Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How Bad Are Things? (2015)

slatestarcodex.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 144 posts

Re: How Bad Are Things? (2015)

#31

Post by asdf21 »

SolaceQuantum wrote: post #24
asdf21 wrote: post #15

Isn't that just entropy in action... There are a zillion ways for any system to be disordered, and only a handful that we would consider "ordered". Life is constantly fighting entropy, and always eventually fails. It makes sense for disorder and even misery to be fairly common. I do tend to dismiss the concerns of others, simply because I've come to the conclusion that I cannot fix the vast majority of the problems o…

"I do tend to dismiss the concerns of others, simply because I've come to the conclusion that I cannot fix the vast majority of the problems of other people." Sorry, I don't understand this logic. I cannot solve world hunger but I recognize that poor food distribution is a problem. Similarly, I cannot solve someone's traumas but I can recognize they've been traumatized. Are we operating on different concepts of dismi…

What good does recognizing someone's traumas do, exactly?

The leading therapeutic modality, CBT, specifically says not to do this -- to basically ignore and try to get past trauma by attempting to live a better life moving forward, rather than rehashing the past and perpetually opening old wounds.

Re: How Bad Are Things? (2015)

#32

Post by DisruptiveDave »

SolaceQuantum wrote: post #6

In my experience this is very true upon simply becoming the kind of person who is open to listening to others. The vast majority of people you've run into have had huge difficulties in life, or are affected by people close to them who have huge difficulties in their lives. People tell me I'm a wonderful listener due to my lack of judgement on their problems (more than once, people, including my therapist, tell me I'd…

> but really I've internalized the idea that everyone is living a life less than what they hoped their life would be to various extents and that there is also a near infinite combination of ways to achieve this effect such that no one can be dismissed for their misery in any respect without also dismissing the "legitimate" misery of a wide swath of people.

There's a downside to this logic, one of the enabling sort. I consider myself fairly empathetic, but with a very pragmatic tint. I find many, many people take on complaining and a victim/underdog status with an almost hobby-like approach. And I watch how others react, which is exactly as expected: sympathy, attention, allowing those complainers a way out of personal responsibility or true introspection (specifically into their role in managing reactions to external events). It's a never ending cycle. And it hardly ever promotes growth. And almost never results in true happiness (happiness is probably the wrong word...maybe contentedness is better, tho maybe not).

So, the same way you wonder about those people who "dismiss others' concerns," I wonder about those who kowtow to others' words and fail to consider the reality (perceived, of course) behind them. It often feels lazy to me. And short-term thinking. Truly caring about another person sometimes means forsaking short-term "feel goods" for long term growth.

Re: How Bad Are Things? (2015)

#33

Post by dack »

apo wrote: post #19

> I work in a wealthy, mostly-white college town consistently ranked one of the best places to live in the country. I wonder to what extent the setting in which the author works selects for people who will feel isolated/regretful and therefore develop the kinds of problems s/he encounters. > The town where I practice psychiatry is mostly white and mostly wealthy. That doesn’t save it. The underlying assumption is tha…

It seemed like the author was just refuting the idea that particular groups "have it good", and using the classic "has it best" group as an example. So I think they'd agree that wealth sometimes creates new unique problems that make them unhappy, but that certainly doesn't mean that it counteracts all the positives. I mean, which is worse - you get divorced and then are alone (but have money), or you can't afford to get divorced, so you live in an abusive relationship your whole adult life?

Re: How Bad Are Things? (2015)

#34

Post by asdf21 »

DisruptiveDave wrote: post #32
SolaceQuantum wrote: post #6

In my experience this is very true upon simply becoming the kind of person who is open to listening to others. The vast majority of people you've run into have had huge difficulties in life, or are affected by people close to them who have huge difficulties in their lives. People tell me I'm a wonderful listener due to my lack of judgement on their problems (more than once, people, including my therapist, tell me I'd…

> but really I've internalized the idea that everyone is living a life less than what they hoped their life would be to various extents and that there is also a near infinite combination of ways to achieve this effect such that no one can be dismissed for their misery in any respect without also dismissing the "legitimate" misery of a wide swath of people. There's a downside to this logic, one of the enabling sort. I…

Ataraxia.. ;)

Re: How Bad Are Things? (2015)

#35

Post by SolaceQuantum »

asdf21 wrote: post #31
SolaceQuantum wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I do tend to dismiss the concerns of others, simply because I've come to the conclusion that I cannot fix the vast majority of the problems of other people." Sorry, I don't understand this logic. I cannot solve world hunger but I recognize that poor food distribution is a problem. Similarly, I cannot solve someone's traumas but I can recognize they've been traumatized. Are we operating on different concepts of dismi…

What good does recognizing someone's traumas do, exactly? The leading therapeutic modality, CBT, specifically says not to do this -- to basically ignore and try to get past trauma by attempting to live a better life moving forward, rather than rehashing the past and perpetually opening old wounds.

From what I understand, your interpretation of CBT is not correct. I understand that the first step of CBT is to analyze a patient as a whole to decide what behaviors need to be adjusted. This requires recognizing that trauma happened and its effect on the behavior of the person. Is this incorrect?

Re: How Bad Are Things? (2015)

#36

Post by hirundo »

If people wore an accurate net misery score on their foreheads, I wonder if it would reduce or increase identity based conflict? Would we look at the scores of people at the intersection of disadvantaged groups, see that they were suffering a lot more, and increase our support for them? Or would we see that putatively privileged classes suffer about as much as others, and conclude that people are people, and our sympathy and support for each other shouldn't focus on demographics?

I wonder if an objective misery score is possible, maybe with a portable continuous brain scanning device. I'd think that the data is in there, if only we had the tech to extract it.

Re: How Bad Are Things? (2015)

#37

Post by qntty »

gedy wrote: post #22
qntty wrote: post #16

> This is part of why I get enraged whenever somebody on Tumblr says “People in Group X need to realize they have it really good”, or “You’re a Group X member, so stop pretending like you have real problems.” One of these is not like the other. You can have it good by being white and still have real problems.

I read that as in response to someone white/Group X being told "What are _you_ complaining about?"

Right, but he seems resistant to recognizing the valid point that some people really do have it better because they're white or whatever.

Re: How Bad Are Things? (2015)

#38

Post by asdf21 »

SolaceQuantum wrote: post #35
asdf21 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What good does recognizing someone's traumas do, exactly? The leading therapeutic modality, CBT, specifically says not to do this -- to basically ignore and try to get past trauma by attempting to live a better life moving forward, rather than rehashing the past and perpetually opening old wounds.

From what I understand, your interpretation of CBT is not correct. I understand that the first step of CBT is to analyze a patient as a whole to decide what behaviors need to be adjusted. This requires recognizing that trauma happened and its effect on the behavior of the person. Is this incorrect?

You identify goals and problematic beliefs and behaviors that impinge on the patient's ability to meet those goals.

You can "recognize" that trauma occurred without analyzing it in depth.

Re: How Bad Are Things? (2015)

#39

Post by qntty »

overthemoon wrote: post #23
qntty wrote: post #16

> This is part of why I get enraged whenever somebody on Tumblr says “People in Group X need to realize they have it really good”, or “You’re a Group X member, so stop pretending like you have real problems.” One of these is not like the other. You can have it good by being white and still have real problems.

You're right. I think it's unremarkable to say: People who are not straight and/or white tend to have worse outcomes than people who are straight and/or white. -- and -- Straight white people can have hard, miserable lives. His specific anger is at the notion that members of minority groups suffer THEREFORE members of majority groups do not suffer. But as you said, you can still have it better than people in a minori…

> His specific anger is at the notion that members of minority groups suffer THEREFORE members of majority groups do not suffer

Yeah this is where his anger comes from, but perhaps he's being a bit too sensitive. He doesn't seem to recognize the validity of the idea that some people really have it better.

Re: How Bad Are Things? (2015)

#40

Post by Allower »

WhompingWindows wrote: post #25

I loved the 20 person simulation the author used. His point about universal suffering reminds me of another point by Sam Harris: "Everyone you know is practically drowning in suffering" SH brings up this point to contextualize our own suffering. It's hard for us to socialize with others and make connections, but if we consider other peoples' plights and struggles, it gives us more perspective and may aid us to talk,…

That would make sense if other people's suffering was equal to my own. But its not, their problems are dramatically easier to solve, ameliorate, w.e. Not to mention, being aware of someone elses problems does absolutely nothing to help them, it might make you more depressed, but it sure as fuck wont HELP you.
Post reply on HN