I do not think he is suffering from depression. I think he is “suffering” from some type of short-circuiting. Perhaps a genetic deficiency which leads to “meditations in morbidity” combined with reading too much of the wrong stuff and too little feedback from people in the real world (think LW readers with no job and little network). This “data-poverty” leading to delusions of grandeur.
He needs a girlfriend, a job and a real problem to work with.
The questions (1) “Is the fact that someone does X evidence of mental problems?” and (2) “Is doing X a good thing or a bad thing, on balance?” are different. As I read it, this article is addressing #2 and not #1. (I see no reason to think that there couldn’t be rather a lot of things that ought to be done but that are psychologically near-impossible for most people with healthy minds.)
Assume that he is, indeed, suffering from depression, and attempts to treat it have not been particularly successful. Does that make a difference?
I do not think he is suffering from depression. I think he is “suffering” from some type of short-circuiting. Perhaps a genetic deficiency which leads to “meditations in morbidity” combined with reading too much of the wrong stuff and too little feedback from people in the real world (think LW readers with no job and little network). This “data-poverty” leading to delusions of grandeur.
He needs a girlfriend, a job and a real problem to work with.
The questions (1) “Is the fact that someone does X evidence of mental problems?” and (2) “Is doing X a good thing or a bad thing, on balance?” are different. As I read it, this article is addressing #2 and not #1. (I see no reason to think that there couldn’t be rather a lot of things that ought to be done but that are psychologically near-impossible for most people with healthy minds.)
“He needs a girlfriend, a job and a real problem to work with.”
Seconded