Is it ethical for a depressed person to limit social interaction with friends, based on the idea that the friends might find such interaction unpleasant? Part of the problem is that friends often don't openly admit to not enjoying the depressed presence, but, if the depressed person finds it difficult to live with him-/herself, would it not follow that other people also find his/her company difficult? Increased isolation would undoubtedly have adverse effects on the depressed person. Would it be possible for a philosopher to explain the ethical position of the depressed person as regards to social interaction, please?

Comments

When Mary is depressed, this rubs off on those who are close to her. It casts a shadow over their lives and deprives them of what Mary might otherwise add to their flourishing. Her depression also, and more substantially, blights her own life, makes it less rich, interesting, successful than it would otherwise be. Both points support the conclusion that it is ethically desirable that Mary get over her depression. For her own sake and for the sake of others, Mary ought to do what she can to get over her depression and others should support her effort.

This conclusion goes against your hypothesis that Mary should spare her friends the effects of her depression. This on your very plausible assumption that isolating oneself from one's friends has adverse effects on one's depression. Mary needs friends in the state she's in. And, realizing this, her (true) friends wouldn't want her to withdraw.

Putting this in terms of the Golden Rule, Mary might ask herself: If a good friend of mine were depressed, would I want him to withdraw or would I want to learn about this and have a chance to counsel and help him? Knowing vividly what it is like to be depressed, Mary would likely want her friend to tell and seek her company. And she would be saddened to know that he did not come to her in his depression (just as she would be saddened to know that he spent the night in the cold rather than bother her at midnight for his spare apartment key).

To be sure, we all have "friends" who wouldn't want to have much to do with us if this were not narrowly to their advantage. Those "friends" wouldn't want to be bothered and wouldn't be much help anyway. But there are also those real friends who would be saddened if they knew that Mary needed some extra love and support but did not think she could or should turn to them.

So, I think Mary should not withdraw but, on the contrary, seek comfort and help from those of her friends who share her ethical goal to overcome her depression. These friends would want to know and want to be there for her. And these friends will also find their lives enriched by Mary once she's back on her feet (though they'd want to be there for her quite independently of this benefit).

When you are going through a depression your social identity is severely undermined. The mirroring effect that others have on your own perception of yourself- the way you "see yourself seen"- is so modified by your emotional states that one can argue that it would be probably safer to avoid too much contact with others. I'm not claimimg this on ethical bases: I agree with Thomas Pogge's idea that depressed people shouldn't avoid interactions on moral reasons, that is, to "spare" friends and acquaintances of their unpleasant presence. Still, I think that depression is a major distortion of the usual social feed-back we get from others in stabilizing our personal identities. Thus, one may argue that a mild isolation can be therapeutic. Jean Paul Sartre used to say that "Hell is other people". I think that depressed know very well the meaning of his claim and avoiding others in some circumstances can be a safe move.

Read another response by Thomas Pogge, Gloria Origgi

Read another response about Ethics, Happiness