Depression is part of who and what you are. — Marcus de Brun

Then there is only the ability to coping with it, yes?

I love my depression, it makes me hate the world and reminds me that the greater portion of humanity is deserving of little more than disgust and pity. As a consequence of this depressive view, the opposites; nature, animals, philosophy, art, litterature, food, old cars, whiskey, old buildings, culture mythology, my bicycle, and the rare encounter with an intelligent thinking human... fill me with consummate delight, a happiness and joy that makes the depression entirely worthwhile. — Marcus de Brun

How can you feel joy out of those things if your depressed? That seems contradictory, no?

Thanks for posting.

Posty

This question is totally out of order and I should not be asking it ... straight out... and I absolutely do not wish to cause any offence.. so please please ignore same or tell me to fuck off and mind my own business if you find it offensive. However I do think it has an impact on ones philosophy and ones depression

What is your sexual orientation?

M

You don't cure the depression itself maybe, but i think you can stop the feelings of guilt and shame assoiciated with labels that maybe prevent you from even starting to cure the depression itself. — ChatteringMonkey

Makes sense. I guess disidentification can only go so far. You can keep your hand warm near the fire but not so much as put it in the fire to keep it warm when already done once before to the detriment of the person .

What is your sexual orientation? — Marcus de Brun

I'm not sure I understand the point of this strange question. Is your point that some things are simply what they are and cannot be changed no matter how much one disidentification applies?

No that is not my point, and apologies for the question.

In my experience deep depression comes from unhappiness about the deepest of things. being loved, sharing love is probably the deepest and most fundamental 'things' for us all.

For most men, love and sexuality are intricately intertwined. Lots of men are unhappy because they have not found real, deep, meaningful love... this I think is the main antidote to depression, and often the barrier to this can be sexuality.

Sex and orgasims are mother nature's anti-depressant.. and when they come (no pun intended) in the form of a meaningful relationship.. the antidote is far better and more enduring than prozac, poetry or philosophy.


I guess what I am trying to say is that if one truly identifies with oneself in a deeply honest way... there is little to dislike and even less to dis-identify with.

M

Yes, I understand this somewhat. To be honest I would call myself asexual. I am not driven (anymore, or much less so) to gratify feelings of lust or sensuality. I used to be attracted to women, and still am somewhat, though rather Platonically.

But, what are your thoughts on Disidentification? Is it BS in your opinion?

Complete BS (IMOP) the only thing that is more BS is the notion of an asexual person.

M

Well, then. Then I guess, quite unfortunately, we cannot have a dispute or discussion over the issue.

A shame really.

What makes you say it's BS, for the matter?

I think you might be right in the sense that you do not 'wish' to discuss the issue, but that is a little different to the notion that one 'cannot' discuss the issue.

The issue (if it can even be called an issue) is perhaps most deserving of discussion... at least with the self, as it is deeply personal and deeply relevant

These are the sexual orientations that I believe exist.

Gay
Straight
Confused/ashamed

M

If you insist, then I think I lean towards being straight.

But, more about disidentification, please. Why is it utter BS in your opinion?

Because its validity or the need for it arises out of internal conflicts such as the following:

"I think I lean towards being straight"

It is the uncertainty here that legitimizes or creates the potential horizon for 'disidentification'

M

And what's wrong about that? Disidentification is a valuable tool to use when confronted with conflict, no?

But, I am leaning on the assumption that one cannot disidentify with things. Identification is just too powerful in the mind and deeply embedded within it to try and negate its own validity.

I do mostly agree with what unenlightened has to say, for the matter.

Ah! I knew it was going to raise its ugly head. wrong and right.

Fuck wrong and right. Listen to Nietzsche and move beyond right and wrong.

Fuck wrong...

The problem with disidentification is that it sees a 'wrong' as wrong...

There is no wrong... with the self.. there is nothing to dis-identify from if one kills the wrongness of the wrong and loves the self.

M

The problem with disidentification is that it sees a 'wrong' as wrong... — Marcus de Brun

No, it is impartial to right and wrong. It doesn't distinguish between the valence of right or wrong.

If it is impartial to right and wrong then it cannot exist because within such a truly impartial space.. there is nothing to dis-identify from.

There is nothing in ones identity that one needs to distance ones self from... nothing at all! The distance becomes pathology illness and unhappiness, because the distance the dis-identity is a move away from the truth of the self.

There is nothing wrong with being oneself en toto. There is everything wrong in the compromise.

I'm off to bed so might be late to reply further

M

If it is impartial to right and wrong then it cannot exist because within such a truly impartial space.. there is nothing to dis-identify from. — Marcus de Brun

There's always stuff that can be dis-identified from. It is just a matter of what content I want to disidentify from. It can or rather, should be impartial to what is right or wrong. After all, right and wrong are social constructs, which are the very thing that one disidentifies from.

There is nothing in ones identity that one needs to distance ones self from... nothing at all! The distance becomes pathology illness and unhappiness, because the distance the dis-identity is a move away from the truth of the self. — Marcus de Brun

So, people who are depressed, anxious, or some other ailment, have no use in trying to dis-identify from those labels and their negative connotations? I think not.

In other words, how does one draw the exclusion between the two statements about being depressed and having depression? — Posty McPostface

Who is asking? Is depression expressing itself? Is depression curious? Probably not. Probably, depression doesn't give a damn.

But there is not an either/or absolute, because it's a matter of what one wants to think, what one finds acceptable to be. For example, folks know, somewhere, that they are not their wealth, it is something they have, but somehow they manage to identify pretty closely with it; you don't find a lot of people trying to dis-identify with it.

"There's always stuff that can be dis-identified from"

One (by definition) has only one self to identify with. The true and entire identity of the self . Dis-identity can never be accomplished in any real form, other than schizophrenia (which may be an unfortunate consequence of the unfortunate attempt)

Dis-identity is therefore ultimately pathological and is merely a euphemism for denial that is deemed essential by the self for the sake of the self, however all that is being facilitated is self delusion and unhappiness and perhaps ultimately self destructive pathology .

Be yourself... no compromise. If the true version of that self appears 'wrong' or immoral, then the basis of that morality must be examined, and or the actual truth of self is not really being understood by the self it may not be a truth but merely a self delusion.

Human beings strive to be happy and true happiness does not necessitate or entail immorality or harm to others or to self. As such the truth should be embraced and not feared, if it is to be feared.. perhaps it is not really a truth but a poorly understood aspect of the self.

Self knowing is perhaps the very purpose to human existence... dis-identity is its antithesis.


"So, people who are depressed, anxious, or some other ailment, have no use in trying to dis-identify from those labels and their negative connotations? I think not. "

'labels' come from 'the other' They should not be avoided, they should be smashed into little pieces of dust and blown into the ether. If the self labels the self then the self has become the enemy of the self. Fuck labels.

M

I'm not sure you can turn down the volume on 'depression' — Posty McPostface

In fact, one gets rid of depression entirely on a regular basis.

Like this...

We're driving to work thinking about the day ahead, depressed about a job we hate. We're thinking about all the mistakes we made to wind up in this job, and that depresses us further, etc etc.

And then a kid on a bike shoots out from a side street right in to our lane of traffic. Thinking is replaced by automatic reflexes as we swerve to avoid the kid. And in those few seconds we aren't depressed, because we're not thinking.

I'm sitting at my desk working on the computer. I hear somebody enter the room behind me. I turn to look to see who it is. And in that moment of looking I'm not depressed, because I'm not thinking, I'm looking.

This escape from thought, and thus from depression, is woven in to the fabric of every day life. It happens routinely but because it happens so fast and is so utterly normal we tend not to notice it.

Meditation is a collection of simple mechanical techniques for taking some conscious control of this process. Or, for some people it's fishing, or working in their garden. There are a thousand ways to the same place.

But the thing is, analyzing the situation is not one of them.

Disidentification simply means, as tim wood has provided, freedom from being labeled by oneself or others. What about the process of disidentification? Do you think you could add to that? — Posty McPostface

Ok, I hear you now. Well, we could start with something easier than not labeling ourselves. We could for instance people watch at the mall and practice just observing without labeling or judging. Or we could take a walk in the park and practice observing everything so closely and carefully that the process of thinking about what we're observing is pushed in to the background.

Perhaps this will help? There is observation, and then there is processing what's been observed (ie. thinking). The more we are observing, the less we are thinking. So we can practice observing in a thousand different ways.

Thinking will continually interrupt the observing. That's completely normal. When that happens, and it will happen a LOT, we can just patiently set the thinking aside and get back to observing. Again, this is simple and mechanical, but not that easy at first.

It's like doing situps. We just do them, and do them, and do them, and do them, and stick with it patiently and persistently, and over time it gets easier and easier with practice.

I doubt such a plan will cure depression. But as we learn how to carve out a temporary space free of depression, we'll probably become less afraid of depression, and thus stop identifying with it so much. You know, weaken the bonds of that feedback loop.

Again, like with situps, no amount of analysis is going to solve the problem. Analysis tends to make it worse as it just feeds the thinking machine, poring more fuel on the fire.

In the end it seems to boil down to this.

We either find a system that works for us AND WORK IT...

Or we don't.

Speaking of simple mechanical solutions, there's this, which I should have mentioned first.

Physical exercise.

The mind and body are not two things as the thought generated labels "mind" and "body" suggest, but rather one thing. This is good news as it means the mind can be positively influenced by work we do on the body.

1) So before we dive in to a pile of sophisticated analysis, let's have an exercise plan that we are loyal to.

2) If our diet can be improved, let's improve it.

3) Yoga is a secret weapon that has served many people very well. Definitely worth investing in that.

4) Massage is a miracle method! Don't miss out!

All of the above is work, but none of it is complicated. It's just a matter of rolling up our sleeves and actually doing it.

And if we don't do things like this, that's useful too, as the not doing informs us that we aren't really that serious.

After following the above plan faithfully for years I have totally cured myself of Manic Typoholic Bloviation disease, as you can clearly see for yourself in this thread. :smile:

I know it smells of Eastern philosophy; and meditation... But, whatever works, I guess. — Posty McPostface

Wow! Eastern philosophy, or even being associated with it, is a negative thing? :fear:

P.S. I found this short article, which seems to give a reasonable impression of what disidentification is, and why we should do it. It definitely has a flavour of Eastern philosophy. :up: :smile:

On the subject of Eastern philosophy and guru-ism etc...

Eckhardt Tolle is an excellent writer who communicates clearly on the kind of subjects being discussed here. He can be a good read for those new to such subjects, as his presentation is mostly in common sense everyday language. However...

The downside is that his students have built a silly new age guru worship circus environment around him, which he may have fallen victim to. But, if you can hold your nose and ignore all of that, he's still a good writer, a good introduction.

1) ... let's have an exercise plan that we are loyal to.

2) If our diet can be improved, let's improve it.

3) Yoga is a secret weapon that has served many people very well. Definitely worth investing in that.

4) Massage is a miracle method! Don't miss out! — Jake

All good suggestions. Anything that keeps the blood flowing and the chi energy moving is good, especially when one might be in a state of reduced physical activity due to feelings of depression.

Personally, I have found that a low carbohydrate diet steadies the body, preventing ups and downs in blood sugar and insulin, which might be causing a roller coaster effect in other neuro-chemicals. There is a dietary paradox which I’m still trying to wrap my head around, but I believe it to be true. Eating a high fat diet (more specifically a low-carb/high fat-fiber-protein diet) forces the body to go into fat-burning mode to produce energy. It has been theorized by proponents of the so-called Paleo diet that this is really the body’s preferred way of generating energy. With the evolutionarily-recent invention of mass agricultural of grains, humans potentially had more carbohydrates than our bodies had evolved to process.

Fat For Fuel by Joseph Mercola is an excellent indepth study of the issue.

Again, like with situps, no amount of analysis is going to solve the problem. Analysis tends to make it worse as it just feeds the thinking machine, poring more fuel on the fire. — Jake

You have made the point that analysis is doing more harm than good. However, I must in general disagree with that assessment. If one was not analyzing the situation, one would not be almost scientifically sizing up the situation, and looking for answers. It’s like trying to untangle a knotted clump of power cords and wires by simply pulling strongly on them. Occasionally, if there are only a few wires and they aren’t too tangled this might work. But for a big ball of cables (that seems to be mating and reproducing :lol:) a slow process of careful and nimble unwinding works better.

I agree with changing the thinking process. That is what the idea of dis-identification, and also this thread is about. But that requires thought and analysis. As the quote above from the Chan/Zen master Wu Hsin hints, trying to stop thought is going against the very nature of mind. Again, disidentification is the goal. However, I completely agree that activities where one can “lose oneself” and “get into the zone/flow” are helpful to all, especially one dealings with depression.

one would not be almost scientifically sizing up the situation — 0 thru 9

You think science is an appropriate tool to investigate disidentification? :chin:

You think science is an appropriate tool to investigate disidentification? :chin: — Pattern-chaser

Looking at the context of the statement will probably clarify what I was getting at. But to be more specific... not “Science” itself in lab coats and oscilloscopes. But rather a scientific and analytical approach of noting causes and effects and looking for patterns. We do this all the time anyway, maybe somewhat unconsciously. In a crucial situation, critical thinking is... well... critical. :nerd:

...a scientific and analytical approach of noting causes and effects and looking for patterns... — 0 thru 9

Oh, I'm all for looking for patterns! :wink: But seriously, there are some things that require considered thought if we are to learn about them. There are others for which no amount of thought will do, e.g. learning to ride a bike. And there are still others for which a wholly scientific approach yields the most useful results. Horses for courses, and all that. :wink: :up:

As regards disidentification, my guess is that nothing beyond considered thought will achieve anything useful. Disidentification seems to be a vague and (dare I mention the word? :chin: :wink:) subjective thing. Formal reasoning seems too, well, formal. IMO, of course. :up:

Who is asking? Is depression expressing itself? Is depression curious? Probably not. Probably, depression doesn't give a damn.

But there is not an either/or absolute, because it's a matter of what one wants to think, what one finds acceptable to be. — unenlightened

Depression doesn't exist in some independent manner or fashion from the mind. It often has a manifestation in being itself. Take, for example, "I am depressed". The sufferer identifies with the depression to a significant extent. How does one disidentify from that?

It seems to me that depression can be learned out of or come out of, and no amount of disidentification will be of any use. It makes no difference if I am a set of symptoms or a label; because, this is just how I feel.

And, yes. I don't think disidentification is useful for treating depression...

Dis-identity can never be accomplished in any real form, other than schizophrenia (which may be an unfortunate consequence of the unfortunate attempt) — Marcus de Brun

Quite interested in what do you mean by schizophrenia here?

Dis-identity is therefore ultimately pathological and is merely a euphemism for denial that is deemed essential by the self for the sake of the self, however all that is being facilitated is self delusion and unhappiness and perhaps ultimately self destructive pathology . — Marcus de Brun

If disidentification could be applied to dysphoric states of being, such as depression, then what's wrong with that?

Self knowing is perhaps the very purpose to human existence... dis-identity is its antithesis. — Marcus de Brun

But, if one wants to know who they truly are, then living by labels, stereotypes, and other means of identification, is quite contrary to that goal? Hence, disidentification?

'labels' come from 'the other' They should not be avoided, they should be smashed into little pieces of dust and blown into the ether. If the self labels the self then the self has become the enemy of the self. Fuck labels. — Marcus de Brun

Oh, so we're in agreement, cool.