Have you noticed now people say 'i have depression' rather than 'I'm depressed' on this board?
It's almost like you're treating it like a real disease, which you can catch or something rather than something that's all in your head with biological causes for a very select few. If yours is caused by chemical imbalances or whatever it would manifest itself in other family members.
You're fucking stupid.
Genes may cause chemical imbalances, but so can life. 50% of adults will meet criteria for a mental disorder at some point in their lives.
The cure for depression is not pills or "just get over it lol", it's changing your lifestyle and social circle.
"I have diabetes and I can't help it, I need chemicals to function normally."
>However, you abused your body for years prior with destructive sugars and overtaxed your pancreas.
>"I have depression and I can't help it. I need chemicals to function normally."
However, you abused your brain for years prior indulging in destructive thought patterns and overtaxed your amygdala.
Literally ZERO difference.
>>inability to experience joy in life
The vast VAST majority of the time there simply isn't joy to experience. Drugs allow you to cope with this. There is no mental problem.
Depression is a recurrent pattern of reactions, there's a reason you'd need to be feeling down for over 6 months (or whatever it is in DSM V) to be diagnosed. This isn't fleeting sadness or grief both of which are normal.
If you have leg pain for a while and it goes away, then theres probably nothing wrong. If it doesn't go away no matter what you do, its a medical problem.
Your "fault", your control, lies in the interpretation of circumstances.
What does life mean to you?
>fucking you over
When you narrativise external factors like that, yes, it's your fault. You abuse your brain to death, and beat yourself into misery by CHOOSING to FOCUS on what is painful, and casting yourself as an eternal victim in the passion-play of your mind.
And yes, there is a point of no return, like diabetes, where you're reactivity is so deeply wired into your mind that you need chemicals to dig yourself out of the metaphysical trenches you have ploughed.
Likewise, if you retain sovereignty over your mind - if you become a master of meaning, then dying is just living. A "shitty life" is no longer shitty because you've stopped calling it that. And there is noone "outside" of you calling the shots and telling "you" what events and symbols mean.
I know that. I got diagnosed with it myself and I still think it's bullshit.
It's just 'being sad.' If whatever you are sad about hasn't changed in the last 6 months hasn't changed then of course you'll feel the same way.
Also, lots of illnesses get better naturally. Just look at the common cold for example. Mental illnesses can also get better naturally anyway.
>It's almost like you're treating it like a real disease, which you can catch or something rather than something that's all in your head with biological causes for a very select few. If yours is caused by chemical imbalances or whatever it would manifest itself in other family members.
I don't quite think you understand depression or neurology
physiological/chemical differences are not limited to a 'select fiew', quite literally everyone has a different brain structure (if we didn't, we would all think and act in the exact same way). There are certain tendencies in neuronal makeup, physical density and structure of certain parts of the brain that correlate directly with certain traits.
These generally aren't terribly difficult to understand, for example, if you have an amygdala that's oddly enlarged and overactive it might become more probable that your brain exerts a fear reaction to more things, this might be involved in the pathology of something like paranoia.
These structures and neuronal compositions are not only influenced by genetics but also by epigenetics and external stimuli (and how it interacts with your mental functioning).
for example, it has been shown that neglect often leads to lowered hippocampal density (a trait associated with depression)
Mental disorders are very real, but they are not clearly defined like in the DSM, there's a lot of overlap and ambiguity, as the underlying physical processes that bring about these undesired traits are always highly variable in their expression.
consider this: In diagnosed avoidant and schzoid personality patients there is a commonality in a polymorphism in the ANKK1 gene, this polymorphism is often associated with mental disorders, but it is only one part of these mental disorders, not a singular deciding characteristic of this disorder
the disorder itself is a sum of multiple different factors like this, which overlap with other disorders.
You're saying it as if there's an objective measure of "shitness". It all depends on your perceptions. I'm not saying if you have no life, no friends, etc you should be feeling great, but there's a difference between viewing your life as irredeemable shit and realizing there are problems that you most of the time can fix.
Look at developing countries like India (>DESIGNATED), millions of people live worse by degrees and yet there aren't debilitating epidemics of depression there. Meanwhile, the US is a world leader in depression diagnoses (probably because of pharma industry being massive jews, but its a different story).
it's like how the only way to get cancer is because god thinks you're a faggot
>Why is some of it considered mental illness but others aren't? It doesn't make sense.
This is a great point, it does seem unreasonable that someone might be considered 'mentally ill' due to factors they can't control
but think about it from an ethical type of perspective, if certain traits are more conducive to higher success in a culture, than those traits will be seen as the 'positive standard' of personality traits and thus we then measure disorder by the deviance from this ideal.
Humans are social animals, we define our personalities based on interactions with others, the overarching culture is the determinant of the standards of personality normality, some will fit what is wanted naturally, some won't.
those who don't are considered 'ill', in the past they might have been considered an 'outcast' or 'loon', people who fell out of the normal bounds of ethics of a society have always existed, and have always been ostracized.
it may not be 'fair' but it's the way we adapted, this social structure has proven successful for propagating a species
That's true. Still though, someone can be a bit of a bellend without being labelled as having 'Bellend syndrome' lel.
I suppose the same question can be asked about physical problems too. Interesting question desu
>Still though, someone can be a bit of a bellend without being labelled as having 'Bellend syndrome' lel.
yea exactly, all these traits exist on a spectrum. we often only delegate special labels to notably expressed varieties of these traits, there's a notable difference between a sad person and a dysthymic person
>I suppose the same question can be asked about physical problems too
works the same exact way, whatever trait is most desirable in that environment will lead to a culture that generates a code of 'ideal traits' relative to that desirable trait
you wouldn't want to be a tall person living in some sort of ultra cramped space for example, in an environment where being tall isn't beneficial the manlet might reighn supreme