|
|
Post by YankeeFan on Dec 4, 2023 15:14:06 GMT
I've got to say, this does not surprise me at all.
If you raise your children to think that the world is an awful, unfair place, dominated by capitalism and greed, where if they are lucky enough to avoid a school shooting, then they will be killed by global warming, then you are setting them up for a life of depression.
Children who grow up in politically liberal households are more likely to suffer mental health problems than their conservative peers, according to a new study.
An Institute for Family Studies-Gallup report found that "political ideology is one of the strongest predictors" of which caregiving styles a parent adopts, and conservative parents are associated with the best mental health outcomes for their children.
|
|
|
|
Post by Whitman on Dec 4, 2023 15:18:19 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by YankeeFan on Dec 4, 2023 15:18:26 GMT
This podcast asked a somewhat different, but related in my mind, question. If you feel like you have no control over the events in your own life, of course you are going to be depressed. And, liberalism has raised a generation of kids to feel like they are victims. They're overwhelmed by the world's problems, and feel like failures because they can't "fix" what they've identified as these problems.
DUBNER: Okay. This question arose when I was reading Maria Konnikova‘s new book, The Biggest Bluff. So Maria, like you, has a Ph.D. in psychology. But she’s not an academic. She’s a writer. And this book is about her quest to become a professional poker player, starting from scratch. So, we made a Freakonomics Radio episode about her book that was called “How to Make Your Own Luck.” And really what Maria is wrestling with throughout that book is the relationship between luck and skill. She’s doing it in the context of poker, but it’s easy to extrapolate into our daily lives. So, here’s the passage that made me think of you. “There’s an idea in psychology,” she writes, “first introduced by Julian Rotter in 1966 called the ‘locus of control.’ When something happens in the external environment, is it due to our own actions — in other words, skill — or some outside factor, chance? People who have an internal locus of control tend to think that they affect outcomes, often more than they actually do. Whereas people who have an external locus of control, think that what they do doesn’t matter too much. Events will be what they will be. Typically, an internal locus will lead to greater success. People who think they control events are mentally healthier and tend to take more control over their fate, so to speak. Meanwhile, people with an external locus are more prone to depression and, when it comes to work, a more lackadaisical attitude.” So, Angela, my question has two parts. One, is it indeed better to generally have an internal locus of control, as Maria Konnikova writes? And if so, if I am more inclined toward the external, if I tend to feel life is more happening to me rather than me making it happen, how can I shift to have a more internal locus of control? freakonomics.com/podcast/how-to-make-your-own-luck-ep-424/ |
|
|
|
Post by Whitman on Dec 4, 2023 15:19:05 GMT
This is one of those mornings you wish you could post at the other board, I think.
|
|
|
|
Post by YankeeFan on Dec 4, 2023 15:23:32 GMT
I don't disagree with you regarding people who believe in various conspiracy theories, including Q-Anon. But, I'm not sure I would call the adherents to that one "conservatives". I think that was applied after the fact, because they supported Trump. Cults and conspiracy theories are going to pull in those who are already disaffected. Q-Anon folks were mostly apolitical, before getting involved in both the conspiracy theory and in politics. It's not like a bunch of kids, who were members of the Young Republicans clubs or the Federalist Society on college campuses latched on to Q. |
|
|
|
Post by YankeeFan on Dec 4, 2023 15:29:39 GMT
I want to tread lightly here, but... If you read this paragraph, in which a grieving father describes his son, who was in his second year of Harvard law School when he died by suicide, I can't help but feel really badly for the kid. His empathy became a weapon, that he turned on himself. From a very young age, he was an enormously sensitive person. He felt the pain of other people and of animals in a way that certainly I had never seen before, and [which] people describe as unique. He would read an article in the newspaper about the civil war in Yemen and the hunger of children there, or about children who were displaced in Iraq, and it would stay with him the entire day and he would think about it, and then he would get in touch with groups that were working on it. He felt these things like these people were members of our family. So he was an extraordinary empath and had this overwhelming sense of responsibility for the world. And so these episodes of war and civil war and famine and hunger and violence, it struck him really hard. That was just in his nature. ... [The pandemic] was intensely isolating and demoralizing for a lot of young people and for someone who's struggling already with depression or some other kind of mental or emotional illness, it can become unbearable, and it did become unbearable in Tommy's case.tinyurl.com/yysvj7zj |
|
|
|
Post by YankeeFan on Dec 4, 2023 15:34:18 GMT
This is one of those mornings you wish you could post at the other board, I think. Would be an interesting topic to see get discussed there. Maybe someone will post it. if you ask me, it's not so much liberalism that leads to depression, it's the overwhelmingness of the world, and its problems. But, I think there is a lot of correlation between liberal kids, and these feelings. |
|
|
|
Post by doctorquant on Dec 4, 2023 15:38:19 GMT
Just finished reading the publication. Odd that the data underpinning this assertion ...
... didn't merit their own table. Independent of that, the authors should have written it as "more likely to report being in good or excellent ..."
|
|
|
|
Post by YankeeFan on Dec 4, 2023 15:41:22 GMT
Just finished reading the publication. Odd that the data underpinning this assertion ... ... didn't merit their own table. Independent of that, the authors should have written it as "more likely to report being in good or excellent ..." I should have stated upfront, that I wasn't expecting the study to be all that great. But I still think the topic is interesting, and that it meets the "eye test". If you think the world is cruel and unfair, and you raise your kids to believe that, they are going to suffer. |
|
|
|
Post by YankeeFan on Dec 4, 2023 15:49:01 GMT
I read this, and just think that depression is a cycle that needs to be broken.
And a liberal mindset is one of the chains holding the cycle together.
|
|
|
|
Post by dirtybird on Dec 4, 2023 16:00:14 GMT
/checks who did the study
Heh, some nice culture war burffle and not much else. And as Quant said, self-reporting obviously plays a role here.
If this wasn’t just silly content, it would be a little amusing. Conservatives preach that the world is downright awful in so, so many ways. It’s dwelled on and focused on. For God’s sake, they strongly believe there’s a holocaust of children every year, and thousands more are molested because no one will stop it.
Perhaps, if this was to be believed, the answer might just be that despite all of this awfulness, conservative parents are just better at teaching their kids to not really care on an emotional level. Only caring for show. I’m some ways, fake tears about dead kids or antisemitism are probably more healthy than real ones.
|
|
|
|
Post by gordonbombay on Dec 4, 2023 16:04:42 GMT
Personally I think liberal homes are more likely to label the same feelings the con kids have as “mental health issues.” Its a framing issue not a ‘how we raise the kids issue’
Example, the difference between ‘I feel a little nervous about this upcoming test’ versus ‘I have anxiety.’
Now I’m not saying its the correct course to ignore feelings and “rub some dirt on it and get tough kid” but I think the tendency to over diagnose these issues and put them all in the pot makes it hard to distinguish …. And influences statistics like this one.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ridiculously Dull Bobby on Dec 4, 2023 16:45:14 GMT
This is some serious bullshit. I’m not surprised at all to see the “Washington Examiner” publish it.
If mental illness is one thing, it’s indiscriminate.
I don’t want to say anything more for fear of getting really nasty.
|
|
|
|
Post by doctorquant on Dec 4, 2023 17:24:43 GMT
/checks who did the study Apparently you didn't ... This is some serious bullshit. I’m not surprised at all to see the “Washington Examiner” publish it. If mental illness is one thing, it’s indiscriminate. The Examiner didn't "publish" it. It reported on the work. And the work's not about mental illness, it's about mental health. And anybody who thinks Slate, or the New York Times, or The Atlantic, or ... well, you get my drift ... wouldn't have been all the fuck over this had the numbers gone in the opposite direction is mentally ill in need of assistance. |
|
|
|
Post by YankeeFan on Dec 4, 2023 17:26:43 GMT
This is some serious bullshit. I’m not surprised at all to see the “Washington Examiner” publish it. If mental illness is one thing, it’s indiscriminate. I don’t want to say anything more for fear of getting really nasty. Certainly mental illness can strike anyone. But we can't ignore that issues like anxiety and depression can be exacerbated by the home environment. |
|
