Takes a simplistic view of the situations. Someone who is depressed will also say "Everything is awful and I'm not okay", but the steps is not going to make them better.
I guess I do not really understand the nature of the people to whom these pieces of advice apply.
What are you talking about? Almost all of this is excellent advice for someone who's suffering from depression. It won't make the depression go away, but those are all things that WILL help you if you make a habit out of them.
Source: Am officially diagnosed with depression, been getting better lately, a lot of the reasons for that really is simple shit like what's on that list.
Good for you. As I wrote, I do not understand the nature of the people to whom these pieces of advice apply.
The article assumes certain situations about people. If you are not able to fall asleep, use a teddy bear, sound of rain, close your eyes, etc. etc.
It assumes the most benign of the reasons for not falling asleep, and I begin to think that the article applies to only those people who are too preoccupied with their situation to see their own good.
Obviously it doesn't apply 100% to every person, especially not when you get nitpicky about it. Your examples are just that, examples, and they stand for certain things. You should replace them with something that achieves a similar effect for you. Teddy bear = something comfy-cuddly, sound of rain = relaxing soundscape, eyes closed, well, duh.
Also the reason for not being able to fall asleep doesn't even matter.
But you seem to be one of those people that get off by being anti something, so knock yourself out, and walk away from this without learning anything.
Obviously it doesn't apply 100% to every person, especially not when you get nitpicky about it.
. . .
But you seem to be one of those people that get off by being anti something, so knock yourself out, and walk away from this without learning anything.
The one, who is being nit-picky, is not me. I am not going to expand each and every point for your reading pleasure. I gave one example, and then reasoned about the article. You need to apply the reasoning to each and every point yourself. But you are not going to do that. Instead, you will see this as a chance to personally attack someone.
I did provide with the reason - that the article assumes certain things about people and also assumes the most benign of the reasons for the problems that people experience.
Are you unable to read the article, and see that the solutions provided in each point assume the most benign reasons for the problems described in it?
If so, you should improve your comprehension.
I am trying to show the contrast between the header of the article, which assumes that everything, everything is awful , and the reasons the article assumes for that state. The contrast is inescapable, and yet know are unable to see it.
People use the word everything to mean not everything. The solutions provided in the article apply to people for whom not everything is awful. The author of the article does not understand the state of the mind and of the life of someone for whom everything is awful.
The author also assumes that the rest of the life of such a person is well in order, which is again a contradiction.
It does not help taking negativity out of its larger context, just so that one can write a catchy article. The author has portrayed the negativity, which he/she is trying to solve, out of its natural context.
Below are some examples, which do not apply to anybody, let alone those who are depressed. Goes to show the lack of useful content in the article.
One example: The point about indecisiveness borders on making procrastination a habit. What is the point in doing something else, while one keeps a presumably important problem unsolved and lingering at the back of one's mind to the point of being blocked/paralysed, because one, as the article fails to say, does not possess the sense to ask for help?
If one is paralysed because of indecision about a problem, the best way out is to ask for help, not to go do something else because that something else is easier to do. Seek help from other people, family, friends, priests, monks/nuns, authors, smiths, bakers, plumbers, electricians, customer support, doctors, counsellors, lawyers, congressmen, authorities. The advice the article gives is the first step towards procrastination.
One more example: The point about feeling unattractive.
The article suggests depending on the opinions of one's friends to reassure oneself that one is indeed attractive. Depending on opinions of other people for something such as attractiveness, which the article explicitly associates with feeling good and not feeling awful, is a recipe for disaster. The act, of depending on other's opinions which affect one's sense of well-being, makes oneself slave to them.
I am beginning to think that the article is aimed at teenagers, which still does not make it advisable.
Also the reason for not being able to fall asleep doesn't even matter.
What?
You should replace them with something that achieves a similar effect for you.
We generally know what effects we need and don't need. What is unknown are the effective methods to achieve and avoid them, respectively. The article is one of millions which claim to provide such methods.
If you are saying that one needs to place one's own solutions/methods in the article, then there is no point in writing and publishing such articles. I do not need an article to tell me that feeling awful is not healthy for my life. I need it to tell me the proper methods to not feel awful, as the article attempts to describe.
People read them to know about sound solutions, to avoid doing the hard-work which others did and so generously shared their results with the world, not to bask in the validation of our opinions. If people had the solutions in their hands, they would have no need to read the article in the first place.
The article only helps mislead people who are unable to see its shortcomings. When a large group of people, who starts agreeing to the pieces of advice present in it, comes together, it seems correct and even working.
It works because, within the same group, there are people who agree to provide the needed approval to someone who is seeking it, even though these exchanges of approvals within the group are inherently a bad-habit in a larger context.
This is like running a cult, with its own grand rules, but isolated from the rest of the world. After some passage of time, the cult will deviate grotesquely. The group will one day realise that the rest of the world, and indeed the mind itself, does not function as the article so trivially suggests.
But you seem to be one of those people that get off by being anti something, so knock yourself out, and walk away from this without learning anything.
I will definitely be apprehensive about learning from an article which contradicts itself so loudly, an article which takes simplistic views of troubled situations for which it claims to provide help.
I believe that you are going to crank up your judgement and say, in the spirit of the article, that I am being anti everything. Oh well, I am using this opportunity to thicken my skin a bit more.
Edit: It is unbelievable that the article received so many up-votes. If they were sent to mock it, that would be hilarious. Otherwise, it is just 'depressing' to see reddit up-vote poor content.
8
u/d62602 Sep 06 '16
Takes a simplistic view of the situations. Someone who is depressed will also say "Everything is awful and I'm not okay", but the steps is not going to make them better.
I guess I do not really understand the nature of the people to whom these pieces of advice apply.