
How David Hume Helped Solve My Midlife Crisis - hownottowrite
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/10/how-david-hume-helped-me-solve-my-midlife-crisis/403195/?single_page=true
======
shas3
This is such a great autobiographical account that manages to do two
incredible things at once. It chronicles the discovery of a very interesting
historical possibility. While doing so, it also explores the interplay between
the personal and professional lives of a very accomplished researcher.

I love the theme of how discovery and research are the source of both
melancholy and ecstasy. Gopnik herself seems to have found fulfillment and an
escape from other troubles in the exciting new questions she encountered about
Hume's influences. The other side of the same coin is Hume's depression during
the period when he found himself incapable of making significant progress on
his thesis.

> "When you’re young, you want things: work, love, children. When you reach
> middle age, you want to want things. When you’re depressed, you no longer
> want anything. Desire, hope, the future itself—all seem to vanish, as they
> had for me. But now I at least wanted to know whether Hume could have heard
> about Desideri. It was a sign that my future might return."

The other theme of interest to the tech community is the interplay of personal
and professional lives. If you consider the two aspects of one's life,
personal relationships and professional fulfillment, each provides a hedge
against possible problems with the other. Interesting explorations in one's
work can help pull one from other problems in life.

There is a significant time-varying component of probabilistic luck in whether
one's life and work will be fulfilling, but I think it makes sense to
constantly strive to bias these probabilities towards outcomes that involve
working on exciting projects and building meaningful personal relationships.

I think this article is a strong descriptive companion to Zach Weinersmith's
popular comic about 'eleven lifetimes' [http://www.smbc-
comics.com/?id=2722](http://www.smbc-comics.com/?id=2722)

~~~
pogimabus
> "When you’re young, you want things: work, love, children. When you reach
> middle age, you want to want things. When you’re depressed, you no longer
> want anything.

It's funny that you quoted this line because I think it reveals a particular
ignorance that the author has, namely a misunderstanding of depression due to
her particular experience with it. A more truthful version, in my view, would
be the following:

When you’re not depressed, you want things: work, love, children. When you
have mild depression, you want to want things. When you’re deeply depressed,
you no longer want anything.

Age really doesn't have anything to do with it.

~~~
angrycoder
So you are only 'normal' when you want things? That is a really strange world
view.

~~~
mentat
Desire is the root of human suffering. This is a widely held belief to put it
mildly.

~~~
rhizome
More precisely, desire is seen as the root of human suffering by, most
commonly, Buddhists.

~~~
zkhalique
Isn't it interesting that she was seeking out Buddhism?

The other philosophy that thought about this, but on a more intellectual
level, was Stoicism, which was very popular in the Roman empire.

------
hownottowrite
Author's original paper: "Could David Hume Have Known about Buddhism? Charles
Francois Dolu, the Royal College of La Flèche, and the Global Jesuit
Intellectual Network"

[http://www.alisongopnik.com/papers_alison/gopnik_humestudies...](http://www.alisongopnik.com/papers_alison/gopnik_humestudies_withtoc.pdf)

For more information on Ippolito Desideri and his life in Tibet:

"Mission to Tibet: The Extraordinary Eighteenth-Century Account of Father
Ippolito Desideri S. J." 832 pages

[http://www.wisdompubs.org/book/mission-
tibet](http://www.wisdompubs.org/book/mission-tibet)

------
eliben
This is an incredibly well-written and interesting piece. Is it only me, but
what seems to have solved the author's problem is getting back "into the
flow", by finding an area of research she was keenly interested in?

Also, this quote is hilarious:

> And turning 50 and becoming bisexual and Buddhist did seem far too
> predictable—a sort of Berkeley bat mitzvah, a standard rite of passage for
> aging Jewish academic women in Northern California.

~~~
sridca
> what seems to have solved the author's problem is getting back "into the
> flow", by finding an area of research she was keenly interested in?

The clue is in the final paragraph:

"I had found my salvation in the sheer endless curiosity of the human mind—and
the sheer endless variety of human experience."

After work, love, children - the author found a new purpose that is now worth
living for. It seems life becomes worthwhile when there is some purpose to
strive towards.

But wouldn't life be easier if we didn't rely on such purpose-driven mental
states? Is it not possible to simply enjoy doing everyday things -- taking
shower, eating, working, walking -- without contingent goals?

~~~
eli_gottlieb
>But wouldn't life be easier if we didn't rely on such purpose-driven mental
states? Is it not possible to simply enjoy doing everyday things -- taking
shower, eating, working, walking -- without contingent goals?

Well yes, but then everyone calls you a loser.
[http://www.theonion.com/article/unambitious-loser-with-
happy...](http://www.theonion.com/article/unambitious-loser-with-happy-
fulfilling-life-still-33233)

~~~
sridca
> Well yes, but then everyone calls you a loser.

Yes, that is how socialization works in adulthood, even in this supposedly
liberalized age and part of the world. However there is a thrill in being (or
aiming to be) a carefree loser while everyone else is busy being a solemn
winner.

This is my single greatest personal goal in life! Not the "money, power,
women" corruption[1].

[1]
[http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086250/quotes?item=qt0458841](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086250/quotes?item=qt0458841)

------
lighthawk
David Hume pretty much ruined my life in college. I was totally bought in, but
it is not a helpful mindview. When you let go like that, you aren't real
anymore. There is benefit to real ideals, real things that exist outside of
our senses and physical experience.

Glad he could help someone, but it was not me. You have to expand your mind at
some point and accept there is mystery.

~~~
ola
My favorite passage from David Hume's work `An Enquiry Concerning Human
Understanding`

 _“Where am I, or what? From what causes do I derive my existence, and to what
condition shall I return? ... I am confounded with all these questions, and
begin to fancy myself in the most deplorable condition imaginable, environed
with the deepest darkness, and utterly deprived of the use of every member and
faculty.

Most fortunately it happens, that since Reason is incapable of dispelling
these clouds, Nature herself suffices to that purpose, and cures me of this
philosophical melancholy and delirium, either by relaxing this bent of mind,
or by some avocation, and lively impression of my senses, which obliterate all
these chimeras. I dine, I play a game of backgammon, I converse, and am merry
with my friends. And when, after three or four hours' amusement, I would
return to these speculations, they appear so cold, and strained, and
ridiculous, that I cannot find in my heart to enter into them any farther.”_

~~~
IkmoIkmo
God that hit home harder than anything I've ever read.

~~~
vasilipupkin
this passage makes me want to read the thing. It's the language more than the
content even.

~~~
laichzeit0
One of the saddest things about modern college/university philosophy courses,
I think, is how few people will ever end up reading any of the great
philosopher's works in the original (nevermind even in the original
language!). It's almost always condensed versions by another author of the
"main ideas".

I had this experience when I picked up a copy of John Locke's Essay Concerning
Human Understanding and read the thing in the original. I was completely
shaken by the beauty of it.

It saddens me because 90% of the beauty is lost in favor of "just getting to
the main idea". You lose so, so much. It would be like reciting Homer without
an understanding of meter. All beauty would be lost.

------
jhallenworld
The process of scholarly search is interesting. In the future, how will we
discover such connections? Just think if Hume was alive today and some future
scholar wanted to know if he was influenced by Buddhism. Easy enough to find
out: check his Google search history at the time he wrote his treatise :-)
More seriously, I suspect something like Hume's Treatise, as it is printed,
would not be taken seriously today due to it's woeful lack of proper
citations.

It makes me wonder about the history of citations:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_citation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_citation)

Hume's A Treatise of Human Nature:
[http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/342](http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/342)

------
bambax
This is a fantastic read, beautifully written (apparently the author is the
older sister of Adam Gropnik, writer extraordinaire for The New Yorker).

I'm in the middle of it; but this statement is inaccurate:

> _For a long time, the conventional wisdom was that the Jesuits were
> retrograde enforcers of orthodoxy._

I don't know what time or wisdom the author is talking about, but the whole
jesuit problem has always been that they were "avant garde", not retrograde;
they were the hippies of the Catholic church, or maybe more accurately the
hipsters.

Not only in matters of science, as the rest of the paragraph makes clear, but
in matters of faith and dogma. They were on the opposite side to tradition.
That's a very well and thoroughly documented fact.

~~~
JackFr
I think its more complicated. The Jesuits never felt threatened or afraid of
new knowledge or science or theological insights, and various popes have had
to rein in certain theological innovations. But during that period they did
spearhead the counter-reformation.

~~~
bambax
It is complicated, yes.

As seen from the protestant point of view, Jesuits can appear "orthodox"
because they are very knowledgeable, etc. and determined; but inside the
Catholic world, they were perceived to be "leftists", so to speak.

Traditionalists vigorously opposed them. Among the reasons: they argued it was
ok to receive communion five times a year...! (instead of just one).

The history of the Catholic church is a fight between modernists (Jesuists
among them) and "orthodox heresies" (not an oxymoron!) -- in the end,
modernists always win (see Vatican II, the new Pope Francis, etc.)

~~~
chippy
When was the time that communion was traditionally had? Easter? What were the
four other times? mapping to the seasons?

~~~
bambax
Yes, Easter (usually in April).

The four other times were Pentecost (in May), Assumption (in August), All
Saints (in October) and Christmas (in December).

So not much happened between Christmas and Easter....

~~~
a-saleh
It makes sense, if you consider that between Christmas and Easter, there is a
~month long fast.

------
toothbrush
Thank you for sharing, i found this a very inspiring read. It really resonated
with me! I have nothing intelligent to add to the conversation, though.

------
aridiculous
I just heard the author on Philosophy Bites (a podcast). Absolutely marvelous
episode, I was genuinely surprised by her findings:

[http://philosophybites.com/2013/09/alison-gopnik-on-hume-
and...](http://philosophybites.com/2013/09/alison-gopnik-on-hume-and-
buddhism.html)

------
mattchew
Nice writing.

"When you’re young, you want things: work, love, children. When you reach
middle age, you want to want things."

~~~
strictnein
Very nice quote. I'm not quite middle aged, but I feel like I'm already in
that vein and it annoys me to no end. Nice enough house, job, family, kids,
schools, car, etc and no real passion right now to step it up a notch, or any
idea how to draw more pleasure from the things and relationships I already
have.

I think the only thing I really want now is for my yard to look better. When I
have free time I landscape, which would have confused the hell out of my 21
year old self.

~~~
Jtsummers
Do you like who you are for the most part and is your family happy and taken
care of? Then it's not really a problem. You've got kids, a lot of people slow
down a bit in their wantings at that point as they raise and care for them. As
they start moving out of the house you and your wife will have more time and
resources to spend on yourselves and each other.

~~~
strictnein
Yeah, my family is happy and has everything they need and I'm content and
mostly am happy with where my life is, but I just don't feel like I'm working
toward anything anymore.

------
fitzwatermellow
Irked by author's facile dismissal of Descartes.

Admit I'm biased against Hume. Something about his Hard Scot style that left
me as clammy as his pronouncement that "man was no more significant to the
universe than an oyster."

For me, it remains Descartes Ontological Argument that provided the
philosophical lantern in our collective cave of existential darkness. And I
still see echoes of its pure logic and simplicity reverberating into the
present. In Boltzmann Brains. In the intersections of quantum information
theory and thermodynamics. Yes, even in the realms of design thinking,
creativity and startup engineering...

~~~
cristianpascu
I, too, felt the dismisal and the return to mere experience was superficial.
Experience would not be possible without an ontological grounding. Just
because you ignore it, does not make anything better. You feel better about
yourself? Cool, but don't pretend metaphysics is useless. On the real side of
things, the dismissal of metaphysics, especially in relation to ethics, has
lead to moral relativism and nihilism.

I don't think people get better or feel good because they found an idea in a
book. Humans love humans. Humans help humans be happy. She found happiness in
another person, not in Hume. This, I think, it's just a post-rationalisation.
Sounds cool, but it's not what really happens. In general. Cool ideas create
an excitement that lasts only so long.

~~~
Digit-Al
I think you're reading it slightly the wrong way. She wasn't necessarily
saying the ideas helped her get through her mid-life crisis. It was getting
interested in the link between Hume and buddhism that gave her a new purpose,
and ultimately allowed her to meet her husband. So it is in that sense that
Hume helped get her out of her mid-life crisis.

~~~
cristianpascu
Interesting, I didn't see that. I'll read again. But if you're right, then it
is not that interesting. :) Anyways, I think that the real good in her life
was finding someone to love.

------
atlantic
Actually, she needn't have looked so far afield. Leibniz lived just before
Hume, and he was well versed in Buddhist philosophy.

------
UhUhUhUh
The curiosity for the reason behind things, the drive of rationalism, the
human sense of awe are not the monopoly of religion. Although a rationalist,
a-religious, myself, I always liked Hume because he pushed empiricism to its
logical limits. As Kant acknowledged, he woke us up from our dogmatic sleep.

------
EC1
I always understood "I think, therefore I am" to mean that you have the power
over your own destiny, like if I wanted to be a professor I could totally
become one, think like one, act like one etc.

I just reread it in this article and realized it means if I have the ability
to observe myself, I must exist.

------
dharma1
Great read. Europeans have been aware of Buddhism since 300 BC though -
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greco-
Buddhism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greco-Buddhism)

~~~
scott_karana
More than that, I love that the "traditional" Asian Buddha statue is in fact
directly descended from Greek schools of sculpture who did him first. :-)

------
336f5
"I discovered that at least one person in Europe in the 1730s not only knew
about Buddhism but had studied Buddhist philosophy for years. His name was
Ippolito Desideri, and he had been a Jesuit missionary in Tibet. In 1728, just
before Hume began the Treatise, Desideri finished his book, the most complete
and accurate European account of Buddhist philosophy to be written until the
20th century. The catch was that it wasn’t published. No Catholic missionary
could publish anything without the approval of the Vatican—and officials there
had declared that Desideri’s book could not be printed. The manuscript
disappeared into the Church’s archives...Desideri accepted the challenge. He
spent the next five years in the Buddhist monasteries tucked away in the
mountains around Lhasa. The monasteries were among the largest academic
institutions in the world at the time. Desideri embarked on their 12-year-long
curriculum in theology and philosophy. He composed a series of Christian
tracts in Tibetan verse, which he presented to the king. They were beautifully
written on the scrolls used by the great Tibetan libraries, with elegant
lettering and carved wooden cases...He also translated the work of the great
Buddhist philosopher Tsongkhapa into Italian. In his book, Desideri describes
Tibetan Buddhism in great and accurate detail, especially in one volume titled
“Of the False and Peculiar Religion Observed in Tibet.” He explains emptiness,
karma, reincarnation, and meditation, and he talks about the Buddhist denial
of the self...Desideri overcame Himalayan blizzards, mountain torrents, and
war. But bureaucratic infighting got him in the end. Rival missionaries, the
Capuchins, were struggling bitterly with the Jesuits over evangelical turf,
and they claimed Tibet for themselves. Michelangelo Tamburini, the head of the
Jesuits, ordered Desideri to return to Europe immediately, until the territory
dispute was settled. The letter took two years to reach Tibet, but once it
arrived, in 1721, Desideri had no choice. He had to leave. He spent the next
11 years writing and rewriting his book and appealing desperately to the
Vatican to let him return to Tibet. It had clearly become the only place where
he really felt that he was himself. In 1732 the authorities finally ruled—in
favor of the Capuchins. His book would not be published and he could never
return. He died four months later."

How truly awful. He mastered Tibetan, spent decades studying the profoundest
and subtlest Buddhist philosophy with great success, wrote it all up for the
Europeans back home whose understanding was de minimis, and from reading old
books I could well credit that his work was superior to anything published
until 1900 (or perhaps later) - implying the Catholic Church singlehandedly
set back understanding by over 179 years, for reasons that strike one as
either incompetent or psychopathicly malicious.

And this is just the summary by Gopnik, who is trying to paint the Catholic
Church in as positive, tolerant, and globalizing a way as possible!

------
hackaflocka
In the past, did people carry all their "travel money" on their person when
taking long trips? What would happen if they were looted?

------
atlantic
Actually, Gopnik needn't have looked so far afield. Leibniz lived just before
Hume, and he was well versed in Chinese buddhist philosophy.

~~~
hcs
Gopnick does mention European contact with Chinese philosophy and theology in
the paper that hownottowrite linked, however this is dismissed as a contact
point for Buddhism: "European scholars in the Chinese court focused on the
elite Confucian and Taoist traditions." It is my understanding that Leibniz
was mostly exposed to the Confucian tradition, his correspondences with
Joachim Bouvet on this topic are mentioned in the paper.

------
raverbashing
So, does this mean that cognitive 'science' and psychiatric drugs are not the
solution? Who would have known /s

------
hippo8
This was one of the best things I have read in a while. Thank you OP.

------
heurist
Strong notes of Pynchon!

~~~
ojosilva
I found it more Bolaño than anything. 2666 is an awesome book that parallels
academic research and a journey of the self, in many way similar to the OP's
account.

------
bobthechef
The article was an entertaining read. However, it contains a few errors.

First, Spinoza was not an atheist. He was a pantheist. He identified
nature/universe with God and tried to overcome the infamous "mind"/matter
duality posed by Descartes by claiming that both were but aspects of the
infinite substance, namely, God. That is, he subscribed to a certain
panpsychism. Comparisons to Buddhism are actually very superficial. Other
attempts at surmounting Cartesian dualism included Malbranche's occasionalism
which claimed that God was the bridge between the two (there is a humorous
anecdote that on his deathbed he was asked what good the world is if God was
the cause of our ideas, after which he purportedly sighed in realization and
died).

Second, I don't know what it is about Hume, but he seems to be quite popular
among those with little philosophical background...which would be fine if
there were some humility attached to the enthusiasm. Hume is notorious for
misunderstanding Aristotle, never having read his works, and relied instead on
mediocre secondary sources. Furthermore, (his) skepticism is self-defeating
and incoherent. I found a good link that describes some of the objections for
those who are interested: [http://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2009/06/hume-
science-and-rel...](http://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2009/06/hume-science-and-
religion.html)

Third - and this is more of an observation - Buddhism, and perhaps especially
of the ostensibly Tibetan Californian variety, seems to be one of those dying
fads in some aging academic circles who hadn't yet properly digested it or
moved on to some other colorful New Age Americanism (popular adoration for the
Dalai Lama has always been incomprehensible to me; most who do haven't the
slightest idea of whom they're adoring). Lhasa is far enough from the West
that envisioning it as a sort of Shangri-La where all of the nastiness of the
West is absent. It's kind of a secular New Jerusalem or Promised Land (the
truth about Tibetan theocracy isn't quite so pretty). To her credit, the
author admits the first bit.

Fourth - another observation - the Jesuits seem to be a kind of least hated
order in the Catholic Church among atheists because of certain perceptions I
won't elaborate here. These perceptions seem to stem from a certain
Enlightenment inheritance that portrayed the Catholic Church as a stale,
largely monolithic institution wallowing in superstition and unilaterally bent
on destroying Science-with-a-Big-S and keeping people ignorant. Many
accusation are outright fabrications or comic book worthy oversimplification
that never seem to get checked by armchair historians (e.g., the Galileo
affair) because the vilification of imaginary enemies is too juicy to rectify.
Whatever apprehensions one might have about the faith, it is important to
remember that history requires proper interpretation by keeping in mind the
times and a sample of the relevant facts. For instance, if a medieval king
punishes a vociferous heretic (most were clergymen, btw) by imprisoning him,
we must try to understand the historical context. Was it a merciful punishment
for that time period? Why was heresy seen as a threat exactly (no facile
answers, please)? What did it mean to have your book placed on the Index
Librorum Prohibitorum (hint: probably not what you think if what you think is
the stock answer of reactionary anti-Catholics)? I mention these consideration
to inspire a search for a deeper understanding of the actual nature of such
things...for those who can and dare.

------
peterwwillis
tl;dr Hume could have been influenced by Buddhism but we don't know, and the
search to find out inspired this person to be passionate about something and
in the process learned to enjoy life again

~~~
ThomPete
That is selling this essay short on so many levels it's not even funny.

~~~
peterwwillis
tl;dr means _too long didn 't read_

------
fizixer
Again as a transhumanist, I would urge everyone to consider the sad reality
that the biggest reason, in recent decades, we haven't cheated death yet is
the pro-aging trance of 99.99% of humanity.

In blunt terms, you don't get to complain about midlife crisis and meaning of
life, and be offended by the suggestion of healthful longevity research (e.g.,
along SENS lines), at the same time. (NOTE: not saying achievement of
healthful longevity will solve all your problems, but cutting out the
discussion of an option is not helping either).

~~~
ebiester
Even if we completely solve aging as a physiological phenomenon, we will still
have to consider aging as a social one. In fact, we may have to understand
aging better, not worse.

What does it mean when you're 70 and have spent the first 50 years in a
relationship that dissolves? Does that change whether you're in the body of a
70 or a 20 year old?

Further, accepting the current reality of aging does not mean that the same
people are offended by longevity research. These are unrelated issues.

