I do think we, both in Mormon culture and American culture more generally, may pathologize unhappiness in unhelpful ways–it’s now reasonably well-established that people have a set baseline of happiness that is related to temperament and personality and does not vary much in response to life circumstances (including, presumably, marginally increased or decreased righteousness). To the extent that we hold up a certain type of disposition as the “righteous” model, and undervalue the gifts that come with more contemplative or even melancholy temperaments, we may actually make it more difficult for people with those sorts of temperaments to enjoy the benefits of Mormon community and impose an unrealistic expectation of cheerfulness that makes their disposition and personality seem “wrong.”

It seems to me that both “righteousness makes people happy” (with the pernicious inverse corollary that unhappiness is evidence of sin) and “all sadness is pathological” are too simplistic to encompass the complicated nexus of personality, spirit, biology, and will that generates happiness, sadness, and sometimes depression or mania.

john, ultimately that’s what I believe, but in the context of the comment I meant that some people see each example I listed as the fault of the individual – that they “can” (are able to) see it that way. Obviously, I don’t – at least not universally. That’s why I said “can” rather than “should”.

I don’t know how many times I’ve heard someone who thinks that all diabetics “got diabetes” because of bad habits (eating the wrong things, being lazy and not exercising, etc.) – or that my mom’s condition isn’t “really” schizophrenia – or that people who are suffering from depression just don’t read the scriptures enough or just don’t pray hard enough or just aren’t close enough to the Spirit – etc.

I believe there certainly are cases where diabetes is caused by neglect and abuse of one’s body, and I believe there probably are cases where depression has causes related to one’s actions. I think these things “can” be seen as either the responsibility of the individual or as a natural result of the Fall, sometimes legitimately and sometimes incorrectly. I just think in the case of depression the vast majority of cases are NOT the fault of the individual, but rather have causes that are hidden to some degree from others – and often from the depressed themselves.

Iow, I believe many people who appear to other people to “cause their depression by their actions” actually are trying to address their underlying depression by their actions – that the depression is the underlying reason for their actions, not vice-versa.

As far as self selection goes, I have had multiple complain vehemently about their marriage / life / children / religion, etc. When I suggest that they make changes so that they can be happy, they say “but I am happy.” I guess they just define it differently.

I thought I’d never have to worry about money, again. But it didn’t last, and boy did it not last.

I’ve been thinking a lot about the word “eternal” over the last few weeks. That happiness is the “end” of our course isn’t in question. But eternal happiness doesn’t mean constant happiness, unmitigated, through all time. It means happiness grounded in things that do last for all time. Hence the opposite of eternal isn’t time framed but _fashion._

“19 ¶ Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal, and economic collapses deprive:
20 But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal:
21 For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.” ~

#45 – “If we can pathologize sadness, say ‘I need an SSRI the way diabetics need insulin’ then there’s a way of eliciting some empathy from a community that might otherwise conclude that ‘unhappiness never was righteousness.’”

#48 – “recognizing that a clinical condition, which often is genetic, might be precluding the potential to experience joy”

Fwiw, the very first thought I had when I read the study about anti-depressant use in Utah was, literally, “Good. I hope Mormons use anti-depressants more than anyone else, given our doctrinal understanding of the Fall and the Atonement.”

My second son has diabetes. To function well (and truly to live a normal, productive life) he simply MUST take insulin regularly – and the dosage HAS to be regulated according to his own needs.

My mother has a rare form of schizophrenia. To function well (and truly to live a normal, productive life) she simply MUST take “sleeping pills” regularly and avoid stress generally – and her medicine HAS to be regulated according to her own needs.

Many people suffer from various levels of depression. To function well (and truly to live normal, productive lives) they simply MUST take anti-depressants – and their medicine HAS to be regulated according to their own needs.

Finally, every single one of the conditions I just described can be seen as a “weakness” that is the fault of the individual or, in religious terms, a natural result of the stuff we inherit as a result of The Fall. We aren’t held accountable for those natural results, since we didn’t choose them in the same way we choose to sin, but we are required to try to overcome our natural (wo)man and become more perfect (“complete, whole, fully developed”).

God help us all if we criticize others for using medicine that we are fortunate to have in order to mitigate the effects of The Fall in their own lives and, in a very real way change themselves from their natural (wo)man and become more like what we all want to be – in this case, truly happier and able to have joy.