have you read Ligotti's book or the pessimists? It's depressing stuff, but I found comfort in it. — Jeremy Murray

No but I did philosophy as my degree and Existentialism was my favourite, with Political Philosophy second, I would say, for very different reasons. I remember eagerly waiting the year it would be studied proper and when it came it did not disappoint.

Yes Camus said that about Sisyphus; they pretty much all were saying the same thing weren't they, from different angles, as per my comment above, to embrace the absurdity of life through living authentically.

As I wrote in my reply to @Moliere this was well and good while things were working out for me through that hard toil of 'living authentically' but when life hit reset for me does not feel fair, while others still get to carry on their own paths unfettered, and I am once again disillusioned.

I suppose that is the absurdity part, which I am not accepting.

Btw why do @ mentions of users seem to work for others but not me?

I'm sorry to hear. I often wonder if I could go through another deep dive these days since it's been so long. I'm not sure where to go from there -- though then that seems to be indicative of the mood. If we knew what to do to fix it then obviously we'd do it, but thus far...

deep dive — Moliere

Deep dive you mean a life downswing? I usually see that term these days used just to mean heavily researching a topic.

Yeah, that's what I meant.

EDIT: Yes to your question. I meant "downswing" -- I was thinking of the metaphor that depression comes in waves, so "dive" came to mind because we dive into the water.

to embrace the absurdity of life through living authentically — unimportant

How does one live authentically with 'injustice'? The 'injustice' of chronic illness you suffer from, the 'injustice' of multiple tragic bereavements in my case? I certainly do not think of Sisyphus as happy.
But I do feel 'condemned to be free', and find that notion empowering. Having rejected religious belief, I was left with rationality or nothing in my quest to find authenticity in the face of suffering. Hence, philosophy and other academic subjects.

But this feels incomplete to me. Do you find satisfaction in Buddhism? As a non-theistic faith, I feel less of a barrier to Buddhism than I do towards faith that requires a deity. The problem of evil is avoided, for one thing.

anyone can be smote at any time.

Most annoying to still watch others enjoy their lives in blissful ignorance.

I know lots of people deal with various chronic illnesses and still enjoy life but for me it has stripped away my ability to engage in what I devoted my life to for about the last 20 years. — unimportant

This is a tough pill to swallow, and a tougher pill at a young age.

I find the invisibility of suffering difficult, so when you talk of blissful ignorance, I think of the privileged woke world in which I have spent most of my adult life. Ironically, the majority of people I encounter in this world are too privileged to have experienced the sort of random tragedies that have affected us both. These tend to be the majority of voices I hear on the subject of MAID.

I am glad you are participating here, on these subjects, which as you noted, are worthy philosophical topics. Do you find any solace in talking about these things?

I always have, personally, but feel the philosophical frame has helped me feel a different form of solace in understanding, or perhaps even wisdom.

Euthanasia for the terminally Ill is one thing. For someone who is really depressed, or shaken by a loss that seems irrecoverable, that is quite another. I don't think it is ethical to make suicide a safe, available option for the depressed. If depression is a mental illness, then the person is out of their right mind, and does not have the competency to judge such a momentous decision for themselves. — hypericin

Ah I missed this response.
Firstly I would agree that there is danger here in making suicide easy, as we all have moments of extreme grief, and, as I say, death is permanent. Many of us are often relieved that in our darkest moments we didn't have access to a gun.

But I also believe that things like "right to life" are meaningless without ultimate control over our own fate. Anyone should be able to check out. But, in terms of assisted suicide, of course we should provide all the therapy, all the options, and all the (reasonable) thinking time that we can.

Do you find any solace in talking about these things?

I always have, personally, but feel the philosophical frame has helped me feel a different form of solace in understanding, or perhaps even wisdom. — Jeremy Murray

I do.

Part of the reason I love Camus' The Myth of Sisyphus is because I've found it soothing to read when I'm at my darkest. It's not so much the arguments anymore even but just that there is a rational frame in which to reflect upon my horrible feelings which helps me work through them.

And I think it's an important topic to talk about philosophically, too. "Depression" has diagnostic criteria for a clinical setting but that doesn't mean it's conceptually clear -- and insofar that we're enjoying ourselves (it is therapeutic rather than harmful) then it's rare for people to even want to talk about the various moods of depression in order to make some kind of sense of it all.

Do you find satisfaction in Buddhism? — Jeremy Murray

Kind of. I would still much prefer my old life back, but it is like my hand has been forced to seek out something else and Buddism has a lot of explanations for the suffering.

I find lots of it ridiculous though, so have to pick what I take, as, while they claim to be non-theistic, it is still steeped in religious dogma, such as reincarnation, fantastical supernatural acts, like the Buddha could supposedly levitate and other such silliness.

This is when you look on contemporary Buddhist forums as well and if you question those things you are told 'you do not have faith'

I don't really read much into that now. Sam Harris has done a good analysis of this, taking the good rational bits and throwing out the nonsense.

The problem of evil is avoided, for one thing. — Jeremy Murray

Don't know what you mean here. Sounds like a misinterpretation. Nothing is avoided in Buddhism, it is all to be accepted and detached from, good and evil, until you do not care one way or the other and move past the dichotomous world.

Do you find any solace in talking about these things? — Jeremy Murray

Not much though I am indulging myself in this thread. I prefer discuss other philosophical subjects.

It is fine at the moment, or I wouldn't have posted, but not something I actively seek over other philosophical matters.

Hi Moliere, what a great ritual with Camus.

I was reading "The Outsider" for the first time in the summer when my neighbors little kids came by selling lemonade, right after the murder on the beach. Mom asked what I was reading but I abstained from telling.

The interlude made the experience even more memorable.

I find real solace in darker philosophies sometimes. It helps combat that sense of doom that comes with despair. I flipped through Ligotti again last night after mentioning him here, and when he quotes Mainlander "Life is hell, and the sweet still night of absolute death is the annihilation of hell", I find it comforting to recognize my suffering, at it's worst, so eloquently expressed, and shared by another.

Of course I know that my beliefs are symptoms, but the power of philosophy, or dark, emotional art, is one of the few strategies I have to fight the worst of depression.

Interesting, just to notice that now as I write you. This sparked me:

a rational frame in which to reflect upon my horrible feelings — Moliere

Definitely how I ended up experiencing existentialism when I reconnected to philosophy a couple of years ago.

"Depression" has diagnostic criteria for a clinical setting but that doesn't mean it's conceptually clear -- and insofar that we're enjoying ourselves (it is therapeutic rather than harmful) then it's rare for people to even want to talk about the various moods of depression in order to make some kind of sense of it all. — Moliere

Some of the most relatable expressions of depression I've encountered are ancient. This article by a young mental health journalist is fascinating.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/the-relatable-emotions-of-depressed-people-from-3000-years-ago/

We do not seem to have improved. The idea that mental illness and mental health are best addressed by professionals is part of the problem, but I have had excellent experiences with counselling as well.

Have you? Or other positive interventions / rituals?

I studied psychology in university, taught it in high school for over a decade, and have a long family history of mental illness. I have seen the objectivity of the discipline overstated my entire adult life.

I have seen the unwillingness to talk about the hard topics in psychology - suicide, depression, addiction, psychosis, etc. - just in the people around me since I was young.

And I've been exposed to the best arguments of the anti-psychiatry contingent as well. They lose me when they talk about psychosis.

Long story short, we need much better public conversations about mental health and mental illness? I think this would honestly reduce some of the problems we see with overdiagnosis.

Kind of. I would still much prefer my old life back, but it is like my hand has been forced to seek out something else and Buddism has a lot of explanations for the suffering.

I find lots of it ridiculous though — unimportant

Fair enough, and it does. I can't believe in the mystical stuff either, but I do see value in ritual for those that do, or who practice it as ritual.

Meditation has been great for me, although I have fallen out of the practice. I even had my high school students meditating. It was super popular, which surprised me, but it helped that I was actually practicing it myself at the time.

I was flipping through Ligotti again last night and he talks about Buddhism and suffering quite a bit, seeing it as in the pessimist tradition. You should check out "The Conspiracy Against the Human Race". He is a horror writer, primarily, but he wrote this on the philosophy of his writing and his life, which is unsurprisingly bleak if you have read his fiction.

It was a big inspiration on Matthew McConaughey's character in True Detective Season 1, if you've seen that.

The problem of evil is avoided, for one thing.
— Jeremy Murray

Don't know what you mean here — unimportant

It's a challenge against a deity. How can a just God allow such extremes of human suffering? Buddhists don't need to answer this. It's the problem of evil that lead me to finally reject the notion of God entirely.

Not much though I am indulging myself in this thread. — unimportant

Well, I certainly appreciate the conversation. I get real value out of talking about mental illness, even my own personally, with a 'rational frame' as Moliere put it.

Emil Cioran said it well " I live only because it is in my power to die when I choose to: without the idea of suicide, I'd have killed myself right away."

Also ..

“Only optimists commit suicide, optimists who no longer succeed at being optimists. The others, having no reason to live, why would they have any to die?”

I agree that there's nothing out there in the world. It's all "chasing after the wind" in the grand scheme of things.

And while I can say this, I still find myself searching and grasping because it is of my nature to do so. Desire is the essence of man. And I guess this dilemma is where the pain is coming from.

And that constant thriving, that desire, is an obstacle to freedom.
Freedom from thoughts & emotions, which we all consider very very personal to us.

I think that if there was total acceptance of the fact that there's nothing out there, one would 'turn inward' so to speak, and disdain the world.

Why would there be any reason to commit suicide then? Except in the most dire circumstances possibly.
Wouldn't the smallest things become a material for inner work, for observation and understanding?

Sounds good in theory! Hence why I try to remember ..

‘But all things excellent are as difficult as they are rare’ - Spinoza

I find real solace in darker philosophies sometimes. It helps combat that sense of doom that comes with despair. I flipped through Ligotti again last night after mentioning him here, and when he quotes Mainlander "Life is hell, and the sweet still night of absolute death is the annihilation of hell", I find it comforting to recognize my suffering, at it's worst, so eloquently expressed, and shared by another.

Of course I know that my beliefs are symptoms, but the power of philosophy, or dark, emotional art, is one of the few strategies I have to fight the worst of depression. — Jeremy Murray

Yup.

Definitely how I ended up experiencing existentialism when I reconnected to philosophy a couple of years ago. — Jeremy Murray

:cool:

We do not seem to have improved. The idea that mental illness and mental health are best addressed by professionals is part of the problem, but I have had excellent experiences with counselling as well.

Have you? Or other positive interventions / rituals? — Jeremy Murray

I've had both bad and good experiences with counselling. I also take medication.

I also try and give comfort to people I see who have the same emotions. In fact I tend to find the more I focus on others' needs the less I notice my depression.

But I don't think that we can just think ourselves to be happy, or whatever that is. Even medicated I have depression and have to recognize it when it creeps up in order to stop myself from going into some kind of spiral.

Other rituals, though, would include writing poetry and reading.

I have seen the unwillingness to talk about the hard topics in psychology - suicide, depression, addiction, psychosis, etc. - just in the people around me since I was young.

And I've been exposed to the best arguments of the anti-psychiatry contingent as well. They lose me when they talk about psychosis.

Long story short, we need much better public conversations about mental health and mental illness? I think this would honestly reduce some of the problems we see with overdiagnosis. — Jeremy Murray

I've noticed an unwillingness. I've been exposed to some arguments of anti-psychiatry, but I'm not invested enough in the project of psychiatry to want to really dig into them. I agree that it's not as objective as people are tempted to believe. But I think that true of medical science in general. There's an annoying habit amongst Doctors where they tend to think that because they are the guy who knows everything in a particular situation that they're the guy who knows everything all the time.

Hardly objective in the manner people tend to mean.

But I agree we need better conversations -- and would go further there and say we need better concepts.

Where I'm hesitant is in thinking there are problems with overdiagnosis. I'd reach for the opposite -- there are problems with underdiagnosis. People may want a diagnosis, but that doesn't mean it's an accurate one....

I'd rather say it's a medical field with such-and-such degree of confidence in it, which is lower than people often mean by "science" because they have the picture of Newton's physics in their mind.

've been exposed to some arguments of anti-psychiatry, but I'm not invested enough in the project of psychiatry to want to really dig into them. I agree that it's not as objective as people are tempted to believe. — Moliere

There is no single project of psychiatry. It's also worth noting that the anti-psychiatry gurus are often psychiatrists themselves; people like Thomas Szasz, R.D. Laing, David Cooper, Franco Basaglia, Peter Breggin, and Giovanni Jervis. There's a lot of self-criticism built into the profession. I've worked with many psychiatrists over three decades, some brilliant, some dullards. None of them have ever held a view that what they do is objective. They would see thier profession as a mix of science, art, culture and intersubjective agreement. I think psychiatry probably arouses more hatred than almost any profession (even lawyers and politicians). How often is psychiatry the tool of oppression and anti-individualism in movies; from One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest to Girl, Interrupted? And god knows, like priests, lawyers, doctors, soldiers, police and politicians, shrinks have often done questionable things over time.

I think psychiatry probably arouses more hatred than almost any profession (even lawyers and politicians). — Tom Storm

I don't know about comparisons, but I agree that psychiatrists are often bad guys in movies. There's a stigma against psychiatry.

There is no single project of psychiatry. — Tom Storm

Good point.

t's also worth noting that the psychiatry gurus are often psychiatrists themselves; people like Thomas Szasz, R.D. Laing, David Cooper, Franco Basaglia, Peter Breggin, and Giovanni Jervis. There's a lot of self-criticism built into the profession. — Tom Storm

Yeah I agree.

I've worked with many psychiatrists over three decades, some brilliant, some dullards. None of them have ever held a view that what they do is objective. They would see thier profession as a mix of science, art, culture and intersubjective agreement.

Does that defend it from the charges of anti-psychiatry?

I'm not sure either way. Really I think that insofar that we take psychiatry, psychology, and the various clinical diagnostics therein as merely kind-of-sort-of right and we're open to hearing one another -- whether they be patient or doctor -- then we're doing as good as we can do.

I'm not anti-psychiatry. Far from it -- it's the reason I'm able to live a content life now.

I agree that there's something to the notion that cultural desires for individualism run against the need for psychiatric help. It also doesn't help that in culture at large people talk about the mentally ill as if they ought have less rights than others.

I agree that there's something to the notion that cultural desires for individualism run against the need for psychiatric help. It also doesn't help that in culture at large people talk about the mentally ill as if they ought have less rights than others. — Moliere

People also talk about mental illness as if it is romantic and needs to be defended as merely a kind alternative lifestyle that the evil mainstream can’t handle.

Does that defend it from the charges of anti-psychiatry? — Moliere

Well, it depends on the charges and claims made. I’m not interested in revisiting this fairly intractible debate, but I will say that if a particular psychiatrist takes the view that they are not infallible, that patient rights should be upheld, that medication is not compulsory, and that the patient should have a say in all treatment (which is how it works here for the most part), then I think we're mostly good. But no doubt there are people so hateful of psychiatry that nothing will ever excuse or redeem it. And there have been awful practices. Not to mention instances of people with a mental illness and absolutely no insight into their harmful behaviours towards self or others. The Foucauldian charge of social control, will always be popular. I feel this way about interior designers. :wink:

People also talk about mental illness as if it is romantic and needs to be defended as merely a kind alternative lifestyle that the evil mainstream can’t handle. — Tom Storm

I don't like the romanticizing of mental illness.

I understand people forming groups, like goths (from back in the day?), who want to defend their identity as an alternative lifestyle choice which happens to include various diagnostic criteria.

Would you agree with:

Long story short, we need much better public conversations about mental health and mental illness? — Jeremy Murray

? As in, we need better public conversations about mental health and mental illness.

Well, it depends on the charges and claims made. I’m not interested in revisiting this fairly intractible debate, but I will say that if a particular psychiatrist takes the view that they are not infallible, that patient rights should be upheld, that medication is not compulsory, and that the patient should have a say in all treatment (which is how it works here for the most part), then I think we're mostly good. But no doubt there are people so hateful of psychiatry that nothing will ever excuse or redeem it. And there have been awful practices. The Foucauldian charge of social control will always be popular. I feel this way about interior designers. :wink: — Tom Storm

I agree we're mostly good in the circumstances you listed.

And I appreciate the self-awareness of the practice -- I've benefited so I have no desire to tear it down or something like that.

? As in, we need better public conversations about mental health and mental illness. — Moliere

Yes, but it depends upon what "much better' means. For instance, if a socialist says we need much better conversations about economics and money, then where do you think this will head? If we are not careful "much better" can mean "much closer to my biases". But I'm in favour of enhanced conversations on most subjects.

It does.

Perhaps we here can attempt to create this "much better" conversation?

Seems amongst us all, in our various experiences, we could find that ground given how much we've agreed upon while speaking all the points we've heard before.

Perhaps we here can attempt to create this "much better" conversation? — Moliere

I doubt it. I think we need face-to-face discussions in real time, not the anonymous often polemical world of forums. But who knows?

I don't like the romanticizing of mental illness. — Moliere

The issue for many people is that normal behaviours have previously been described as mental illness; homosexuality, even feminism. Of course, many religious folks might still agree. And now trans identities… even many progressives view this as mental illness. But let's not go there.

I doubt it. I think we need face-to-face discussions in real time, not the anonymous often polemical world of forums. But who knows? — Tom Storm

I do too, tho I've also been disappointed by face-to-face interactions in real time as well.

To the point that I've come to think that the face-to-face relation is not literal, but that we can have it here even as we only type to one another.

The issue for many people is that normal behaviours have previously been described as mental illness; homosexuality, even feminism. Of course, many religious folks might still agree. And now trans identities… even many progressives view this as mental illness. — Tom Storm

Yes.

"I am homosexual/trans/etc." is classified and understood as a "sin", and people who grow up in them settings will likewise attach themselves to that idea and not want to be seen that way. Or, for the "progressives", understood as "illness", as if it needs a cure.

Also, why sign up for an identity that is likewise stigmatized unless you have to? Even with doctor's notes I've been treated by HR peeps as a liar.

"I am homosexual/trans/etc." is classified and understood as a "sin", — Moliere

I’ve often thought that sin and mental illness are connected for many people. The notion that one is going against nature/god.

I do too, tho I've also been disappointed by face-to-face interactions in real time as well. — Moliere

All interactions can disappoint. For me there are always distinct advantages to being face to face someone in real time. But perhaps not for everyone.

Sound to like you’ve thought a lot about these themes and have acquired wisdom.

Sound to like you’ve thought a lot about these themes and have acquired wisdom. — Tom Storm

Thank you, and I want to say the same for you: I'm doubtful of my own wisdom (as I'm sure you are of yours), but I'm asking after your thoughts in reply because I think you have it too.

“Only optimists commit suicide, optimists who no longer succeed at being optimists. The others, having no reason to live, why would they have any to die?” — Hurmio

Great quote. I need to read Emil Cioran, where's a good place to start?

I think that if there was total acceptance of the fact that there's nothing out there, one would 'turn inward' so to speak, and disdain the world.

Why would there be any reason to commit suicide then? Except in the most dire circumstances possibly.
Wouldn't the smallest things become a material for inner work, for observation and understanding?

Sounds good in theory! Hence why I try to remember ..

‘But all things excellent are as difficult as they are rare’ - Spinoza — Hurmio

A phenomenology of depression?

Interesting idea, but I don't think it inevitable, to 'turn inward'. One can admire or enjoy a world they are unable to join.

That said, 'turning in' is a project that could bring meaning to 'disdain for the world'. Sometimes, my personal writing when at my lowest points emotionally is quite powerfully descriptive, in ways I can't access most of the time.

Thought-provoking post, Hurmio.

I've had both bad and good experiences with counselling. I also take medication.

I also try and give comfort to people I see who have the same emotions. In fact I tend to find the more I focus on others' needs the less I notice my depression.

But I don't think that we can just think ourselves to be happy — Moliere

Helping others is as good a practice as there is for people with depression. And I certainly think it is easier to support people when you, too, have suffered.

I agree that one cannot 'think themselves happy'. Is happiness the goal for you? I align more with Buddhist non-attachment, but that too is not available only through rationality.

For many, or at least, certainly for myself, mental illness begins with hypersensitivity and an excess of reflective ruminating. 'Too much thinking' has been precisely my problem.

But I agree we need better conversations -- and would go further there and say we need better concepts.

Where I'm hesitant is in thinking there are problems with overdiagnosis. I'd reach for the opposite -- there are problems with underdiagnosis. People may want a diagnosis, but that doesn't mean it's an accurate one....

I'd rather say it's a medical field with such-and-such degree of confidence in it, which is lower than people often mean by "science" because they have the picture of Newton's physics in their mind. — Moliere

Better concepts such as? I agree with you here, but have not given this specific thought till now.

Perhaps I should say 'problems with overdiagnosis and underdiagnosis'?

There are definitely a lot of students who get medical accommodations in schools these days, although we also see rising rates of diagnosed disorders. There are many situations in which getting a diagnosis brings a person material benefits, in addition to, hopefully, care and support.

Some of this leads to overdiagnosis. Fears of 'safetyism' in parenting, and parents reaching for medical labels to understand their children. The 'romanticization' that Tom Storm raised. Young people who gain identity points for self-diagnosing online. Freddie DeBoer - who publicly talks about his own bipolar disorder - writes very thoughtfully on this subject. Abigail Shrier is also good.

But there are a lot of people walking around with many of the symptoms of depression who would never discuss their mental health, who represent the problem of underdiagnosis.

If you consider addiction a mental illness, how many people do not acknowledge, say, a smart-device addiction?

It's complicated. Better conversations to me means, more honest and informed conversations, not ideologically more correct ones. Too much of mental health is taboo, especially for men. Getting people talking about things they benefit from talking about. Ideally, this improves social science literacy and people can start to appreciate the complexity and nuance of mental health and illness.

For example, how many people do not even make a distinction between those concepts?

How often is psychiatry the tool of oppression and anti-individualism in movies; from One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest to Girl, Interrupted? — Tom Storm

Interesting point Tom. I give "Cuckoo's Nest" a pass just because of its age (and overall awesomeness) but that stereotype persists today.

I recently rewatched "12 Monkeys" on TMC, and was appalled by the stereotyping of mental illness. Brad Pitt got an Oscar nod for that I believe, all mannerisms and googly eyes, nothing at all like any of the people with bipolar disorder I have known. He's actually 'rational' because the psychiatric 'system' is oppressive.

I loved that movie as a kid. With a 'social justice' perspective, the stereotypes are glaring, and yet when I searched online for commentary, nobody has a problem with it, and Google AI assured me that it was a fair representation.

I continue to think that the reality of severe mental illness makes many people too uncomfortable to face, and instead they turn a blind eye?

To the point that I've come to think that the face-to-face relation is not literal, but that we can have it here even as we only type to one another. — Moliere

I had a great time reading your non-literal face-to-face with Tom Storm. I think it is absolutely possible to have meaningful dialogue online. It's harder, in that a screen is one more barrier to understanding, in general. But the depth of thought I see here on TPF is different than most places.

I definitely benefit from the 'slow thinking' required of me as a lay philosopher to follow and participate on TPF. Like writing pen on paper, the action of participating here requires me to shift out of fast thinking, a shift that benefits my mental health.

I can't recall back to the beginning of this thread, but participating over the past few days, I see a lot of dialogue that belongs to the 'better conversations' category.

So what would you (and other posters) nominate as starting points for 'better conversations'? Where is the need greatest? Where can philosophy best intersect with social science today?

Is happiness the goal for you? I align more with Buddhist non-attachment, but that too is not available only through rationality. — Jeremy Murray

It is, though I tend to think there are benefits to non-attachment. We can become overly attached to a point where we are no longer happy -- so here I mean happiness not in the sense of intense joy but rather calm and tranquil joy.

There seems to be some subtle differences between the way Buddhists see the world and I, but it's a close analogue.

So what would you (and other posters) nominate as starting points for 'better conversations'? Where is the need greatest? Where can philosophy best intersect with social science today? — Jeremy Murray

I'm not sure exactly, though I do know one important thing. You note:

For many, or at least, certainly for myself, mental illness begins with hypersensitivity and an excess of reflective ruminating. 'Too much thinking' has been precisely my problem. — Jeremy Murray

Which I think is a danger in philosophizing about mental illness when you're wanting to know about it because it helps you express yourself -- to disappear into the navel and not even enjoy oneself but instead get caught up in a self-feeding circle that just hurts.

I.e. we ought not ruminate. And the way to tell if we're ruminating or not is whether or not we're enjoying ourselves or not -- i.e. am I just wallowing in my sadness in which case, OK, I have to wait it out and can't think myself out of it, or am I actually coming to understand it better such that I know better how to deal with my emotions?

Which leads to:

Better concepts such as? — Jeremy Murray

That's sort of the philosophical question. But the guide towards whether a concept is better or worse is whether or not it helps us to talk about our feelings in the pursuit of finding more peace with them.

Sometimes I think it best to drop all talk of "mind"; not that there is no mind, but to speak about the mind to understand the mind runs the risk of rumination and question begging. Here then the medical model isn't towards this mental construct which we interact with but rather towards whether a person we are talking to is happy or not.

But the social model might run differently. A better concept there might be the elimination of the doctor-patient relationship in search of another relationship to seek peace in -- such as solace among fellows and mutual aid.

Which isn't to speak against the medical model at all, from my vantage, but to show that there's already two different ways of improving concepts. (Medical/Social distinction I'm lifting from @Banno's thread here: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/16296/disability/p1

I can't recall back to the beginning of this thread, but participating over the past few days, I see a lot of dialogue that belongs to the 'better conversations' category. — Jeremy Murray

I agree. Sometimes there's not a program or a concept or anything more to it than open and honest communication.

Glad it was of use.

Me too :). Gracias amigo.