Student mental illness (Part 2)

Posted by on

Statistic of the week:  75%  of diagnosable mental illnesses crop up by the age of 24, driven by fear of failure and the eternal chatter about how essential it is to get a job straight out of college.

American psychologists are increasingly seeing children with ADD  and some kind of executive functioning problem among college students who haven’t learned to manage their time or structure their days, because their parents have always organized everything for them.  

American parents are often so focused on their children’s cognitive development – in part , because that’s what colleges reward – that they neglect to encourage self-management.  They are let off chores, even making beds or learning how to operate a washing machine. They need responsibility- building tasks so that they can be self-reliant.  If they are mothered to death, when they get to college they cannot cope.

There has been a cultural shift, starting with the Columbine massacre, the twin towers and the 2007 financial crash, from parental encouragement of autonomy in childhood to parental control. Parents are now super-anxious, and this communicates itself to children.  They, the parents think every little mistake is something to be fixed, rather than a learning experience which helps the child grow into an adult.  If the parents catch every fall then the child ends up afraid to fall.

There is the huge pressure to get A grades (of course, once in college everyone gets A grades! – equally ridiculous( Ed.). The message is that the child will not have a good, productive life unless they go to the best colleges for four years and do stellar work.  But there is no single perfect way of preparing for life, and the sub-text is the importance of earning power.  

Then there is the pressure kids feel as they try to make new friends at college in an atmosphere where social media is pervasive and virtual friends are not the same as real, flesh and blood friends.  It has also become more difficult to make these real friends because kids are sitting, isolated, with earphones on, staring at a computer. (These comments were extracted from a Bryn Mawr College newsletter).

Parents need to understand that their job is to prepare their children for the world of personal responsibility, starting with doing chores around the house and submitting to discipline (starting with time limits on-line).  Secondly, going to college at 17 or 18 might be satisfactory for girls ( who grow up quicker than boys), but at that age the boys, in particular, are generally still children, and need help taking responsibility for their lives and their actions.  They will get more out of college by having a gap year before college, when they either travel (yes, to Thailand possibly) or get jobs for a year where they learn some self- discipline and experience adulthood.

I believe that this whole thing is enabled by the corporations , whose interest is in hustling kids through puberty and college so that they can bolster the ( cheap) workforce.  We should be resisting.  We are, all of us, only young once.

 

Student mental illness ( Part 1)

Posted by on

A surge in anxiety, mental breakdowns, depression and stress is sweeping British university campuses. Above all, a growing proportion just seem terrified of failure, and experience the whole process of learning and assessment as an unforgiving ordeal that offers no room for creativity or mistakes,” says William Davies, lecturer at Goldsmiths and author of The Happiness Industry, a book about the commercialisation of wellbeing. One study found that six times more young people in England (aged four to 24) have psychological problems today than a generation ago, in 1995.  (The Guardian 27/09)

This is obviously a difficult and fraught subject that touches on a host of issues, including parenting, social media, the perceived job market and other factors.

My personal take will be ferociously unpopular, but it has an Epicurean aspect.  I was one of the last people to do British National Service, in the Army. I was 18 when I joined up and nearly 21 when I went up to university.  It was the first time I had encountered unforgiving discipline and encountered at close quarters young men of very different backgrounds who had been working for two or three years, were street- smart and, compared with me, were grown-up young adults.  Great guys!

I ended up commanding , as a second lieutenant, 45 men under active service in a shooting/ bombing/damn dangerous environment, making life and death decisions sometimes.  In short, postponing university grew me up rather quickly, taught me respect and consideration for people of all backgrounds, how to manage men and inspire (hopefully) respect in them, to darn socks and sew on buttons (literal and figurative).

You can spot where I am going with this.  Cosseted youngsters are leaving home, often for the first time, far too young, having had little experience of standing on their own feet and making their own decisions.  Most are not even taking a year off to travel the world ( called a “gap year” in the UK), even if all that means is sitting on a beach in Thailand and drinking too much beer.  If nothing else, this gets kids away from home, taking responsibility for themselves, without messing up their future careers.

Tomorrow, I will report and comment on the views on this subject of two Americans who have studied the epidemic that has hit college students: psychologist B. Janet Hibbs  and Dr. Anthony Rostain.

Proof of residence for EU citizens in the UK

Posted by on

To The Guardian

I have just read Brandon Lewis’s article (“The Home Office’s message to EU citizens living here: we want you to stay”) in respect of the need for us EU citizens living in the UK to apply for settled status, mainly to prove to the authorities that we have lived permanently in the UK for more than five years and are permitted to stay after Brexit.

I would dearly like to know what proof the authorities need from me, as someone who has lived in the UK since 1964, married a British citizen in 1968, and produced two quite intelligent and useful British citizens who in turn are contributing to society and are taxpayers?

The Home Office should really know me by now. I have a national insurance number, an NHS number and a British driving licence. I have a tax reference number because, believe me, I pay large sums to HMRC. I draw a UK state pension.

The information that I am still a German citizen (in my head, always an EU citizen) can be found in the electoral roll. Why, after all this, do I need to comply with a requirement to prove that I have existed in this country not merely for five, but for more than 55 years? Does this speak of incompetence by the Home Office, or rather a desire to belittle and humiliate EU citizens? That is certainly what it feels like.

Marlies Branston, Bedford. Sep 2019

Mr. Branston is one of thousands who, hopefully, will remain in the UK after Brexit, contributing to the country.  Unfortunately, what the uninformed and emotional supporters of Brexit expect is that most “foreigners” will be despatched “ home”.  Not only would this be cruel and crude but self-defeating.  Britain heavily relies on smart, clever and hardworking people of foreign origin to do everything from scientific research, to fixing holes in roofs, to planning a better transport system for London.  The Tory party have done such a lousy job with both education and health that there are insufficient trained people to do almost everything technical,  from nursing to plumbing.  One of the huge benefits of EU membership was the ability to attract ability.  When and if the obscurantists (who want the country to be a mean little offshore home of the semi-ignorant) have their way there will be no one to repair the electrics in their houses or to teach mathematics.  Just don’t later start bleating about it to the rest of us!

My declared intention to avoid politics never meant that I would stop protesting crass stupidity.

Dealing with people

Posted by on

“People like it when you tell them things, in suitable portions, in a modest, intimate tone, and they think they know you, but they do not, they know about you, for what they are let in on are facts, not feelings, not what your opinion is about anything at all, not how what has happened to you and how all the decisions you have made have turned you into who you are.  What they do is they fill in with their own feelings  and opinions and assumptions, and they compose a new life which has precious little to do with yours, and that lets you off the hook.  No one can touch you unless you yourself want them to.  You only have to be polite and smile and keep paranoid thoughts bay, because they will talk about you no matter how much you squirm, it is inevitable, and you would do the same thing yourself.”

From “Out Stealing Horses”, by Per Petterson, published in 2003, in the US by Graywolf Press.  The book was originally in Norwegian. The book is about the thought and random life events of a man living in the Norwegian forest.

A somewhat long, but hopefully useful, philosophy crib list

Posted by on

Pre-Socratics (6th-5th cent BC)  Interested in the natural world

          –Thales: 1st philosopher; “everything comes from water”

            –Anaximander:  “Our world is one of many and what comes before and after all created things is boundless.” 

            –Parmenides:  “Everything that exists has always existed and nothing changes.”  He was the first rationalist.

            –Heraclitus:  “The basic characteristic of nature is constant change, or flow.  The world is characterized by opposites.  He is the first empiricist.  He says God is logosor “universal reason”.

            –Empedocles:  “All things are made of air, water, earth and fire–which don’t change but are recombined.  He distinguishes between substance (the 4 elements) and force (love and strife).

            -Anaxagoras:  “Nature is built up of an infinite number of minute particles invisible to the eye, e.g. skin and bone are made of minute skin and bone seeds”.

            –Democritus:  The building blocks of nature are different eternal and immutable atoms.  He was the first materialist.  Things happen due to natural causes, not due to an external force or soul.

            –Hippocrates:  Founder of Greek medicine, influenced later philosophers..  “The road to health is through moderation, harmony, and sound mind and sound body..

 Athenians:  Interested in man and his place in society

            Sophists (e.g. Protagoras):  Taught for money and pretended to know a lot.  “Man is the measure of all things.”  About the gods, “The question is complex and life is short.”  (He was the first agnostic.)  He distinguished between what is natural and what is socially induced.  He believed there were no absolute norms for right and wrong.

            Socrates:  A rationalist,he believed in the art of discourse.  He believed in absolute and universally valid norms and that right insight leads to right action and happiness.

            –Plato:  Established an Academy and wrote down much of Socrates and his own thoughts.  Was a rationalistbut also a dualist, since “everything in the material world flows but the soul is immortal.”  Myth of the cave:  what we see is just a reflection of the true eternal set of ideas.  He distinguishes between the natural world and the world of ideas which only a few men and women see.  These are the philosophers, who should govern the state.  Like the Hindu caste system, everything has its place.

            –Aristotle:  Spent 20 years at Plato’s Academy.  Believed in using our senses as well as our reason, and unlike Plato, that the chicken comes before the idea of the chicken.  Distinguishes between “substance”, or what things are made of, and “form”, their particular characteristics and what they do.  When a chicken dies, only the substance remains. Form governs a thing’s potential and limitation.  He classified everything in to animal, vegetable, and mineral.  He distinguished 4 different causes, including the “first” or “final” cause, which was God.  Ethics:  There are 3 forms of happiness: pleasure; as a free, responsible citizen; and as a thinker/philosopher.  He believed in balance and moderation in all things, echoing the Golden Mean and Greek medicine.  He believed women are incomplete, and all of a child’s characteristics come from the sperm.

            –Stoics:  Believed in a universal natural law, like Socrates.  Believed in one nature (monism), and the importance of politics.  Believed in enduring pain and accepting destiny.

            –Epicurus:  He believed in creating one’s own “garden” and avoiding politics.

His basic guide to living:

1) Don’t fear God.

2) Don’t worry about death.

3) Don’t fear pain.

4) Live simply.

5) Pursue pleasure wisely.

6) Make friends and be a good friend.

7) Be honest in your business and private life.

8) Avoid fame and political ambition.

I would add: think of others; be polite and considerate; try to see the other point of view; meet others half way, if possible. Take the smooth and pleasant road, as free from stress and conflict as possible. But don’t be put upon!

            –Mysticism:  Western mysticism involves communication with a personal god; eastern mysticism involves merging with the cosmos.

            –Neo-platonism:  Plotinusbelieved that the world is a span between 2 poles: the devine light (the “one”) and absolute darkness

Middle Ages  Were interested in God and mind and body relationships

            -St. Augustine:  4th/5th cent.  Saw no conflict between Christianity and the philosopy of Plato.  Believed God created the world, which was in his mind as a devine idea.  Within each person is a struggle between Kingdom of the World and the Kingdom of God (or City of God) and the way to God is thru faith.

            –St. Thomas Acquinas:  13th cent.  Like Aristotle, believed that God was the first cause, or prime mover.  There are two paths to God, one through reason, one through faith.

The Enlightenment  Were interested in rationality, etc.

            -Descartes:  A rationalist, like Plato, believes the proof of God is that humans have an idea of a “supreme being”.

            Spinoza:  A materialist, like Democritus, believes that everything happens through natural causes and questions man’s freedom.

            Locke:  17th cent. empiricist–believed everything we know comes from our senses and distinguishes between primary and secondary qualities.  But also a rationalistwho believed in the idea of a natural right and the ability of man to “know” God exists.  A forerunner of liberal ideas including equality of sexes (influenced Mill) and division of powers of state.

            Hume:  18th cent.  qualified empiricistand agnostic, distinguished between impressions (immediate sensations) and ideas (reflection on experience), which can be simple or complex (like our idea of Heaven).  He said complex ideas are not trustworthy.  The sense of self is just a collection of “simple” impressions; we don’t really have an unalterable ego, or immortal soul.  Buddha said the same thing 2,500 years ago.  What we see as “laws of nature” are only things we are in the habit of seeing.  They don’t prove anything.  He thinks right and wrong are based on sentiment, not reason.  Distinguishes between descriptive and normative statements.

            Berkeley:  18th cent. Irish bishop.  Did not believe in the reality of the material world.  The cause of our perceptions is spiritual, the effect of God’s power.

            Enlightenment philosophers (Montesquieu, Voltaire, Rousseau):   Were interested in the following ideas (which moved from England (early 18th cent) to France (mid-18th cent) to Germany (late 18th cent.):

            -Opposition to authority (Locke)

            -Rationalism (Montesquieu, Voltaire)

            -the Enlightenment movement (writing of the 1st encyclopedia)

            -Cultural optimism

            -the Return to Nature (Rousseau)

            -Natural religion (Deism:  God is the prime mover but has not revealed himself since except thru nature and natural laws)

            -Human rights (Locke, later Mill)

            –Kant:  18th cent.  Said time and space are our 2 forms of intuition and things adapt themselves to this perception, distorting reality.  Believes we use both senses and reason to know.  The law of causality is in our minds: he distinguishes between “the thing for me” or the formof knowledge and “the thing in itself”, or the materialof knowledge.  The Existence of God, the Immortality of the Sourl, and Free Will are practical postulates; they can be known only by faith, not reason (he’s a Protestant).  The ability to tell right from wrong is part of our practical reason.  He tried to reconcile the rationalists and empiricists.

            –Hegel;  He united and developed many of the ideas developed by the Romantic movement but confined the definition of “world spirit” or “world reason”  to humans.  He said that all knowledge is human knowledge and truth is subjective.  He believed there are no eternal truths; knowledge evolves over time.  The history of thought follows a dialectic process; thesis, antithesis, and symthesis.  The synthesis then becomes the point of departure for the next thesis.  In contrast to the romantic thesis of individualism (subjective spirit) , Hegel emphasized the importance of the family, civil society and the state (objective spririt).  Beyond this, there is the “absolute spirit” represented by art, religion, and philosophy.

            –Kierkegard:  A Dane, who reacted against Hegel by emphasizing the individual’s responsibility for his own life.  e,g, deciding whether Christianity is true for you (not in general).  The 3 stages of life are:  aesthetic (enjoyment of life, may also lead to angst); ethical (characterized by seriousness and consistency of moral choices) and religious (characterized by the leap of faith that dominates both the search for pleasure and reasoned behaviour).  He became significant to existentialists as well as Christians.

            –Marx:  Known as an historical materialist (i.e. it is the material factors in society that have been decisive for historical development, not “world reason”), Marx also rejected Hegel’s idealism, or system. He believed that the purpose of philosophy was not to interpret the world but to change it.  His thinking therefore had a practical, political objective.  In particular, he claimed that it is the economic forces in society that create change, i.e. the basis of society creates the superstructure (political ideas and institutions, etc.)  The interaction between these two is known as dialectical materialism; the superstructure does not have any life of its own.

            –Nietsche:  Said “God is dead” and don’t listen to those who offer you supernatural expectations.  Believed the life force of the strongest should not be hampered by the weakest.

            –Existentialism:  Sartre said “existentialism is humanism”, and we must create our own essence because it is not fixed in advance.   Man feels alien in a world without meaning, hence feelings of the absurd, of despair, boredom.  Man’s freedom is a curse.

(I would like to thank Jostein Gaarder, the author of “Sophie’s World” (1991) for both the idea and for the foreshortened summing ups)