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

Dabrowski’s theory and existential depression (2020)

davidsongifted.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 161 posts

Re: Dabrowski’s theory and existential depression (2020)

#141

Post by brundolf »

physicles wrote: post #136
brundolf wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To add to this: I grew up with religion and eventually broke away from it. I went on this hyper-realist streak, looking to break down life and reality into its most fundamental parts. I assumed this would include true meaning. It didn't. What I found is that meaning is like a delicate ecosystem, and I was strip-mining. I thought I was breaking reality down into its most fundamental pieces, harvesting them and learnin…

I had a very similar journey. Even after 10 years I sometimes still slip into existential despair, and the remedy is, as you said, a bit subtle: don’t outright ignore it, but also don’t attack it directly. No matter how hard you stare into the void, you will never see anything but darkness. It’s a bit like happiness: if you pursue happiness directly, you will surely fail. Instead, pursue worthy goals and care for oth…

I look at it a bit more like Tinker Bell: meaning may only exist while you believe in it, but that doesn't make it not real. When you believe in it without picking it apart, it's as real as can be. So let yourself.

As a musician I like once put it, careless realism costs souls

Re: Dabrowski’s theory and existential depression (2020)

#142

Post by warent »

dsego wrote: post #116
warent wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting that many atheists seem to argue that the only two choices are either a Christian god, or a basically meaningless universe, and a keystone for Christianity to be the wrong option is the problem of evil. But there are so many other philosophies that have resolved this. For example, some Hindu schools explain that god is the only one that experiences anything. The paradox of its infinite nature means t…

> but the problem of evil always seems like the weakest argument in its defense. I can't understand why anyone would see religion or philosophy that says that some poor child deserved bone cancer because of karma or some balance of good and evil in the world as anything but despicable and disgusting. What is gained from any of them, what value do they bring?

The words "deserve" and "not deserve" are very common misunderstandings of karma. I think it's not about deserving, more like being tossed around a terrible stormy sea with a terrible rudder. That's the point of Buddhism, is to be free of it. It's not considered a desirable thing.

Re: Dabrowski’s theory and existential depression (2020)

#143

Post by naasking »

rendall wrote: post #132
pmoriarty wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"What amounts to fantasy and superstition and what reflects reality?" I don't see how we can ever really know. We only ever have access to our own experience. How could we ever find out what the world is really like beyond our own "subjective" experience? "Pyschedelics is a rabbit-trail followed from here, as well as the idea that "nothing is actually real, this is just a simulation". And following those is the idea…

Descartes' I think therefore I am has become a cliche, but it is profound. I can chuck any questioning about whether I actually exist or not. How do I know that I exist? Well, because I am thinking. It's at this point all I (we?) can know with probability 1, metaphysically speaking. We could just be a brain in a box, stimulated to believe we are alive in this world. But at core, we (or at least I) do exist, brain-in-…

> Descartes' I think therefore I am has become a cliche, but it is profound. I can chuck any questioning about whether I actually exist or not. How do I know that I exist? Well, because I am thinking.

This is a common mistake. Cogito ergo sum actually assumes the conclusion by asserting the existence of "I" while asserting that "I" exists.

The fallacy-free version is "this is a thought, therefore thoughts exist". Still profound, but it does not prove as much as you think.

Re: Dabrowski’s theory and existential depression (2020)

#144

Post by johnchristopher »

rendall wrote: post #139
johnchristopher wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Hwæt! The Universe might be meaningless, these nihilistic Viking ghosts whispered to me, across the centuries. Live bravely, do not allow yourself to wallow in despair while entropy gathers itself. Make meaning, fight, build, love, stay healthy right in the face of the Uncaring Void. It's the only thing you can do. Entropy will win. Until then, make it meaningful. Those vikings are more existentialist than nihilist…

Their answer to existential questions was to throw their lives away slaughtering each other and innocents in battle, so they could drink mead in Valhalla until the Final Battle. The question is Existential. Their answer was nihilist.

Agree to disagree ?

> The fact that Vikings chose to create meaning by slaughtering their unfortunate neighbors is a bit beside the point.

Nihilism is specifically about the idea that there is no meaning and no will to create some.

Creating meaning, seeking it, is the inverse of a nihilist answer.

If Vikings were nihilists they would have engaged in a multitude of different activities without justifications rather than creating meaning by all fighting anyway. This fighting they do, despite the fact it won't change anything is an existentialist trait and an existentialist answer. I'd concede it's close to a philosophical suicide.

I am not fluent enough in English and I remember not much from philo 101 so allow me to quote wikipedia:

A pervasive theme in existentialist philosophy, however, is to persist through encounters with the absurd, as seen in Camus' The Myth of Sisyphus ("One must imagine Sisyphus happy")

Re: Dabrowski’s theory and existential depression (2020)

#145

Post by ZephyrBlu »

acituan wrote: post #134
GavinMcG wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you say "central thesis" and "confounds" it sounds like you think this is a piece where the author is setting out to prove something. What, though? It seems to me this is an exploration that's meant to be helpful to people who relate to what the author describes. That description doesn't need to reflect a well-defined category in order to be useful. Useful things don't even need to be true much less well-proven.…

Thanks for the honest inquiry, I’ve been responding between sleep cycles and my responses has been more combative than necessary. My main grief with his exploration (and the reason for trying to dig out his thesis) is that gifted folks, which I think are over represented in this forum, are going to ascribe all their malaise to their giftedness. Which is a very misleading and harmful but also attractive proposition to…

I think you are not taking into account the path to existential depression.

The article describes some very specific experiences of so-called gifted people, which leads to the possibility of existential depression.

It seems very unlikely that the experiences he describes are common among most people.

I didn't read the article so much as "I am gifted, therefore I will be existentially depressed" but more along the lines of "I am gifted, and the effect this has on my life and experiences may cause existential depression".

This article opened my eyes as to why I may have had particular experiences in my life.

Re: Dabrowski’s theory and existential depression (2020)

#146

Post by pmoriarty »

naasking wrote: post #143
rendall wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Descartes' I think therefore I am has become a cliche, but it is profound. I can chuck any questioning about whether I actually exist or not. How do I know that I exist? Well, because I am thinking. It's at this point all I (we?) can know with probability 1, metaphysically speaking. We could just be a brain in a box, stimulated to believe we are alive in this world. But at core, we (or at least I) do exist, brain-in-…

> Descartes' I think therefore I am has become a cliche, but it is profound. I can chuck any questioning about whether I actually exist or not. How do I know that I exist? Well, because I am thinking. This is a common mistake. Cogito ergo sum actually assumes the conclusion by asserting the existence of "I" while asserting that "I" exists. The fallacy-free version is "this is a thought, therefore thoughts exist". Sti…

"this is a thought, therefore thoughts exist"

This is more of a tautology disguised as an argument, as the word "is" in that sentence already indicates existence.

So that sentence can be rephrased as "this thought exists, therefore thoughts exist". Well, yeah, but that's not saying much... also the premise is arguable, since what do you even mean by "thought" and "exists", and how do you know either?

A bit more fundamental would be "experience is" (without trying to break up experience in to artificial distinctions like "thought" and "non thought").. better yet is just saying "is" or pointing, and best is simple silence and basking in existence itself.

Re: Dabrowski’s theory and existential depression (2020)

#147

Post by wpietri »

rendall wrote: post #125
wpietri wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I think one of the issues people have with lack of intrinsic meaning is that they experience it as a loss. My parents weren't religious, so I grew up an atheist. I never believed that there was intrinsic meaning, intrinsic purpose. That was intimidating in my youth, as I was learning about the vast scale of the universe. Now it seems great. The universe is a blank canvas: we can create meaning for ourselves. On…

> Yeah, I think one of the issues people have with lack of intrinsic meaning is that they experience it as a loss. This is kind of a clueless, dismissive response. If existential despair has not touched you, how marvelous for you. It passes most people by. I would not read that article and then smugly congratulate myself on this. Your self-satisfaction at being raised correctly is no different from someone being just…

I don't mean it as dismissive, just factual. Loss is hard. I'll leave its cluelessness for others to judge.

But you're wrong to say, "There is nothing there about people being particularly religious." The author describes it as the start of things for him, writing "I, on the other hand, had grown up in the Deep South in an insular culture that had limited vision and rigid beliefs; my loving parents were traditionally religious and tried to live conforming, righteous, and conventional lives."

Re: Dabrowski’s theory and existential depression (2020)

#148

Post by SamvitJ »

As someone who tested as "gifted" as child, I don't think as much naval gazing and self-analysis as this article describes is warranted for anyone, gifted or not. There are lots of productive ways in which to channel "giftedness" (success in school, creative pursuits, etc.), and this article instead puts giftedness on a pedestal, which (I think) is a bit indulgent and counterproductive.

Re: Dabrowski’s theory and existential depression (2020)

#149

Post by rhizome »

hungrykoala wrote: post #46
rendall wrote: post #35

For me and a friend, we'd joke about our existential despair. "What's wrong?" "The Void" Any philosophy that just asserted that the Universe has meaning was a non-starter, for me. There is nothing that I can see that unambiguously tells me that the Universe ultimately has absolute purpose or meaning. It could, but anyone who tells you they know the fundamental question of why we are here is delusional or a liar. The…

I think the "Universe/life has no meaning" sentence can mean two completely different things: 1. It could have a meaning, but there is none. For example food can have taste, but if it has none, we assume there is something wrong with it. 2. It is not possible for it to have a meaning, because it simply lacks that property. For example: what is the color of running? There is no color, and could never be. I think "Univ…

Both examples are category errors. In #1 there's no such thing as food without taste, and in #2, verbs don't have physical attributes.

Re: Dabrowski’s theory and existential depression (2020)

#150

Post by q-base »

_uoud wrote: post #21

I'm halfway through the article and surprised that the quality of being a neurotic person is not discussed yet or even mentioned. I find this post incredibly interesting, especially in the context of books that I've recently read and summarized like: Denial of Death by Ernest Becker ( https://www.lostbookofsales.com/notes/the-denial-of-death-by... ). Nonetheless, thanks for sharing!

That was a very good and thorough walk through of that book. I highly enjoyed it - so thanks a lot for sharing!
Post reply on HN