Live data from Hacker News

The Arctic Suicides: It's Not the Dark That Kills You

npr.org

111–117 of 117 posts

Re: The Arctic Suicides: It's Not the Dark That Kills You

#111
post #97

The section talking about contagion was interesting. What follows is pure speculation on my part and a bit of a ramble. I believe many mental illnesses, depression, suicidal behavior and anorexia among them, can be characterized as contagious. And perhaps some other things that aren't usually described as mental illnesses. The border between belief, religion and mental illness seems a bit fuzzy (echoes of Snow Crash)…

There are certainly communities that "explain" the behaviors of mental illnesses in a way that don't help people who are at risk but instead drives them even more into the illness - i.e. certain extreme conspiracy boards, esoterics sites or misguided bulimia "self-help" groups. For sites like that, I agree. However, as for groups which just represent off-mainstream subculture I don't see it. Well, technically they ar…

Let's say that magic is real, OK? Magic actually works. Science hasn't noticed it yet because psychologists don't get network effects and don't have the data sets. But let's say this is the case.

That means words have power. Certain words and phrases, repeated in the right way, perceived in the right way, will get people real sick. Names and labels have even more power. The right name can change people, give them a new identity. They change the way people see themselves, how they behave.

Some websites, some communities, are chronic incubators of the bad kind of magic. Enough exposure to it and you'll start having bad thoughts, you'll get depressed, withdraw from society, maybe start giving a harmful kind of name to yourself, maybe hurt yourself or other people. Sure, the boundary between mental illness and not-a-mental illness is vague, and maybe subject to abuse (just ask the Russians). But some stuff is unquestionably both contagious and harmful.

We just have to be careful not to get exposed to bad juju out there.

We don't have to sterilize every water source on the planet. Some people like drinking out of rivers. But we'd be crazy not to treat our water for obvious bugs.

But it does mean we should be prudent about what we're consuming, and what our families are taking in. And if you were a government, you'd be tempted to do some harm-benefit analysis. You could say that free speech isn't an absolute, and promoting, say, bulimia or terrorism carries great harm and should be minimized, as many governments do.

Re: The Arctic Suicides: It's Not the Dark That Kills You

#112
post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are certainly communities that "explain" the behaviors of mental illnesses in a way that don't help people who are at risk but instead drives them even more into the illness - i.e. certain extreme conspiracy boards, esoterics sites or misguided bulimia "self-help" groups. For sites like that, I agree. However, as for groups which just represent off-mainstream subculture I don't see it. Well, technically they ar…

Let's say that magic is real, OK? Magic actually works. Science hasn't noticed it yet because psychologists don't get network effects and don't have the data sets. But let's say this is the case. That means words have power. Certain words and phrases, repeated in the right way, perceived in the right way, will get people real sick. Names and labels have even more power. The right name can change people, give them a n…

Well, good thing then that magic probably isn't real - and that we actually do have a lot of knowledge about the real effects of words and ideas on people.

But anyway, the usual counter-arguments to censorship "for your own safety" apply, whether you name it censorship or "sterilization" or anything else.

For example, what would be the "obvious bugs" in that case? As I agree that certain communities can be harmful to certain groups of people and I would agree to blocking - because there is an established body of psychological literature that can tell you why and how those things are doing harm. And even in those cases it's not always clear-cut.

(Such sites are already being blocked in a number of countries btw, for example germany.)

But the parent poster was talking about Tumblr and 4chan. They think those sites are "contagious", I think they are not. So who would decide? And what about other cultures? If you ask an iranian or chinese official, they would tell you that the western media are highly contagious and harmful. Shouldn't we block those as well then? Or whatabout showing Saw in our cinemas? Is that good for the mental health?

So far the western strategy in those matters was to give freedom priority and instead strengthen the immune system of the individuals (to keep using that metaphor). And I don't see a good reason to change that.

Re: The Arctic Suicides: It's Not the Dark That Kills You

#113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. Are there any studies on this lowest-in-spring observation?

Rhonda Patrick talks about vitamin D quite bit (she is awesome). I'm coming up empty on seasonal relationships but it would surprise me if she hasn't mentioned something about it. It does make sense though. If you're not taking supplements and the sun isn't direct enough to make any on your own until late April then late spring would be the longest point in the year you've gone without proper sunlight.

Good point!

Re: The Arctic Suicides: It's Not the Dark That Kills You

#114
post #59

Whenever I read about tribal communities coming into modernity, I can't help but think that our "first-world" culture gets a lot wrong. These communities seem to have a deep sense of narrative--you're a part of a greater cultural story, a spiritual story that's connected with place, nature, and family. There is a journey laid out for you rich with sacrament (e.g. the rite of passage to become an Inuit hunter in this…

I recently read Sapiens by Yuval Harari, and this is a recurring theme in the book. "Collective fictions" throughout human history, the different forms of these myths, and how they help a society grow, or need to change as one does grow. One sort of related example is local religions versus universal, missionary religions. The majority of religions in history have been local and exclusive. Deities such as nature/anim…

The Romans conquered many peoples with different local myths, but they incorporated them into the empire by mapping the local deities to their Olympian canon, forming joint entities as targets of worship and devotion. This seems to be a tolerant and scalable approach, given a universe of various polytheisms based on nature, which helps ensure a viable mapping exists.

Monotheism has a lot to answer for. It began with Judaism, which has a certain exclusivity, but does not take the missionary position of universal adoption and conversion. It is surely the descendants, Christianity and Islam, where the polarizing missionary zeal of crusade and jihad has caused a lot of trouble. While many religions practice ostracism for the non-believer, only Islam insists on death to the apostate, who is seen as a traitor by definition, even without any further subversive or mutinous action.

Unfortunately, the doctrinaire and totalitarian proselytizing religions seem to have been quite scalable and successful. The Reformation and the Enlightenment have successfully turned back the tide of Catholicism in the West, but the challenge to Islam has yet to really get started.

Given the exploding demographics of the relevant parts of south Asia, Middle East and Africa, that future struggle gets harder by the hour. Indeed, it is the intensive demographic success of the subjugation of women and the rejection of contraception that has propelled these expansive conquering religions through history. It seems very likely that Japan and Russia will decline in population (no immigration), Europe will be Islamized and North America will be (re-)Hispanized with Catholicism.

The Reformed and Enlightened might have liberated themselves into an evolutionary dead-end of personal choice, free from enslavement by community propaganda and intimidation, but ultimately just a fleeting moment of liberty before the incoming tide of ruthless and fertile monotheists.

Re: The Arctic Suicides: It's Not the Dark That Kills You

#115
post #59

Whenever I read about tribal communities coming into modernity, I can't help but think that our "first-world" culture gets a lot wrong. These communities seem to have a deep sense of narrative--you're a part of a greater cultural story, a spiritual story that's connected with place, nature, and family. There is a journey laid out for you rich with sacrament (e.g. the rite of passage to become an Inuit hunter in this…

I agree. But I don't think it's "tribes" exactly that create the effect, it's sustainable subsistence living within a community. You will find a few people doing a variation of it in every bioregion on the planet. I just came across this[1] video about Satayama, a Japanese village. They're not eating whale blubber, They're eating gourmet food and living in designer homes in paradise basically. Someone pointed me at Sepp Holzer the other day who is doing it in Austria[2]. There's a good chance someone is living that way within 100 miles of you.

What's interesting to me is that I believe we are less than a decade away from a time when AIs will be able to instruct you, step by step, how to live sustainably on just your own power, with maybe $1000 worth of financing and access to a tool lending network.

At that point a lot of "rules" of economics start to break down.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcpdi1geXuI

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GMXqgQIU9c

Re: The Arctic Suicides: It's Not the Dark That Kills You

#116
post #92
post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where did you do this? Is there a high demand for volunteers? Is it easy to get started with? Is it common to do this work "remotely" or "on-call" by carry around a cell phone?

I did this in Boston back in the 1980s. At that time there was a shortage, but nevertheless they screened us and trained us and provided support services to us. No mobile phones; I would go there two evenings a week (we were all volunteers). I did this first at my school, MIT (which didn't thank goodness, get suicide calls when I was there though there were suicides and we did get calls about the consequences) and la…

Thanks for the info. It is something I have wanted to look into.

Re: The Arctic Suicides: It's Not the Dark That Kills You

#117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. Are there any studies on this lowest-in-spring observation?

Rhonda Patrick talks about vitamin D quite bit (she is awesome). I'm coming up empty on seasonal relationships but it would surprise me if she hasn't mentioned something about it. It does make sense though. If you're not taking supplements and the sun isn't direct enough to make any on your own until late April then late spring would be the longest point in the year you've gone without proper sunlight.

Quite a few diseases vary with season of birht if you do not supplement http://vitamindwiki.com/tiki-index.php?page_id=3225
Post reply on HN