Why are intelligent people more likely to be depressed?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by yo radical one
Most people even with average intelligence, understand the slave trade, understand terrorism, understand conflict. Depression simply doesn't come from understanding the world better, it's caused by faulty neurotransmitters.
What has ''understanding terrorism'', a term whose actual meaning I feel tens of reasons to question, got to do with thinking in highly relative ways about the world? It's variant perspectives, analyses, simultaneous comprehension of multiple views that make people beehive thinkers or linear thinkers or abstract thinkers or whatever, and all have certain perspectives with which they view thought, sense, emotion and the physical world themselves.
For those who are on the extreme end of 'intelligent', they're fewer, more esoterically cognitive, and don't generally have that many people to relate to, and loneliness is a precursor to depression.
If you're not talking about 'understanding the world better' as being definitionally equal to 'simultaneously comprehending multiple perspectives' and instead mean it to be ''understanding atrocity, concluding that there exist injustices, and feeling grievance at the horrific nature of humanity's inhumanities'' then I disagree with you that such an outlook can't possibly cause depression.
Understanding how **** people can be to each other can make the world look a lot bleaker.
Original post by Petey7
What has ''understanding terrorism'', a term whose actual meaning I feel tens of reasons to question, got to do with thinking in highly relative ways about the world? It's variant perspectives, analyses, simultaneous comprehension of multiple views that make people beehive thinkers or linear thinkers or abstract thinkers or whatever, and all have certain perspectives with which they view thought, sense, emotion and the physical world themselves.
For those who are on the extreme end of 'intelligent', they're fewer, more esoterically cognitive, and don't generally have that many people to relate to, and loneliness is a precursor to depression.
If you're not talking about 'understanding the world better' as being definitionally equal to 'simultaneously comprehending multiple perspectives' and instead mean it to be ''understanding atrocity, concluding that there exist injustices, and feeling grievance at the horrific nature of humanity's inhumanities'' then I disagree with you that such an outlook can't possibly cause depression.
Understanding how **** people can be to each other can make the world look a lot bleaker.
For those who are on the extreme end of 'intelligent', they're fewer, more esoterically cognitive, and don't generally have that many people to relate to, and loneliness is a precursor to depression.
If you're not talking about 'understanding the world better' as being definitionally equal to 'simultaneously comprehending multiple perspectives' and instead mean it to be ''understanding atrocity, concluding that there exist injustices, and feeling grievance at the horrific nature of humanity's inhumanities'' then I disagree with you that such an outlook can't possibly cause depression.
Understanding how **** people can be to each other can make the world look a lot bleaker.
Terrorism was just an example.
You clearly have no clue what depression is, honestly. You can't simply think yourself into depression by understanding the world better, sure it has an environment component, but it is genetic and caused by physical differences in the brain.
The rest of it is 100% hardcore snowflaking "so intelligent they feel they can't relate to others", if you can't simply have fun and joke with others in a down to earth way, your problem isn't that you are too clever (lots of clever people have friends and can hold conversations, laugh, joke, have a girlfriend and be normal) it's that you are socially awkward or perhaps shy. This is typical TSR "I have bad social skills, therefore I must be a genius like Sheldon Cooper". Grow up.
Original post by yo radical one
Terrorism was just an example.
You clearly have no clue what depression is, honestly. You can't simply think yourself into depression by understanding the world better, sure it has an environment component, but it is genetic and caused by physical differences in the brain.
The rest of it is 100% hardcore snowflaking "so intelligent they feel they can't relate to others", if you can't simply have fun and joke with others in a down to earth way, your problem isn't that you are too clever (lots of clever people have friends and can hold conversations, laugh, joke, have a girlfriend and be normal) it's that you are socially awkward or perhaps shy. This is typical TSR "I have bad social skills, therefore I must be a genius like Sheldon Cooper". Grow up.
You clearly have no clue what depression is, honestly. You can't simply think yourself into depression by understanding the world better, sure it has an environment component, but it is genetic and caused by physical differences in the brain.
The rest of it is 100% hardcore snowflaking "so intelligent they feel they can't relate to others", if you can't simply have fun and joke with others in a down to earth way, your problem isn't that you are too clever (lots of clever people have friends and can hold conversations, laugh, joke, have a girlfriend and be normal) it's that you are socially awkward or perhaps shy. This is typical TSR "I have bad social skills, therefore I must be a genius like Sheldon Cooper". Grow up.
Depression is, by definition, prolonged periods of feelings of despondency and dejection, so ''I feel like I can't relate to people'' is by definition a depressive state of mind, and depressed people usually find 'having fun and joking with others in a down to Earth way' quite difficult.
I never used to term 'understanding the world better'. Better, in this context is relative to personal perspective, and in fact I would imagine highly intelligent people find the ability to see things in ways others don't decidedly not better, at least where inadequate social relation and the subsequent emotional health effects are concerned.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by septimius
No, because mental illness doesn't exist. it's a socially defined label with no clinical basis.
But no, depression can happen to anybody, not based alone on intelligence.
But no, depression can happen to anybody, not based alone on intelligence.
"Mental illness" is very real, it all stems from "biological" illness if you like in one way or another. Hormonal regulation either by physiological fault, environmental stimulus or what ever is a large driver of depression.
More intelligent people, I would propose, live, on average, more stressful or high stake lives (higher ranking jobs, more responsibility, higher stake exams etc). Obviously there are extremes and exceptions both ways but lets not be pedantic. Stress, be it chronic or accute can lead to depression and other disorders, this is a fact demonstrated through scientific method in many published articles from both a Psychology perspective and a Biological perspective.
I'm not sure if the principle that intelligent people are more likely to be depressed is actually accurate as there is no source for this but if so then the above could potentially explain the discrepancy.
I guess it's more the fact that if you are "intelligent" that you might over think things and then become stuck in whether or not to do something whilst if you aren't that intelligent you are quite open minded and don't necessarily look at the consequences. I think the perfect balance between the two is the best way to look at life.
I do like Karl Pilkington though, I remember he once said "Some people work hard to sit on their ass all day whilst others sit on their ass all day and don't work hard"
I do like Karl Pilkington though, I remember he once said "Some people work hard to sit on their ass all day whilst others sit on their ass all day and don't work hard"
Original post by Cinamon
Dislike this thread.
People are talking about intelligence as if it can be measured in some way. By intelligent are we talking educated, logical, musical, creative, scientific, IQ, relfective, good at maths? What?
The more you know about life? Ok so you are talking about education and wisdom here. Interesting. I have the best imagination out of anyone I know. I love fantasy, daydreaming, writing, composing music, science - but guess what. I have depression. My mums best friend has very bad depression and is amazing at art and is so so intelligent creatively.
possibly
In response to some neg:
IQ tests are completely unreliable. Intelligence has never been defined properly and there is little agreement on what it actually is. Some say it is related to how much a person can adapt to their environment. I'm sure, by this theory, many socially awkward A* students would be deemed unintelligent. IQ tests have been critisized constantly - emotional tension, experience, anxiety, qualifications, attitutes and response to instructions can completely skew IQ results.
People are talking about intelligence as if it can be measured in some way. By intelligent are we talking educated, logical, musical, creative, scientific, IQ, relfective, good at maths? What?
The more you know about life? Ok so you are talking about education and wisdom here. Interesting. I have the best imagination out of anyone I know. I love fantasy, daydreaming, writing, composing music, science - but guess what. I have depression. My mums best friend has very bad depression and is amazing at art and is so so intelligent creatively.
possiblyIn response to some neg:
IQ tests are completely unreliable. Intelligence has never been defined properly and there is little agreement on what it actually is. Some say it is related to how much a person can adapt to their environment. I'm sure, by this theory, many socially awkward A* students would be deemed unintelligent. IQ tests have been critisized constantly - emotional tension, experience, anxiety, qualifications, attitutes and response to instructions can completely skew IQ results.
Theres tonnes of good studies on intelligence. Guildhall's structural model of intelligence should be interesting for you, it involves over 180 aspects of intelligence, like you were saying, which are intelligent. Ie math, running, canoeing, extreme survival, polyglot etc. I personally subscribe to the specific skills theory were if you have a good memory/attention/problem solving capability you can do anything therefore be intelligent. Whats also true is that the brain is an organ which can be trained like any other. Plentiful oxygen and nutrients plus practice make a person smarter.
When you say that an A* geek student that doesn't fit in is less intelligent because they don't adapt to their surroundings I think it is a bit harsh - who is to say that the people around the geek they are supposed to fit in with are intelligently adapted to their environment. I know this will start the big argument but aren't geeks usually picked upon because they like to excel in academia, spending their time engaged in science and culture rather than drinking 20/20 and cheap vodka with their wrecked mates?
Original post by septimius
No, because mental illness doesn't exist. it's a socially defined label with no clinical basis.
But no, depression can happen to anybody, not based alone on intelligence.
But no, depression can happen to anybody, not based alone on intelligence.
Mental illness is VERY much real.
Posted from TSR Mobile
As they say, "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing."
But personally I would rather know a little and be a bit cynical than be deluded to reality.
Perhaps it's because intelligent people often over-think things, dare I say wade in too deep (although there would be no progress without that). Perhaps it's because we focus too much on the abstract, the metaphysical or the complex. Some of the greatest pleasures in life are the simpler things.
But personally I would rather know a little and be a bit cynical than be deluded to reality.
Perhaps it's because intelligent people often over-think things, dare I say wade in too deep (although there would be no progress without that). Perhaps it's because we focus too much on the abstract, the metaphysical or the complex. Some of the greatest pleasures in life are the simpler things.
Spoiler
What I don't comprehend however is how having an inability to rationalise, thereby control, illogical or situationally inconvenient emotional impulses, and thus adapt to an ever-changing environment and set of sources of stress-what do they call it, problem solving?-makes you moreintelligent? Playing devil's advocate here, apologies if I offend anyone.
Depression for most people has the power to distort their cognitive functions, and generally cause either themselves consciously to make decisions counterproductive to their own wellbeing and survival (e.g. comfort eating, or substance abuse/SH on the more extreme side of things) or their body/mind to unconsciously be tricked into acting counterproductively to optimum efficiency for survival (e.g. insomnia). To act against this basic will to survive, you would have to have some conclusive, rational logic embedded into your core values as to why either
a) the world is not worth living for
or
b) the world would be a better place if you weren't in it
which when objectively taken into consideration disregarding the subjectivity of the ego in its need for self-preservation and stasis (see below) is difficult to find.
If intelligence is as it is most stereotypically classified, adaptation to the environment-a survival skill-then how can depressed people be *more* intelligent? All of circumstantial, existential and biological depression are by nature maladaptative to one's survival. For example (if we go by this classification of intelligence) my decision to stay up late debating why intelligent people are more likely to be depressed online and risk sleep deprivation is counterintuitive to my survival since it hinders my physical and mental efficiency; if I wish to face life's stresses tomorrow, I am almost deliberately placing myself at a disadvantage through this behaviour. From an outsider's perspective, that's not clever at all, that's plain stupid.
(As another example, here you would have thought I would have had the emotional intelligence to not discuss triggering behaviours on a mental health forum…sorry!)
Moreover, cognitive distortions are forms of logical fallacies, and a plethora exist in those entering a depressive state from a sense of low self-esteem; generalisations, cognitive bias, mental filtering, predictions and 'mind-reading' (which are all fairly lazy mental short-cuts supporting a cognitive bias at heart), catastrophic or irrationally histrionic thinking, 'all or nothing' false dichotomies, cynicism. Yet again I apologise if I offend-I'm apparently mildly to moderately depressed myself according to the Beck inventory questionnaire I recently filled in in therapy-but from my perspective the inability to examine these cognitive distortions, or indeed recognise them in the first place, is another sign of low intelligence.
If I'm going to really shake things up I would say that the very creation of the ego is counterintuitive to one's survival since the undeveloped self, or better yet it which can transcends its ego, can, like a chameleon, systematically mould itself into its environment as best befits its optimum rate of survival, and perhaps the survival of the others in the group. Only pride, or false virtue, prevents it from having such adaptive and flexible behaviours and morals. That being said, the world would be boring if we all agreed with one another.
One would either have to be somewhat lower in intelligence or slightly mascohistic in nature to choose to act counterintuitively on the conscious or unconscious level against this basic instinct-or indeed have rationalised their way as to why life is futile/their life is a hindrance unto society. Disturbing.
Of course, the majority of this operates under the assumption (perhaps a false one) that intelligence can be singularly classified as the ability to adapt to ensure one's survival. Perhaps a much more positive way to view intelligence would be the ability to constructively provide a resource (such as 'knowledge', or a skill set ranging anywhere from social skills to pottery) in a way that best enhances the world in which we inhabit. Ideally this would mitigate our risk of survival, but it is also possible that one could rationally prioritise the needs of the community, the environment, above their own in this instance, or indefinitely-disregard their ego-as the logical and intelligent choice. Of course, is utilitarianism at the expense of one's own life ethical? The intelligent and the ethical option are often opposed to one another.
One thing's for sure; rumination, a symptom of depression, is rarely a difficult way to achieve this (at least, not in the short-term as demonstrated above by myself).
tl;dr "Am I actually stupid for being able to think myself into depression? And am I stupid for not being able to find a way out myself?" Sometimes I worry I am. There is nothing logical, thus intelligent, about my insecurely narcissistic self-image or introspective, ruminating and markedly avoidant personality. :/
Depression for most people has the power to distort their cognitive functions, and generally cause either themselves consciously to make decisions counterproductive to their own wellbeing and survival (e.g. comfort eating, or substance abuse/SH on the more extreme side of things) or their body/mind to unconsciously be tricked into acting counterproductively to optimum efficiency for survival (e.g. insomnia). To act against this basic will to survive, you would have to have some conclusive, rational logic embedded into your core values as to why either
a) the world is not worth living for
or
b) the world would be a better place if you weren't in it
which when objectively taken into consideration disregarding the subjectivity of the ego in its need for self-preservation and stasis (see below) is difficult to find.
If intelligence is as it is most stereotypically classified, adaptation to the environment-a survival skill-then how can depressed people be *more* intelligent? All of circumstantial, existential and biological depression are by nature maladaptative to one's survival. For example (if we go by this classification of intelligence) my decision to stay up late debating why intelligent people are more likely to be depressed online and risk sleep deprivation is counterintuitive to my survival since it hinders my physical and mental efficiency; if I wish to face life's stresses tomorrow, I am almost deliberately placing myself at a disadvantage through this behaviour. From an outsider's perspective, that's not clever at all, that's plain stupid.
(As another example, here you would have thought I would have had the emotional intelligence to not discuss triggering behaviours on a mental health forum…sorry!)
Moreover, cognitive distortions are forms of logical fallacies, and a plethora exist in those entering a depressive state from a sense of low self-esteem; generalisations, cognitive bias, mental filtering, predictions and 'mind-reading' (which are all fairly lazy mental short-cuts supporting a cognitive bias at heart), catastrophic or irrationally histrionic thinking, 'all or nothing' false dichotomies, cynicism. Yet again I apologise if I offend-I'm apparently mildly to moderately depressed myself according to the Beck inventory questionnaire I recently filled in in therapy-but from my perspective the inability to examine these cognitive distortions, or indeed recognise them in the first place, is another sign of low intelligence.
If I'm going to really shake things up I would say that the very creation of the ego is counterintuitive to one's survival since the undeveloped self, or better yet it which can transcends its ego, can, like a chameleon, systematically mould itself into its environment as best befits its optimum rate of survival, and perhaps the survival of the others in the group. Only pride, or false virtue, prevents it from having such adaptive and flexible behaviours and morals. That being said, the world would be boring if we all agreed with one another.
One would either have to be somewhat lower in intelligence or slightly mascohistic in nature to choose to act counterintuitively on the conscious or unconscious level against this basic instinct-or indeed have rationalised their way as to why life is futile/their life is a hindrance unto society. Disturbing.
Of course, the majority of this operates under the assumption (perhaps a false one) that intelligence can be singularly classified as the ability to adapt to ensure one's survival. Perhaps a much more positive way to view intelligence would be the ability to constructively provide a resource (such as 'knowledge', or a skill set ranging anywhere from social skills to pottery) in a way that best enhances the world in which we inhabit. Ideally this would mitigate our risk of survival, but it is also possible that one could rationally prioritise the needs of the community, the environment, above their own in this instance, or indefinitely-disregard their ego-as the logical and intelligent choice. Of course, is utilitarianism at the expense of one's own life ethical? The intelligent and the ethical option are often opposed to one another.
One thing's for sure; rumination, a symptom of depression, is rarely a difficult way to achieve this (at least, not in the short-term as demonstrated above by myself).
tl;dr "Am I actually stupid for being able to think myself into depression? And am I stupid for not being able to find a way out myself?" Sometimes I worry I am. There is nothing logical, thus intelligent, about my insecurely narcissistic self-image or introspective, ruminating and markedly avoidant personality. :/
(edited 9 years ago)
