Talk:Rank theory of depression

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

well,eventually people become sick of being weak and unable to defend themselves or others they care about and hate having to shut up and deal with with people steping over them by leting them win and at the end they commit sucide

[edit] Rank theory and Antidepressants

If I understand this theory correctly, given the widespread use of anti-depressants, shouldn't we see more societal disruption? Anti-depressants should interfere with this "self-preservation" mechanism, and cause harm to its users by making them try harder to attain unreachable goals. Social hierarchies ought to be destabilized by anti-depressants. However, it's tough to point to these kinds of observations. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TrainYourBrain (talk • contribs) 14:11, 5 April 2007 (UTC).

[edit] The question of anti-depressants disrupting social harmony

Social hierarchies may well be disrupted by anti-depressants, in the sense that someone else finds themself at the bottom of the hierarchy rather than the depressed individual. But the individual on anti-depressives could be more functional than he or she was in the past, and may therefore merit a place further up the hierarchy. The reason for thinking this is that, as they entered a depressive state, they may have taken a rank lower than they actually merit, since self-preservation may have led them to exaggerate their inadequacy to protect them when in a weakened state. The restoration of social harmony, then, must be seen as restoration from the point of view of the previously-depressed individual, not necessarily for every individual in the society. As evolutionary theory requires, the genes of the individual are primarily at stake, not those of the species. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gibsonj (talk • contribs) 20:07, 23 October 2007 (UTC)