oh no reason to be embarassed, one can’t be rational without frequently realizing own mistakes.
Assumption: Depression may be a state of minimal energy where the brain searches for internal patterns.
Let’s start simple. The statement above is quite general. It might be that you have a theory behind it, but I frequently see this terms (“energy”, “pattern”) used as just buzzwords without much specific meaning.
Legible research/theories usually have some references to prior art.
But, it’s possible that you have omitted more specific definitions for brevity? So, decide for yourself—having or not having well defined grounding and references is a good signal for rationality of your ideas.
Yes, you’re right. I tried to be as quick and brief as possible.
I was talking about the state of the lab rat that stops exerting itself and tries medication for depression in this state. In the forced swimming test (FST), the rat gives up trying to escape “learned depression.” However, it could be because it changes its strategy: it conserves energy and floats passively, as if in a reflective, introspective moment… perhaps S1? That could help it search its memories for a way out.
Many researchers have interpreted this as “learned depression” and medication, but others see it more as an adaptive adjustment to negative information.
What happens if we think of depression as a “system failure,” as a low-energy mode while the brain searches for a new model of the environment?
My hypothesis is that my supposed depression is correlated with a bias in the interpretation of reality and my memories, and that I should seek a system to reorganize them with the best possible cost-benefit.
I could treat my life like a science experiment, but that would be expensive and I’d miss out on life. So, what scientific method could I apply, using probabilities to organize my memories and expectations, to increase my chances of experiencing fewer biases and depression?
How could we prove this?
I mean, I’m embarrassed to share all this stuff I’ve posted, but it might help to see if I’m not too biased.
oh no reason to be embarassed, one can’t be rational without frequently realizing own mistakes.
Let’s start simple. The statement above is quite general. It might be that you have a theory behind it, but I frequently see this terms (“energy”, “pattern”) used as just buzzwords without much specific meaning.
Legible research/theories usually have some references to prior art.
But, it’s possible that you have omitted more specific definitions for brevity? So, decide for yourself—having or not having well defined grounding and references is a good signal for rationality of your ideas.
Yes, you’re right. I tried to be as quick and brief as possible.
I was talking about the state of the lab rat that stops exerting itself and tries medication for depression in this state. In the forced swimming test (FST), the rat gives up trying to escape “learned depression.” However, it could be because it changes its strategy: it conserves energy and floats passively, as if in a reflective, introspective moment… perhaps S1? That could help it search its memories for a way out.
Many researchers have interpreted this as “learned depression” and medication, but others see it more as an adaptive adjustment to negative information.
What happens if we think of depression as a “system failure,” as a low-energy mode while the brain searches for a new model of the environment?
My hypothesis is that my supposed depression is correlated with a bias in the interpretation of reality and my memories, and that I should seek a system to reorganize them with the best possible cost-benefit.
I could treat my life like a science experiment, but that would be expensive and I’d miss out on life. So, what scientific method could I apply, using probabilities to organize my memories and expectations, to increase my chances of experiencing fewer biases and depression?
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4401172/