James R. Fisher, Jr., Ph.D.
© July 12, 2022
READER WRITES Here are some interesting links! Wow. I couldn’t believe all the case studies and TONS of articles noting the correlation between Current Events or “News”, Reading/Viewing/Listening, AND Depression!
Here’s a small sliver, a mere fraction of a fraction, from the thousands of results using a simple Google search of (no quotes) “News +Depression”.
wowzers L
Healthline Article:
https://www.healthline.com/health-news/how-to-balance-staying-informed-and-not-being-overwhelmed-by-stressful-news GoodRx Health:
https://www.goodrx.com/health-topic/mental-health/is-news-bad-for-your-mental-health Washington Post:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/03/29/tech-tips-news-anxiety/ Study Univ. of California San Francisco:
https://psychiatry.ucsf.edu/copingresources/politics WebMD:
https://www.webmd.com/balance/stress-management/news/20220224/how-to-manage-headline-anxiety Many “tips and tricks” suggested, of course, from the articles above conveying their take on news/life balance
THE PERIPATETIC PHILOSOPHER RESPONDS
These references to the media sources indicate, ironically, how much we are prisoners to our computers and app sources.
One of my books, WHO PUT YOU IN A CAGE, looks at how natural it is for us to prefer the cage to freedom.
We put ourselves in jeopardy because we con ourselves into thinking "we want to be informed" when google, Facebook, et al, play on our emotions. These sources intend to advertise us to buy something, an idea, a product, or an emotion to connect us while purporting to be altruistic.
Media has one function -- to sell us something through diffusion, acculturation, or invention.
Our minds use one mechanism to take information from the sensory field in which we exist to create new ways to act and think about the world all the time automatically, largely unconsciously, expectantly, and with error.
For a time, I watched Fox Cable News and Tucker Carlson until I came to feel he was as much a load of beans as was CNN. I do use GOOGLE as if a history book knowing many of these sources are subject to error. I use e-mail as I am using it here but I am not connected to any social media networks and use my cell phone only to keep in touch with my family.
Being an old man, I am certainly no model for the younger generations. It is their time and they are stronger, wiser, and more gifted than my generation as we experienced a much less noisy existence. God bless them one and all!
Although I have had nine years of university training in two widely different disciplines, I never bought into ideas that failed to match my empirical experiences. The filters of my prism have given me much freedom, which I believe is reflected in many of my books. It doesn't mean that I am right but it does display a reason to cherish freedom as freedom is a choice.
Often my hematologist and cardiologist and my primary physician ask me if I am depressed, given my chronic condition. I always want to answer them with a question: how could I be depressed when I, a very average person in every way, could expect the life that I have had? But instead, I simply say, "No."
THE READER RESPONDS “TIT” FOR “TAT” “These references to the media sources indicate, ironically, how much we are prisoners to our computers and app sources”
How Ironic? Was the New York Times, circa 1950, imprisoning? Maybe… how about the NYT circa 2022?
The links w/in the original email were not solely computer or app-specific. “CNN”, “FOX”, “San Francisco Chronicle”, and “Twitter”, would all fall w/in “news sources”. i.e., potential causal agents for depression. Let’s save a Section 230 discussion for a later date :P Think in terms of “objective news”… further, “may cause depression when overdone”.
“We put ourselves in jeopardy because we con ourselves into thinking "we want to be informed" when google, Facebook, et al, play on our emotions. These sources intend to advertise us to buy something, an idea, a product, or emotion to connect us while purporting to be altruistic.”
Is there any objectivity to be found in 2022? Epistemology/Ontology aside… where can one seek objective facts (or “truths”, lol), in your humble opinion? *Also, the original email WAS NOT noting, solely, social media news sources. Like you, I too, don’t have an appetite for social media indulgence. ALL NEWS sources potential causal agents for depression.
“Media has one function -- to sell us something through diffusion, acculturation, or invention.”
BINGO! J I couldn’t agree more. Hence my question about where, in your humble opinion, can one seek objective fact in 2022. Everyone has an agenda. Everyone has “skin in the game” in their narrative called life. Who’s on first?
“Our minds use one mechanism to take information from the sensory field in which we exist to create new ways to act and think about the world all the time automatically, largely unconsciously, expectantly, and with error.”
Say more? Vacuous
“For a time, I watched Fox Cable News and Tucker Carlson”
That sucks. I’m sorry to hear. How long did you watch Cucker Tarlson before his “beans” clicked? Do you recall a singular event where you said “that’s it, bullshit”? Also, where did you leave your critical thinking skills (at first)? Why no questioning of his sources, devil’s advocate type thoughts while he engaged his (you) audience with dialogue (agenda)?
“Being an old man, I am certainly no model for the younger generations. It is their time and they are stronger, wiser, and more gifted than my generation as we experienced a much less noisy existence. God bless them one and all! “
Bullshit. Stomp the Tierra hard while you’re here. You have an audience, kind of, so stay inspired. “older, wiser, pursuit of wisdom (def. of philosophy)”. You have a lot to offer folks. J
“It doesn't mean that I am right but it does display a reason to cherish freedom as freedom is a choice.”
Lot of “grey” in the world. Right and Wrong mentalities are detrimental, absurd, and passive-aggressive (IMHO). Good questions lead to good answers (good answers lead to better questions) :P I.e., “right” is not always static (always, operative word)… a better question to the last answer is often on the horizon.
“Often my hematologist and cardiologist and my primary physician ask me if I am depressed, given my chronic condition. I always want to answer them with a question: how could I be depressed when I, a very average person in every way, could expect the life that I have had? But instead, I simply say, "No."
Time is precious, even Jeffrey Bezos can’t buy himself more time (as far as I know… so I get it). BUT, for kicks, next time say to your hematologist or cardiologist when answering a query as to if you’re depressed… “no I am not depressed, but would you kindly give me a happy ending?”
THE PERIPATETIC PHILOSOPHER AGAINIt always surprises me when my writing gets such attention. Whenever it does, I am flattered as the reader is reflecting his or her mind and not mine. Bias is the powerful acculturation of our conditioning. For example, I find CNN as offensive as FOX however I doubt that you do.
One time a consulted client -- who withheld $3,500 owed to me -- claimed my analysis sounded too much like an academic tome. My analysis was quite critical of her management style that was preventing the operation from getting its work done and what to do about it.
This CEO was already under fire with several newspaper columns and magazine articles noting her bizarre practices.
Once my report was made public, the press bombarded me with telephone calls asking me to "give my side of the story." I didn't as a good friend had recommended me for the job and he was a director under the CEO. She was eventually relieved of her position but I had no part in that. My friend survived the ordeal. BB said, "This is a side of you nobody sees."
I would put it another way. I am not into throwing gasoline on a raging fire.
Thank you for your spirited reaction to my missive. Your keen observations are appreciated.
