Video review: Stanford's Sapolsky on Depression
Found here. Or here:
It's an hour-long university lecture on depression. I watched this hoping for illumination on myself and my ex, mainly, though I'll admit to a curiosity if this fit how I thought Sylar would be after several years trapped alone in Matt's mind-prison. For myself, I had thought during the closing years of my marriage, that I was depressed. According to this lecture, I wasn't. At least, not in a clinical sense. I never lost my ability to enjoy life - I just didn't have much happening with me that was enjoyable and I felt so immensely persecuted that I was stressed all the time. I'm sure that's something else (my therapist diagnosed me with Generalized Anxiety Disorder), but it's not depression. That's interesting to know.
Then there's my ex. A lot of this fits him pretty well, but mildly. He could feel pleasure, but it never quite worked right. I've said many times that he'd be unhappy if someone gave him a brick of gold. No matter how good things are, he's obsessed with the negative side of it. If he can't find a negative side, he'll invent one. If he can find one, he'll exaggerate it. He was hypercritical of everything - myself, our friends, the government, the state he lived in, random drivers on the road, and so on. If it existed (and it wasn't him), then he had bad things to say about it. He had bad things to say about himself, too. He was profoundly selfish, greedy, and lazy, but that didn't mean he didn't have the worst opinion of himself. That's a lot closer to the depression the lecturer was talking about.
An even better example is a fellow named Ryan who remains something of a family friend. Unlike my ex, Ryan is on medication, sees a therapist, and has had a fair amount of counseling. He's also fully disabled by his depression. He lost his mother when he was 9 and never had his father in his life. That sort of stressor was exactly what the lecturer said triggered life-long clinical depression.
But Sylar? No. I'd lump his mental condition over with my own, in that he might feel hopeless at times, but this is a passing condition for him. Canon shows him taking control of his life and acting aggressively to better things. Clearly, he thinks it's possible for him to get ahead. Even if, in The Wall, he's stuck and might be feeling depressed, he's not clinically depressed. His depression is, instead, a rational response to a suck situation.
This was a good quote from it: "Depression is aggression turned inward."
I got from the lecture that clinical depression happens in people genetically predisposed to it who have serious stressors in early life (birth to 10 years, roughly). These are stressors like losing a parent or being abused. People who have a sense of control over their lives and have a reliable support network are not the ones who become depressed. But the ones who develop learned helplessness and how valueless they are, do.
What's fascinating is how parallel this is to the formation of violent personality types. There's clearly a genetic component that means some personality types are predisposed to violence, but they *only* commit that violence when raised in a certain environment with certain key events in their history - they have to witness violence (usually domestic or child abuse), be coached or reinforced in using violence, and be successful in using it to get what they want. All of these have to happen in childhood or youth. Once they get that pattern down, it becomes a default tool for coping with discomfort or emotional distress for the rest of their lives.
The difference between the two (besides probably which particular gene they have) is that depressed people learn from their environment and stressors that they are powerless, whereas violent people learn they have power when they act violently. Neither of them are very functional.
This was a fascinating video. I see there's a whole bunch of other related ones. Would that I had time to watch them all!
Click to viewIt's an hour-long university lecture on depression. I watched this hoping for illumination on myself and my ex, mainly, though I'll admit to a curiosity if this fit how I thought Sylar would be after several years trapped alone in Matt's mind-prison. For myself, I had thought during the closing years of my marriage, that I was depressed. According to this lecture, I wasn't. At least, not in a clinical sense. I never lost my ability to enjoy life - I just didn't have much happening with me that was enjoyable and I felt so immensely persecuted that I was stressed all the time. I'm sure that's something else (my therapist diagnosed me with Generalized Anxiety Disorder), but it's not depression. That's interesting to know.
Then there's my ex. A lot of this fits him pretty well, but mildly. He could feel pleasure, but it never quite worked right. I've said many times that he'd be unhappy if someone gave him a brick of gold. No matter how good things are, he's obsessed with the negative side of it. If he can't find a negative side, he'll invent one. If he can find one, he'll exaggerate it. He was hypercritical of everything - myself, our friends, the government, the state he lived in, random drivers on the road, and so on. If it existed (and it wasn't him), then he had bad things to say about it. He had bad things to say about himself, too. He was profoundly selfish, greedy, and lazy, but that didn't mean he didn't have the worst opinion of himself. That's a lot closer to the depression the lecturer was talking about.
An even better example is a fellow named Ryan who remains something of a family friend. Unlike my ex, Ryan is on medication, sees a therapist, and has had a fair amount of counseling. He's also fully disabled by his depression. He lost his mother when he was 9 and never had his father in his life. That sort of stressor was exactly what the lecturer said triggered life-long clinical depression.
But Sylar? No. I'd lump his mental condition over with my own, in that he might feel hopeless at times, but this is a passing condition for him. Canon shows him taking control of his life and acting aggressively to better things. Clearly, he thinks it's possible for him to get ahead. Even if, in The Wall, he's stuck and might be feeling depressed, he's not clinically depressed. His depression is, instead, a rational response to a suck situation.
This was a good quote from it: "Depression is aggression turned inward."
I got from the lecture that clinical depression happens in people genetically predisposed to it who have serious stressors in early life (birth to 10 years, roughly). These are stressors like losing a parent or being abused. People who have a sense of control over their lives and have a reliable support network are not the ones who become depressed. But the ones who develop learned helplessness and how valueless they are, do.
What's fascinating is how parallel this is to the formation of violent personality types. There's clearly a genetic component that means some personality types are predisposed to violence, but they *only* commit that violence when raised in a certain environment with certain key events in their history - they have to witness violence (usually domestic or child abuse), be coached or reinforced in using violence, and be successful in using it to get what they want. All of these have to happen in childhood or youth. Once they get that pattern down, it becomes a default tool for coping with discomfort or emotional distress for the rest of their lives.
The difference between the two (besides probably which particular gene they have) is that depressed people learn from their environment and stressors that they are powerless, whereas violent people learn they have power when they act violently. Neither of them are very functional.
This was a fascinating video. I see there's a whole bunch of other related ones. Would that I had time to watch them all!