Very perceptive, Sheluyang. I'm old enough to remember when "pop psychology" first became trendy. It started with the book "I'm Okay, You're Okay," which introduced the "inner child" idea to the general public. Then, daytime TV gradually got taken over by people like Dr. Phil.
Most of that was relatively benign, as it encouraged a little bit of introspection, but not endless rumination. But, just as with most of our modern ills, social media took everything way too far.
Scrolling through, It all sounds very persuasive: the attachment patterns, the impact of trauma, etc. As mental models, they may even be useful to describe certain things. But the question is, does focusing on these things help people become healthier and happier? Clearly, the answer is no. Like the pharma companies that profit from disease, the therapy industry profits from malaise.
I understand the concerns about the culture having become too therapized, but I want to say that a good therapist isn't telling someone what to do. A good therapist would be trying to help the client access their own wisdom and empower themselves to handle the opportunities and vicissitudes of life.
I'd like to note that it's not just information at play here. We've had several generations now who are told throughout their youth that they can "be anything they want," and these are also the generations who more-or-less grew up with the internet.
If nothing else, the social side of the internet has always been a collection of weird, little subcultural cul-de-sacs: fans of the obscure, the unusual, the kinky, the avant-garde, the underappreciated. When you pair this limitless supply of interests (or "identities") and the modern koan "you can be anything," trying to decipher the teenage mystery of "who am I and what do I like?" turns into an existential, endless scroll through options. It would be easy to find oneself depressed either due to "choice paralysis" (I believe this is the scholarly term I've read) or depressed because one descends into the bubble of some obscure identity and sees oneself as at odds with the rest of humanity.
Well said, but I'm not so sure the rate of troubled mental health is related to the proliferation of information and access to it. The attack on all things in our US history as the result of oppression surely plays a role. The Marxist binary is winning the argument so far, with nothing to take the place of what were received wisdoms. May I suggest access to the fire hose of information now available requires the ability to think critically and, as long as the government controls the schools, critical thinking will wither and die.
Interesting topic. But when you are studying the rise of new age spiritualism since the 1960s and want to show how it's related to the decline in mainline protestant membership you really should draw your graphs back to at least the sixties. One might wonder if you're cherry-picking your data to make a point which wouldn't appear so with all the data evident. Also, it isn't at all clear what those six graph headings are acronyms for. I can guess one but that's about it.
Very perceptive, Sheluyang. I'm old enough to remember when "pop psychology" first became trendy. It started with the book "I'm Okay, You're Okay," which introduced the "inner child" idea to the general public. Then, daytime TV gradually got taken over by people like Dr. Phil.
Most of that was relatively benign, as it encouraged a little bit of introspection, but not endless rumination. But, just as with most of our modern ills, social media took everything way too far.
Scrolling through, It all sounds very persuasive: the attachment patterns, the impact of trauma, etc. As mental models, they may even be useful to describe certain things. But the question is, does focusing on these things help people become healthier and happier? Clearly, the answer is no. Like the pharma companies that profit from disease, the therapy industry profits from malaise.
I understand the concerns about the culture having become too therapized, but I want to say that a good therapist isn't telling someone what to do. A good therapist would be trying to help the client access their own wisdom and empower themselves to handle the opportunities and vicissitudes of life.
I'd like to note that it's not just information at play here. We've had several generations now who are told throughout their youth that they can "be anything they want," and these are also the generations who more-or-less grew up with the internet.
If nothing else, the social side of the internet has always been a collection of weird, little subcultural cul-de-sacs: fans of the obscure, the unusual, the kinky, the avant-garde, the underappreciated. When you pair this limitless supply of interests (or "identities") and the modern koan "you can be anything," trying to decipher the teenage mystery of "who am I and what do I like?" turns into an existential, endless scroll through options. It would be easy to find oneself depressed either due to "choice paralysis" (I believe this is the scholarly term I've read) or depressed because one descends into the bubble of some obscure identity and sees oneself as at odds with the rest of humanity.
Well said, but I'm not so sure the rate of troubled mental health is related to the proliferation of information and access to it. The attack on all things in our US history as the result of oppression surely plays a role. The Marxist binary is winning the argument so far, with nothing to take the place of what were received wisdoms. May I suggest access to the fire hose of information now available requires the ability to think critically and, as long as the government controls the schools, critical thinking will wither and die.
Interesting topic. But when you are studying the rise of new age spiritualism since the 1960s and want to show how it's related to the decline in mainline protestant membership you really should draw your graphs back to at least the sixties. One might wonder if you're cherry-picking your data to make a point which wouldn't appear so with all the data evident. Also, it isn't at all clear what those six graph headings are acronyms for. I can guess one but that's about it.
Great read. Thank you.