cure is to not pay attention to the chattering of the mind. If you wrote down all the chattering of the mind, you may find that >90% of them are useless. Paying attention to the chattering brings more useless chattering.

All this sounds new age, but it works.

The article reads like philosophical/spiritual bullshit written to overcomplicate a single idea, which I am still not sure what is.

Does the evolutionary psychologist serve an evolutionary purpose? It seems to fail the analytical egalitarianism test.

There was a study in Sweden where people got a small amount of money (500skr, about $60) per month instead of a prescription of anti-depressants. Turns out the people who got the money were happier.

Link: https://www.dn.se/nyheter/sverige/studie-psykisk-ohalsa-blir...

(only in Swedish, sorry!)