I lived in San Francisco from '91 to '97. I retreated back to Maryland after everything went to shit in mid-'97. My wife and I still love San Francisco and hope to move back there some day (after we both finish our educations probably).

---
"And Wirthling isn't worth the paper he isn't printed on."

A few comments, all of which should be preceded by the disclaimer, these are my view of things, and you know what that's worth.

[list=1][*]Suicide: I have no faith in death, and find it hard to fathom a worse fate. It may come out and grab me someday, but I refuse to be that directly enabling. All my thoughts of being gone have been none more than whimsical fantasy.

[*]Drugs: I have a high (physical) tolerance for them. I can't comprehend addiction myself, but abstractly understand it can happen to others. Recreationally, I've enjoyed things that felt good, and detested things with untasty side effects. And I'm extremely aware of the effects stuff may have on me, and refuse to let them control me. So, no booze, pills or other stuff when I'm down or weak; save them for pleasurable recreation. And keep the mindfucking pills away from me. I'm so glad ritalin wasn't in vogue when I was little; who knows what I would have turned into, but it may not have been me.

[*]Pleasure/Pain: Obi said some good and interesting things, but I feel it can probably be generalized a bit more. We tend to apply utility and expectation functions (in the probabilistic sense -- ask me, if you want an explanation) to make decisions. Those of us who weight the pain side of the equation more are known as "risk-averse". But there's more to it than that. Some of us start playing "mini-max," i.e., behave as if there's an active adversary out there who's attempting to effect the worst for us as we try to effect the best. Thus, as in a game of chess, it's not enough to assess the quality of the position after your move; you have to consider what they will do in response.

Also, I may be in situations where I'd be happy to assess pleasure possibilities, but sometimes, the pleasure outcome is literally unfathomable. It never occurs to me that something could go right. Like when I have the opportunity to start a conversation with a total stranger out of nowhere. What would I possibly say that would generate any interesting result?

[*]Failure: I had a doubly cursed childhood. Boy genius, supposed to know everything and get everything right in school and the like, and social outcast. What conclusion do both of these things lead one to? That the least misstep on my part is utter catastrophe. In the first case, people's expectations are shot to pieces, and in the second, my slim-and-none chances of success have been fragged. Ergo, no margin for error. Ever!

[*]Approval: The truth is, I make comics on this site for my amusement. When some of you derive pleasure from them, that's just icing on the cake. But I'd still happily do it if no one read my damn comics or voted for me in the contests. And I encourage you all to take that same attitide and make your strips for yourself.

[*]Comedy is Pain: Think what a wonderfully happy fellow Deisel must be :-)

[*]The ultimate authority on depression: Lest we forget, the first anniversary of Douglas Adams' passing is around the corner. Shed a tear for Marvin, and dig up that old LadyJ strip.[/list=1]

---
ken.kaufman@gmail.com

Of course, I think that whole theory about pain being the only source of great comedy is a crock.

Oh, and Wirthling sucks.

---
...Trot and Cap'n Bill were free from anxiety and care. Button-Bright never worried about anything. The Scarecrow, not being able to sleep, looked out of the window and tried to count the stars.

I agree. Pain is just a good motivator for art (it's an outlet for stress). It's not the only motivator possible, though.

Indubitably.

---
"And Wirthling isn't worth the paper he isn't printed on."

On the topic of doing things for the pleasure of approval...

I have always placed too much weight upon the approval of others. Again, this is something I am working on. My own theory about this is that seeking the approval of others is not inherently good or bad, but the degree to which you live by it can be. For example, using the reaction of others as an independant gauge of how successful your book, song, comedy routine, strip, or whatever is seems just fine to me. You want it to be good, but sometimes you are too close to it to judge properly, and the reactions of others are the only way you can measure its success. On the other hand, if the approval is the only thing you live for, then you have a problem, since there is no longer any self-contained cycle of gratification occurring within yourself.

Where am I going with this...? Urm..

---
This signature has performed an illegal operation and has been shut down.

That is probably the single most brilliant thing I have read here. Ever.

---
I wanted my half in the middle and I wound up on the edge.

quote:

---

Another difficulty is that "depression" does not really seem to be a single clinical entity like smallpox or bubonic plague. This tends to play all kinds of hell with any disease model of depression.

---

But Boo, how do you feel about the disease model of alcoholism?

{ducks and runs}

---
When they invent BookFace, I'm -there-.

Well, since this is the caring and sharing thread, I thought I'd share my experience tonight. One of my major fears has been making a fool of myself, live and in person, in front of the public. I went to a local bar that has a karaoke night on Thursdays and proceeded to put myself behind the mic and make a fool of myself (I sang "Erotic City" with my wife and "Oh Darling" solo--"Oh Darling" was in a much different key than I imagined) but it felt liberating. (The alcohol helped a great deal.) I feel like I have put myself "over the hump" with this particular fear. I may try it again...

---
"And Wirthling isn't worth the paper he isn't printed on."

To what extent does/did that fear of making a public fool of yourself reach? Like, aside from speaking or singing in front of people, what sorts of things are you talking about? Does it effect one-on-one interpersonal interactions at all, or is it *just* crowd based?

I have no problem speaking or presenting to crowds, though I would probably freak out if I had to sing or something. Well, at least I'd freak out with Karaoke. I don't think I'd be freaked out if I were performing music I'd written, though... assuming I ever did write music. What can I say, I really like attention for the most part. The weird part about this is that even though I've got no problems speaking in public, I have no skills when it comes to starting a conversation with people one on one, and the prospect of meeting individuals scares the fuck out of me. Out of all the friends I hang out with, I can count on one finger the number of them who I initiated first contact with. All the rest approached me first.

And Obi, thank you for the advice. I'll remember it for when I'm not a broke bum... if I'm still in the mental pits by then, at least. Actually, what Kajun said earlier is a pretty good reflection of how reading this thread has effected me. I've never been under the illusion that all the regulars on this forum lead idyllic lives, but the fact that some of you guys and girls know what I'm feeling (and more, from the sounds of it) and still managed to do something good with your lives despite your despair makes me feel less hopeless. Now if only I could figure out how I lost that passion for arts and expression that I once had... maybe it fell out of my pocket on my way home from school a couple of years ago?

It happens in all of those circumstances for me. I've never been able to sing in front of anyone, and I tend to clam up when I'm talking to people I don't know, as well. I also have trouble speaking to a group of people I know if I'm the center of attention. I remember vividly reading French papers in high school in front of the class (people who I knew very well) and my hands shaking so hard that I couldn't read the paper. I pretty much gave up on my musical aspirations when I realized that I was not about to overcome this fear any time soon. That's why this was such a major step for me. Hopefully I'll be able to do this again in the future without the alcohol (and maybe I won't suck quite so hard).

---
"And Wirthling isn't worth the paper he isn't printed on."

That's exactly what I was saying when I was talking about predicting behavior ahead of time. Imo, it works like this:

Each of us, when trying to make a decision with will weigh the the pains and pleasures of each choice and make a decision. When it is definite that a pain or pleasure will occur from a certain action, we don't need to take into account probability. That is, the probability for the pleasure or pain = 100%. (For instance, there is a definite 100% chance that if I put my hand on a hot burner, there will be pain.)And if the probability is 100% for both choices, only the intensity of the pleasure or pain itself affects your decision.

We don't often know for a certainty what pleasures and pains will be produced by a given choice though, and this is where probability comes in. When making decisions each one of us internally factors in the probability that a pleasure or pain will occur. So now we don't use pleasure and pain to make decisions, we use risk and opportunity. Where risk is the intensity of a painful event multiplied by the probability that that event will happen. Similarly, opportunity is the intensity of a pleasurable event multipled by the probability that that event will happen. For example, say I'm walking down the street and see a $20 on the ground, the pleasure pain scenario would be as follows (just an arbitrary 1-10 rating, where 10 = highest intensity of emotion, probability 0 to 1 instead of 0 - 100%):

--Choice 1 - pick up the $20 and keep it--

Opportunities (Intensity * Probability)

Pleasure of Feeling Lucky (6 * 1) = 6
Pleasure of Deciding what to spend it on (7 * 1) = 7
Pleasure of buying and using whatever I decide = (9 * .6) = 5.4

= 6 + 7 + 5.4 = 18.4

Risks (Intensity * Probability)

Pain of Guilt for not turning it into the police station (4 * .6) = 2.4
Pain of Having someone see me pocket it and think less of me (7 *.3) = 2.1

= 4.5

So, Pleasure - Pain of Choice 1 = 18.4 - 4.5 =13.9

Choice 2 - pick up the $20 and take it to the police station

Opportunities

Pleasure of feeling proud of myself (4, .8) = 3.2
Pleasure of feeling the societal pat on the head (6, .5) = 3

= 6.2

Risks

Pain of regret of not getting pleasure out of the things I could have bought (6, .6) = 3.6
Pain of feeling I did something to avoid pain (of guilt) rather than to seek pleasure (of buying) (4, .9) = 3.6

= 7.2

So, pleasure - pain of choice 2 = -1. So, since Pleasure - Pain of choice 1 was 13.9, I'd choose choice 1 and keep the $20 for myself. (Which I would.)

I've written up 4 surveys and given them to my mom and sister to test whether this can quantitatively predict behavior ahead of time. What I did was give them two lists of 5 things and had them rate them, not using the same number twice. I had them label 1 to 5 how good these foods sound right now: bread, cheese, apple, tomato, and carrot. Then I had them label 1 to 5 how good these activities sound right now: reading, watching tv, jogging, doing the laundry, doing a crossword puzzle. (I also weighted the lists against each other -- how much more does the person like food than activities or vice versa, but ended up not using the values since the lists weighed about the same)

I then asked if they had to, right now, do one of the two following pairs, which would it be. (For instance: If you have to, right now, Eat a Carrot and then Watch TV OR Eat an apple and Read a book, which would you do?)

Based on just their rankings of items in each individual list, I was able to predict their choice for the combined items 72% (13/18)of the time for the adding method shown above, and 80% (17/21) of the time for a multiplication method I use. That's pretty damn good.

The seeking pleasure vs. avoiding pain principle can also be seen quantitatively. Say for a decision, Choice 1 gives me values of Opportunity = 12, Risk = 4, so pleasure - pain =8; Choice 2 gives me values of Opportunity = 14, Risk = 5, so pleasure - pain = 9. So, most people (those who seek pleasure AND avoid pain) would choose Choice 2 since since its pleasure - pain value is higher.(9 to 8) Pain avoiders, though, would choose Choice 1 since it has a lower risk value (4 to 5). I wonder then if there's people out there who's decision is only based on pleasure. (They'd choose choice 2 because it has a higher pleasure potential than choice 1 (14 to 12).) This isn't synonomous with hedonism and harming others, because hedonism and harming others doesn't give most people pleasure. (exception noted, Spankling) Maybe this is happiness --> only seeking pleasure. If so, then happy people need to scoot there asses over, cause I want a seat on the bench.

-------------------------------------------------
I've slapped my email on my sig if anyone wants to shoot the shit about this or anything else, but on yahoo's dime.

---
I ate a hooker half a bottle of knife.

Keeping the quoting to a minimum ...
It isn't just a measure of pain-avoiders and pleasure seekers. We need to remember that even if we can linearly assign numbers to results, the true utility function is non-linear.

For example, you get to choose two envelopes. Envelope 1 has a 50% chance of containing a certified check for $50,000,000, and a 50% chance of containing a blank piece of paper. Envelope 2 is certain to contain a certified check for $10,000,000. Even though the "expected value" of Envelope 1 is 25,000,000 and the value of Envelope 2 is 10,000,000, most of us would choose Envelope 2 because once you have $10,000,000, the additional utility value of each succeeding dollar is lower.

Similarly, in the eyes of some of us, the jump between pain levels 4 and 5 and/or pleasure levels 12 and 14 my be more or less than their linear value.

---
ken.kaufman@gmail.com

I don't follow. I was measuring everything off of pleasure and pain, with some seeking pleasure, others pain, and every shade of grey. That's completely what decisions are based off of.

I don't know what the utility function is. I came up with all this independently, by "watching" my ideation processes. If you're saying that each individual's personal pleasure vs. pain axis is different and some (probably most) are non-linear, I agree. However, pleasure - pain still applies universally. The non-linear part comes in with the individually-defined intensity and probability assessments. Those non-linearalities are accounted for by having the person rate their own value assesments.

That's why it's both scary that someone could predict behavior that well, but a relief to know you'd have to give them pleasure and pain (intensity and probability) assessments before they could.

(Pleasure of 50,000,000 *.5 - Pain of regret of turning down a sure thing of $10,000,000 * .5) < (Pleasure of 10,000,000 * 1 - Regret over not choosing 50,000,000 * .01)

It still applies. (The .01 is the probability that someone will regret not trying for 50,000,000 when they have 10,000,000 in the bank. 1% was generous.) In that envelope example, even though the probability values were held constant, Pain or Pleasure intensity values (here the main determinant being regret over giving up a sure 10,000,000 for nothing) is individually defined and therefore non-uniform.

I wonder if each of us has our own unique pleasure seeking and pain avoiding equation. If so, maybe the difference between seeking pleasure and avoiding pain is whether you round up or down on 5.

:)

---
I ate a hooker half a bottle of knife.

Oh, I forgot to tell you, the V.D. Clinic called.
They want you to stop spreading the Love.

: )

---
“It is only with the heart that one sees rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye.” - The Little Prince by Antoine de Saint-Exupéry (1945)

Here's a short test to determine if it's just the blues or heading into clinical depression:

http://depression.about.com/cs/amidepressed/
also:
http://depression.about.com/blscreenquiz.htm

Depressive Illness -- What Is It?
Everyone experiences variations in mood -- transitory blues, disappointments, the normal grief that accompanies the loss of someone you love. But a severe or prolonged depression that interferes with the ability to function, feel pleasure, or maintain interest is not a mere case of the blues. It is an illness. Researchers have demonstrated that it results from biochemical imbalances in the brain.
Depressive Illness Is Treatable
More than 80 percent of those suffering from Depressive Illness can be treated successfully with modern medications. These medications are not habit-forming, do not produce a "high", and are not abused. Depressive Illness, also referred to as Affective or Mood Disorder, attacks millions of Americans and is often fatal; yet few people are being properly treated or even diagnosed. The costs of this neglect, both in terms of human suffering and economic loss, are staggering.
A Major Unrecognized Health Problem
Depressive Illness is among the most common and destructive of illnesses prevalent in the United States today. In addition to major depression, many people suffer from manic depressive illness (bipolar disorder) which is characterized by radical mood swings from severe depression to exaggerated, inappropriate elation.
An estimated 35-40 million Americans living today will suffer from major Depressive Illness during their lives. For each person directly suffering, three or four times that number of their relatives, employees, associates, and friends will also be adversely affected.
Of those 35-40 million afflicted, a substantial percentage will commit suicide if not treated with appropriate medication.

---
“It is only with the heart that one sees rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye.” - The Little Prince by Antoine de Saint-Exupéry (1945)

Cholesterol has been my big concern on this diet too. Atkins claims that cholesterol levels will actually go down on his diet...I am somewhat skeptical about this so I got my cholesterol tested a couple of months back and plan on getting retested here soon so I can see whether the Atkins diet actually does increase or decrease cholesterol levels. To his credit, I have seen many low-carb dieticians back up his claim of reduced cholesterol levels. Not huge losses, (maybe 15, 20, 25 points) but no gain.

---

I just did my second cholesterol test, and after 6 months on the Atkins diet...

(drumroll)...

[list][*]My cholesterol's dropped 24 points from 204 to 180
[*]My bad cholesterol's dropped 27 points from 154 to 127
[*]My good cholesterol's risen something like 13 points, though I can't remember the exact numbers.[/list]
My doctor told me that my cholesterol would go up, so did my brother who's a paramedic, so did my sister-in-law who's a nurse, and so did just about everyone else I told I was eating (basically) meat and cheese. Atkins was really the only person who predicted cholesterol would go down on the diet. His reasoning is two-fold: first, tests correlating red meat and cholesterol are flawed and there really exists a much higher correlation between refined carbohydrates (sugars and flours especially) and cholesterol. Second, though someone on the Atkins diet is eating more cholesterol per meal, they're also eating less per day, so eating less overall cholesterol per day.

Looks like he knows his shit.

---
I ate a hooker half a bottle of knife.

The Zone by Barry Sears sounds very similar. He says you should eat more good carbs (high-fibre, low-sugar, such as fruit and vegetables) and less bad carbs (mostly starch, little or no fibre, such as grains and potato). Fibre is certainly good for your digestive system, but it also slows the intake of sugars into the bloodstream. High-fibre carbs take longer to enter your bloodstream, and therefore give less of a glucose rush, generate less insulin, and give you a far more sustained energy level. Even better, protein and small amounts of fat even out this carb absorption even more. He also strongly warns against high fat meats, especially those with saturated fats (though monounsaturates are very good for you in small doses).

Sears recommends a diet where the calorie intake is derived 40% from carbs, 30% from protein, and 30% from fat. Since protein contains more calories than carbs, and fat even more, this works out to a ratio of roughly 12:7:3 in actual intake weight (though, since most protein sources include some fat, the active fat intake is usually 1.5). So, if you eat a big meal that totals a bit less than half a kilo (a pound-ish) in weight, according to Sears it should be made up of 240g carbs, 140g lean protein, and 30g fat - a pile of vegies, a medium-sized steak, and a bit of peanut oil to fry it in, or some olive oil in a salad dressing.

I really should stop being so lazy and get back on it. I dropped ten kilos in two weeks last time - all of it just water-retention in my fat cells.

---
This signature has performed an illegal operation and has been shut down.

* writhe *

nononononono

There are links between brain chemistry and depression, but the above is a vast overstatement. I mean, which chemical imbalances? Several neurotransmitter substances are implicated in depression, which suggests (to me, anyway) that "depression" may not be a distinct clinical entity. It's not like saying "this germ, here, the squiggly one, causes smallpox." It's way more complicated.

Sure, they say it's caused by a neurotransmitter deficiency. But ask them which one.

Sorry, I'm just a disgruntled ex-shrink.

---
What others say about boorite!

quote:

---

http://depression.about.com/blscreenquiz.htm

---

It says

quote:

---

Your score on the Wakefield questionnaire is 14
If your score is 15 or higher, it is recommended that you contact your
primary care provider to have him/her assess you for depression.

[b]Some individuals may have normal scores on depression questionnaires,
but in reality are depressed and can benefit from further evaluation.[/b]

---

Kind of a lopsided purpose then, if you ask me.

And all of this leads me back to something that I flannel on about all the time, boring old geezer that I am: Isn't some depression and whatnot pretty much part and parcel of life on this planet? Everybody gets bummed out about stuff. I do. I've been achingly miserable and stunningly happy. I have no idea if I have ever had "clinical" depression and I certainly think that, if one thinks they may suffer from this condition, that they take measures to have it remedied. However.... Sometimes you just have to buck up your spine and get - over - things. I buried both of my parents, I had very little of anything that could be construed as a childhood or a happy home life in my younger years. I've been kicked about as much as the next working class Billy Bloke, and I've been pretty fucking upset about it, too. The only option that's ever been open to me is to just keep going or check out. It's not what I want, but I don't lose sight of my dreams or my passions and the things that I DO want.

My mother was not a very happy woman. She struggled with depression for a large part of her life. It is quite possible that she had clinical depression, I don't know. I attribute a great deal of it to having made the less than ideal decision to marry my father.

All that aside, I think that a lot of these tests are simply trolling for business for the psychoanalytical profession in an age when we're surrounded by madness, cheap behaviour and mindless violence - and simultaneously being told that if we're not constantly happy, that we're in need of drugs. Sometimes, I think, it's best to take that age old advice and just "suck it up and hang tough." Yes, i'm talking about that old saw about "building character" and other recently dismissed notions of behaviour and conduct. Old hat, I realise, yet I think it holds merit.

Anybody that is blissfully happy in this world is not paying attention. If you are consistenly, insufferably miserable at inappropriate times, and it's medical or chemical, get help. If you're just not happy, I recommend some blues records, a nice meal, and the sound of the voice of some person in this world who loves you.

---
I wanted my half in the middle and I wound up on the edge.

Most people can get depressed from time to time. Clinical depression is when it's prolonged and seriously negatively affecting your life. It's one thing to be bummed out and moody, it's another thing to be completely unable to get out of bed and have relationships, go to your job, etc. Like anything else, it becomes "clinical" when it becomes a big problem to the person who's suffering from it.

---
www.bradsucks.net

You know what helps me get over a bout of depression? Porking the entire Dallas Cowboys' cheerleading squad.

---
What others say about boorite!

Gotcha.

---
I wanted my half in the middle and I wound up on the edge.

Amen brother. Amen.

---
100 pounds of shit in a 25 pound sack.

I would think that having sex with the entire Dallas Cowboys' cheerleading squad would be more fun than feeding them BBQ.

---
I wanted my half in the middle and I wound up on the edge.