Depression comes in 3 basic forms; physiological, emotional, and cognitive. "Depression" is the label given to the "urge to give up", to not act even when actions are available. The medical world defines depression as a state wherein a person retreats from "normal activity" for that person (much less definitive). The underlying cause of depression in all cases is the futilization of positive response.
Oppression often leads to depression whereas suppression offend leads to aggression (opposite of depression). The depressive state neither loves nor hates, but rather stops caring and insists in not caring. Depression is not merely the loss of hope, but the acceptance in the hope of retreating, "shutting down", "giving up". The urge to withdraw completely is what leads to suicidal depression. Suicide is the overt act to withdraw from all life entirely.
Biochemicals and drugs can help most with physiological depression wherein the body refuses to respond normally under normal stimuli. Exercise, increased bodily fluid flow, and a medically clean environment help most against physiological depression. Proper levels of vitamins and minerals can help if they happen to have become abnormal. This level of depression is classified as "disease" (dis-ease) and is generally caused by invasion of toxins or germs. Physiological depression is almost never caused genetically despite family history. More often the family merely experiences the same invasive affects, often from the same sources (environmental or social).
Drugs effect emotional depression through a complex reaction process where the feelings and emotors are medically tweaked until they mask the cause of the depression sufficiently to simulate normal behavior (what is assessed as such anyway). A strong change in life situation can greatly effect a depressive state, but the person will seldom choose to pursue such a change. Strong love or hate interests can jar the emotional state into seeing new hope in taking action. But if such changes in life are introduced and do not succeed, they instead further aid the depression. Emotional and cognitive depressions are never caused genetically regardless of family history.
Biochemicals and drugs have no effect on cognitive depression unless they have positive (or negative) effect on mental functions such as memory, attention, focus, concentration, analytical response, and so on. Nootropics aid in that regard. The cognitively perceived situation of the person is the cause of cognitive depression thus anything that appears to the person to yield hope in the person's situation works against cognitive depression (winning the lottery for example if money is an recognized issue).
Signs of each type of depression vary from each other. Some people have various degrees of each type. Each type affects each other type, but does not directly determine them. People sufficiently skilled to properly diagnose depression (or just about any psychological ailment) are difficult to find. This is largely due to the attempt to over simplify the mental state and assign labels through symptomology rather than addressing causes.
Social and economic depression are additional depression types caused by analogous affecters. These are most often brought about (along with personal depressions) as governments change hands or restructure. Futilizing the people's effort to maintain their own safety is a critical part of re-ording a society, thus the people sense and often recognized the hopelessness of their situation. Suicides rise sharply as social demonism is injected so as to make clay by crushing the former statue for sake of the new statue. In the West, the more recent change ("paradigm shift") came about as Christianity was replaced with Judeo-secularism for sake of world governing.
In all cases, depression is the result of the actions of others and is seldom remedied except by the same.
Showing posts with label psychology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label psychology. Show all posts
Thursday, April 14, 2011
Saturday, August 14, 2010
Paranoia, Insecurity, and Memory
In common lingo, the word “paranoid” is often conflated with the word “phobic”. A person might proclaim another person paranoid if they perceive an unusual fear of something like water or the police. But that would actually be a phobia concern, not a paranoia concern.
Paranoia is distinct from phobia in that paranoia specifically involves cognitive deductions that pertain to suspicions. It is when a person deduces that the police are doing something in particular because they are pursuing him. To be “paranoid of water” would mean there was a belief that the water was actually behaving in some way because it is pursuing the person.
It is promoted that drugs cause paranoia, but in reality, any illegal activity; lying, stealing, assassination, drug use, or merely pornography or anything thought to be immoral is likely to inspire a sense of being watched and perhaps hunted.
Typically a psychologist considers a person paranoid if the person displays what the psychologist believes to be an inappropriate fear or suspicion. A more competent psychologist will ensure that the person is actually making cognitive deductions based on that suspicion. But does a psychologist really know what is inappropriate? Does he know the likelihood that a political conspiracy is actually taking place? A psychiatrist is typically going to declare a state of paranoia based on whether the suspicions are anti-socialistic.
To me it is more valid to ask a sociologist, political scientist, or social engineer if someone is paranoid than it is to ask a psychologist or psychiatrist. The sociologist might need a short explanation as to the exact definition of the concept, but a sociologist is more likely to know the state of society such as to know whether suspicions are realistic or inappropriate. The sociologist is more in tune with how often suspicions are justified in a society.
Paranoia rises from a sense of insecurity that inspires the mind to begin speculating. It is normal and appropriate for a person who senses insecurity to speculate as to the cause. Without such an instinct, a species would never learn to avoid subtle real dangers. But when the deductive process gets deluded by being too narrowly focus on unlikely speculations compared to more likely scenarios, delusion overtakes the mind.
Delusions overtake a mind by the normal and healthy process of seeking out justification for belief. But the fact that such justifications were merely possibilities gets forgotten as further deductions are pursued.
In developing a delusion, a suspicion is generated then a defense for belief in the suspicion is generated so as to thwart doubt. Focus on the possibility of the suspicion being true tends to generate imaginative plausibility scenarios. When the mind forgets that each thought was merely a possibility, not a probability, these plausible scenarios add together to form an airtight case study. The belief becomes undeniable to the deluded mind.
Although without the insecurity paranoia is difficult to generate, the most significant culprit causing the end result of delusion is the loss of short-term memory skill. An insecure person who can think clearly might suspect the wrong scenario, but a delusion will not be established until they forget that they had only one suspected scenario out of other possibilities.
The lack of memory also makes deducing probabilities far more difficult resulting in making poorer guesses. A poor memory disallows the imagination from deriving all of the possibilities from which a probability can be validly deduced. Often the possibility that is left out of the calculation is merely the one that posits a serious lack of education or information on the subject. It is difficult to analyze how likely it is that you do not know enough to even make a guess.
Such deductions of probability occur deep within the subconscious and when they err, the conscious mind is only presented with the erroneous imagined scenario as though no other possibility could exist. This results in a firm belief as no other possibility can be imagined. And if the person is challenged, the natural social ego defense comes into play to divert embarrassment and further defend and seal the delusional state.
Thus the cause of paranoia is not merely feelings of insecurity and an imaginative mind, but actually it is the result of feelings of insecurity, possibly justified, and a failing or poor memory limiting the imagination to poor belief choices.
Memory problems in society are becoming even more prevalent than paranoia problems because.. in case you don't remember, they're out to GET us.
Paranoia is distinct from phobia in that paranoia specifically involves cognitive deductions that pertain to suspicions. It is when a person deduces that the police are doing something in particular because they are pursuing him. To be “paranoid of water” would mean there was a belief that the water was actually behaving in some way because it is pursuing the person.
It is promoted that drugs cause paranoia, but in reality, any illegal activity; lying, stealing, assassination, drug use, or merely pornography or anything thought to be immoral is likely to inspire a sense of being watched and perhaps hunted.
Typically a psychologist considers a person paranoid if the person displays what the psychologist believes to be an inappropriate fear or suspicion. A more competent psychologist will ensure that the person is actually making cognitive deductions based on that suspicion. But does a psychologist really know what is inappropriate? Does he know the likelihood that a political conspiracy is actually taking place? A psychiatrist is typically going to declare a state of paranoia based on whether the suspicions are anti-socialistic.
To me it is more valid to ask a sociologist, political scientist, or social engineer if someone is paranoid than it is to ask a psychologist or psychiatrist. The sociologist might need a short explanation as to the exact definition of the concept, but a sociologist is more likely to know the state of society such as to know whether suspicions are realistic or inappropriate. The sociologist is more in tune with how often suspicions are justified in a society.
Paranoia rises from a sense of insecurity that inspires the mind to begin speculating. It is normal and appropriate for a person who senses insecurity to speculate as to the cause. Without such an instinct, a species would never learn to avoid subtle real dangers. But when the deductive process gets deluded by being too narrowly focus on unlikely speculations compared to more likely scenarios, delusion overtakes the mind.
Delusions overtake a mind by the normal and healthy process of seeking out justification for belief. But the fact that such justifications were merely possibilities gets forgotten as further deductions are pursued.
In developing a delusion, a suspicion is generated then a defense for belief in the suspicion is generated so as to thwart doubt. Focus on the possibility of the suspicion being true tends to generate imaginative plausibility scenarios. When the mind forgets that each thought was merely a possibility, not a probability, these plausible scenarios add together to form an airtight case study. The belief becomes undeniable to the deluded mind.
Although without the insecurity paranoia is difficult to generate, the most significant culprit causing the end result of delusion is the loss of short-term memory skill. An insecure person who can think clearly might suspect the wrong scenario, but a delusion will not be established until they forget that they had only one suspected scenario out of other possibilities.
The lack of memory also makes deducing probabilities far more difficult resulting in making poorer guesses. A poor memory disallows the imagination from deriving all of the possibilities from which a probability can be validly deduced. Often the possibility that is left out of the calculation is merely the one that posits a serious lack of education or information on the subject. It is difficult to analyze how likely it is that you do not know enough to even make a guess.
Such deductions of probability occur deep within the subconscious and when they err, the conscious mind is only presented with the erroneous imagined scenario as though no other possibility could exist. This results in a firm belief as no other possibility can be imagined. And if the person is challenged, the natural social ego defense comes into play to divert embarrassment and further defend and seal the delusional state.
Thus the cause of paranoia is not merely feelings of insecurity and an imaginative mind, but actually it is the result of feelings of insecurity, possibly justified, and a failing or poor memory limiting the imagination to poor belief choices.
Memory problems in society are becoming even more prevalent than paranoia problems because.. in case you don't remember, they're out to GET us.
Saturday, May 22, 2010
Psychological Momentum
“Psychological momentum” refers to occurrences of strong mental effect. To create such effect requires sufficient logical, emotional, and instinctive appeal.
As a mind attempts to balance the effects upon it in an endeavor to direct affect upon the world around it, the mind categorizes and thus filters information. To understand the mind more clearly, we segregate the mind into 3 general levels of processing; logical, emotional, and instinctive. To alter the mind requires affect upon at least one of these generalized levels and for maximum effect, upon all three.
Logical influence is created through simple irrefutable association (ie; “2 is a number”). These typically include definitions, declarations, and equivalences. Although any one logical step is merely tautological, a series of steps can become very significant and lead to a surprising conclusion. A mind that is carefully examining each step might not accept the conclusion at all until it clearly sees each incontrovertible step leading up to it.
Often in competition with logical affectance, is emotional acceptance. As a mind attempts to deal with the challenge of life, it must select in which direction to lean concerning many issues and thus often in preference to a leaning, it refuses to accept a clearly logical step. Having emotional acceptance is often necessary to allow a logical argument to be heard.
Just as logical argumentation requires a degree of education on the simple associations involved before the conclusion is reached, emotional appeal requires established emotional responses to be instilled or trained before the logical argument is presented. This process can take a long time to establish but once established, logical argumentation becomes easily accepted. Such pre-training is clearing the path for the oncoming logical presentation such as to allow for maximum affect.
The inertial mass within psychological momentum is the actual logical association to be accepted. That association must be as firmly bonded as possible, perhaps by a variety of verification arguments that all lead to the same association. The more firmly irrefutable the logic, the more affect it will have against potential resistance and entropy. Likewise, there is emotional mass comprised of pre-trained emotional responses that can serve either to shuttle the logic into maximum effect, or to resist any affect from the unaccepted inertia of logic. This is largely the concern of diplomacy.
In addition to the traditional and well-known affecters of logic and emotional appeal is instinctive appeal. Instinctive responses occur on a lower level than emotional and often serve to form both emotional and logical associations. Instincts are directly derived from physiological reactions such as drawing back from the heat of a fire or being attracted to the smell of food. Instinctive responses are not always accurate, but tend to be more difficult to overcome regardless of logical or emotional associations. Instinctive responses are the primary affecters in addictions. Even though an addiction behavior might be irrational and hated by the subject, the subject still finds it difficult to alter the behavior.
By properly implementing all three of the levels of influence, affect cannot be resisted. Momentum is the measure of that which cannot be resisted.
Logical Appeal;
logical, pre-accepted,
Logical Appeal;
logical, pre-accepted,
directly observable,
goal related
Emotional Appeal;
friendly, admirable, rewarding (entertaining or profitable), attractive, respectable,socially accepted
friendly, admirable, rewarding (entertaining or profitable), attractive, respectable,socially accepted
Instinctive Appeal; sensory appeal (sight, sound, smell, feel,..), orderly, simple, non-threatening
Progressing, Joy, and Momentum
Joy and the inspiration to continue in life come from the inner perception of progress toward an accepted good or goal direction. Joy is the sense that “good is at hand”.
The perception of progress or “the good at hand” can only occur from the measure of it. The natural mind perceives such measurements as a part of its normal functioning. But interestingly, the conscious mind often ignores the actual measure as it pursues merely the feeling, the inner perception of the good, regardless of whether the good is anything the conscious mind would agree to being actually good.
In effect, this disables the worth of the conscious mind and makes the person very susceptible to being misled and bemused by outside influences. The person in such a state is unconscious of the fact that he is not actually making any progress toward any improvement at all. In a sense, he is but dreaming and sleep walking and talking.
To ensure actual progress, enduring changes must be monitored.
People speak and act so as to have affect on their surroundings. Most often, the effect is intended to be only temporary, but at times the intent is to more permanently adjust society in a chosen direction.
When a statement is made, what effect has it had? Has it changed any opinions? For how long will the change endure? If momentum toward a goal is to be achieved, the smaller positive changes must endure. It is insufficient for angels to merely have wings. They must also have armor and often armament and allies.
The perception of progress or “the good at hand” can only occur from the measure of it. The natural mind perceives such measurements as a part of its normal functioning. But interestingly, the conscious mind often ignores the actual measure as it pursues merely the feeling, the inner perception of the good, regardless of whether the good is anything the conscious mind would agree to being actually good.
In effect, this disables the worth of the conscious mind and makes the person very susceptible to being misled and bemused by outside influences. The person in such a state is unconscious of the fact that he is not actually making any progress toward any improvement at all. In a sense, he is but dreaming and sleep walking and talking.
To ensure actual progress, enduring changes must be monitored.
People speak and act so as to have affect on their surroundings. Most often, the effect is intended to be only temporary, but at times the intent is to more permanently adjust society in a chosen direction.
When a statement is made, what effect has it had? Has it changed any opinions? For how long will the change endure? If momentum toward a goal is to be achieved, the smaller positive changes must endure. It is insufficient for angels to merely have wings. They must also have armor and often armament and allies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)