The More You Try, The Worse You Feel | On Mood Swings

Wise people of the past have emphasized the impermanence of things. Consider Marcus Aurelius, repeatedly contemplating the transience of everything and how we all eventually fall away in the face of death. Or how Lao Tzu mentioned that a violent wind doesn’t last for the whole morning, and rain could last long but not forever.

We just have to look at the changes in our environment, the seasons, and the state of our bodies to see that nothing remains the same. But what about our mental states? Don’t they continually change as well?

In fact, they do. And sometimes, they fluctuate so quickly and abruptly that they make us suffer. These kinds of emotional fluctuations are called ‘mood swings’.

Mood swings can be very unpleasant. And when extreme, they can severely impact our quality of life. But where do these changing emotional states come from?

Are they triggered by external events, like a traffic jam or a financial setback? Or do other causes play a role? And what can we do about mood swings?

Many philosophers have been contemplating these questions and have come up with different answers. This video explores mood swings through the lens of philosophy. Generally, mood swings just plainly suck.

One moment, you feel fine, or even great, about your life. Things flow naturally, and you’re moving with the rhythm of the universe as a flourishing part of it. Sure, minor inconveniences come along your path, such as your dog defecating in the middle of the living room or the guy cutting you off in traffic.

Still, although slightly annoying, these things do not affect your overall contentment with the moment. They don’t ruin your day, don’t suddenly bring up past hurts, and don’t make you feel hopeless about the future. It’s like you’re a smiling rock in the ocean, unmoved by the violence of the waves.

But next thing you know, the world that seemed so bright before now looks bleak. It’s like you are going against the flow, obstacles come your way, and misfortunes such as bad traffic or a slow internet connection hit you like concrete slabs hitting cars when thrown off a bridge. Your mobile hotspot not working reminds you that you always suffer from internet problems, and you wonder why the gods destined you for a life of ongoing bad luck, unlike other people whose lives seem just fine.

Mood swings come in different amplitudes. Some are minor and quickly moving. Others have peaks as high as Mount Everest, only to descend into the depths of Hell, where we experience significant, deep despair about life, which may even inhibit us from doing our daily activities; some even fail to get out of bed.

Mood swings are no joke. In the highest of highs and lowest of lows, we may do things we later regret. When we’re riding the high of euphoria, we might spend a ridiculous amount of money on things we’d otherwise never buy.

On the other hand, during our lowest ebbs, we may wish we never existed and might engage in self-destructive behaviors as a misguided attempt to alleviate our pain. Therefore, mood swings, in many cases, are not just unpleasant; they can be highly self-destructive. Take addictions, for example, which are essentially just coping mechanisms for one’s unpleasant, often agitated states of being.

That’s why many people drink when they’re down but also drink when they’re overjoyed, for example, because they’ve got something to celebrate. And mood swings don’t just potentially wreak havoc on oneself but also affect others. It’s not evil to vent about life to others now and then or show one’s feelings, but continual exposure to one’s fluctuating moods can strain relationships.

As they say, moods are contagious. And who wants to be around Pessimistic Pete and Debby Downer all the time? So, while the misery of mood swings may be apparent, the reasons behind them are complex, involving our biology, life experiences, feelings, and how we view the world.

As we look at mood swings through a philosophical lens, can we shed light on why we have them? The Stoics often describe Lady Fortuna, the goddess of chance and luck, as a capricious, volatile entity. She’s merciless.

She allows things like poverty, death, and violence to afflict those who inhabit the Earth. She makes parents lose a child because of illness while suffering financial problems because they can’t afford the healthcare costs. She plays people as if they’re part of a sadistic game, handing out crumbs of luck only to take them back without warning.

No wonder many people are miserable. No wonder, being amidst such changing fates, our moods swing. I just described the Stoic view of a volatile world that subjects us to luck and chance.

Although we can influence this world, we cannot control it. Fate occurs as it will. And so, we ultimately cannot stop misfortune from happening, no matter how much security we build around ourselves.

No one is secure. There is no safe space. Even the deepest, remotest bomb shelter won’t protect us from bad things happening.

The Stoics acknowledge our environment has a role in our moods, but this comes with a caveat. It’s not the circumstances ‘in themselves’ that cause how we feel. It’s our attitudes toward these circumstances.

So, why do our moods swing, according to the Stoics? Two words: desire and aversion. Epictetus explains this in a very logical way, and I quote: Remember that following desire promises the attainment of that of which you are desirous; and aversion promises the avoiding that to which you are averse.

However, he who fails to obtain the object of his desire is disappointed, and he who incurs the object of his aversion wretched. End quote. In short, the Stoics argue that how we think about (or our ideas and attitudes towards) circumstances dictates our moods.

So, when we foster desire and aversion toward these circumstances, our moods fluctuate. After all, fate is pushing us in all directions. If we try to resist fate or want something out of it, we let our happiness and unhappiness (thus, our moods) depend on it.

When circumstances are good, we’re happy. When they’re bad, we’re unhappy. And thus, we give birth to mood swings.

Essentially, we have become slaves of circumstances and are destined to suffer. Buddhism, a religion originating from around the same period as Stoicism, would agree with the Stoics that our thoughts (or minds) cause how we feel. Our untamed monkey minds jump from one thought to another, leading us to rumination, worry, and anxiety.

The Buddhists observed that the root of suffering, including our mood swings, lies in our attachments. We can see the connection between mood swings and attachment in different ways. First, we see that (similar to what the Stoics point out) if we attach ourselves to externals such as other people, money, and material possessions, we’ll be in trouble sooner or later.

The Buddha taught about the concept of Anicca, or impermanence, meaning that everything is transient. Therefore, attaching ourselves to external things leads to suffering and can cause our moods to swing, for example, when we lose someone we love or by the mere thought of losing that person. But as everything is transient, so are our moods.

For whatever reason, we feel different at different moments of the day. Unless you’re enlightened, the five mental hindrances (desire, anger, stagnation, restlessness & worry, and doubt) will affect us. That’s the bad news.

The good news is that, as with everything, the problematic emotions are impermanent. They will come but disappear as well. And that’s kind of the nature of mood swings: change, impermanence, transience.

Being too attached to a good mood eventually leads to the worsening of a lesser mood. Two arrows have hit you: firstly, the initial decline in mood and, secondly, your dissatisfaction with that declining mood. Considering the wisdom of the Stoics and Buddhists, let’s take a closer look at the external circumstances to which we respond.

What exactly do we dislike about the world so much that it affects our moods? What makes us miserable? For the existentialist philosophers, the answer is obvious: it’s the meaninglessness of it all, the absurdity of existence, the human reality of living on a desolate rock amidst an indifferent universe for no particular reason.

Of course, we’re dreadful when we realize our lives don’t amount to anything! Especially when there’s this absurd, unreasonable human desire for overarching meaning, which, and that’s the tragic part, will forever remain unanswered. So, we try to distract ourselves.

We engage in work, telling ourselves it’s somehow meaningful; we meet someone attractive, fall in love, and convince ourselves we’ve found the meaning of life in that person; or we just drink to the point that we aren’t even capable of contemplating the meaninglessness of our lives anymore. Others find answers in religion and adopt a belief system that eases their existential angst. But from the existentialist viewpoint, chances are high that, at some point, ‘meaninglessness’ stares us in the eyes again, reminding us that life is pointless, nothing we do matters in the grand scheme of things, that there’s no salvation, no afterlife: there’s just existence.

This idea suggests a large degree of freedom, as we’re free to shape existence how we see fit. But it also implies the inherent meaninglessness of our existence. These recurring reminders of life’s meaninglessness, clashing with a fierce desire for meaning, may cause deep despair.

Another philosophical way to look at mood swings is through Epicureanism. To the ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus, a mental state named ‘ataraxia’ was the foundation of a happy life, which we could achieve by carefully managing our desires and not falling for irrational fears. For example, if we follow unnecessary, unnatural desires, we walk an impossible path toward contentment.

Our happiness requires satisfying a desire for things difficult to achieve and maintain without a natural limit. An example of this is the pursuit of extreme wealth and fame; these things are fragile and difficult to get. We see that people pursuing these things mostly want more.

When we earn a million, we want two million. But emotional instability lurks around the corner when we let our happiness depend on such fickle circumstances. Every little sign of losing the fame and reputation we have, and these signs are inevitable, affects us.

Add to that irrational fears such as the fear of death, pain, or poverty, and we have set ourselves up for misery. Aside from our attitudes toward external circumstances (such as life’s meaning or the lack thereof), what else can cause our moods to swing? Could, for example, biological factors be at play?

The philosophical views we discussed so far argue that external factors (and our attitude towards them) influence our moods, whether it's meaninglessness or fate. But the behavior of our moods also depends on internal factors, such as biology and mental health issues. This is a tricky topic, as it relates more to psychology and neuroscience than philosophy, so I’ll discuss it with great prudence.

But I think it’s safe to say that internal factors such as genetics or mental disorders play a significant role in mood swings. These internal factors can arouse mood swings, seemingly for no reason. An internal factor many people experience, including myself, is the influence of sleep on mood.

A night of inadequate sleep usually has a negative influence on my mood. In such cases, I often wake up feeling down for no particular external reason. Worse still, there are mental illnesses such as Borderline Personality Disorder and Bipolar Disorder, which signify emotional dysregulation during which moods tend to shift in extreme ways.

And then, there’s biology, which causes some people to be genetically more prone to moodiness than others. The internal factors don’t just cause moodiness for no reason other than bodily chemistry at work; they also influence how we relate to external factors. For example, a person with Borderline Personality Disorder (which is prominent in my family, by the way) can react explosively to an external event, which non-disordered people wouldn’t do.

Also, someone dealing with high sensitivity can be easily overwhelmed by external stimuli; too much of it can negatively affect this person’s mood. So, to a certain extent, factors beyond our thinking influence our mood, which seems to contradict what the Stoics propose. But in reality, the Stoics acknowledge the existence of internal factors, such as mental illness and so-called “pre-emotions,” which cause involuntary ‘responses.

’ Professor Margaret Graver describes this in her book called Stoicism and Emotions, and I quote: (In addition,) there are some feelings which Stoics count as strictly involuntary, below-threshold responses. These include not only low-level physiological events such as blanching or shuddering but even some feelings manifested in tears or laughter and, remarkably, many responses to literature, music, and the visual arts. And just as there are below-threshold responses which are not yet emotions, so also there are over-the-top responses which are no longer emotions but belong rather to the category of mental illness.

End quote. So, interestingly enough, the Stoics saw these over-the-top responses caused by mental illness no longer as emotions. In their eyes, true emotions (or passions) are consequences solely of our reasoning.

The problem with many of these internal factors is that they’re often very difficult (if not impossible) to change. When it comes to genetics, for example, we’ve no other choice than dealing with the cards we’ve been dealt with. Some win the genetic lottery; others are less fortunate.

The idea of determinism comes into play here. Determinism is the idea that all events, including our own actions, are determined by preexisting causes. When we apply determinism to biology, we can argue that our genetic makeup largely decides our behavior and personality.

For example, specific genes associated with a high risk of Bipolar Disorder increase the chances of individuals born with these genes suffering from this mental illness. Thus, their predisposition for extreme mood swings (from mania to depression) has been written in their genetic code. It has been biologically determined.

It’s part of what the Stoics call ‘Fate. ’ Mood swings are complex. We’re still discovering new things regarding how they work and what we can do about them.

But whether our emotional fluctuations stem from biological factors or our attitudes toward circumstances, is there any wisdom from philosophy that could help us manage them? Many (if not most) philosophers who shared their worldviews and their ramblings on meaning and purpose also came up with suggestions on how to live. In some cases, they described in great detail how to manage our moods and achieve inner peace.

Epicurus, for example, suggested that we focus on abundant, simple pleasures as a means to be content because they’re both easy to obtain and our desire for them easy to satisfy. Because of this, good moods occur as easily as bad moods are prevented. I created a video about Epicurus and his philosophy to learn more about him.

The Stoics promoted virtues such as modesty, self-control, cheerfulness, and honesty. Focusing on being ‘good,’ which lies within our control, eventually leads to the best mental states. Focusing on what’s not in our control, things like money, fame, and material goods, leads to dependence on the whimsical nature of Fate, attachment to things that are not ours, and the unstable mental states that follow.

I’ve created many videos on Stoic philosophy if you wish to learn more. Buddhist monk Ajahn Nyanamoli shares interesting viewpoints about depression in one of his videos. He says that it’s important to recognize that there may be external reasons that influence depression, but they’re not the cause.

Rather, depression is a mental state that influences how we regard those external reasons. We can uproot depression, and any unpleasant mental state for that matter, if we train our minds to become less entangled with circumstances. One of the methods he proposes is ‘sense restraint.

’ He also mentions that if depression is already affecting us, we shouldn’t resist its unpleasantness. Because if we don’t resist it (and thus accept it), then it cannot get a hold of us. “Accepting a negative experience is a positive experience,” so to speak, which we could apply to any unpleasant mental state.

I’ve put a link to his video in the description. Needless to say, many systems of thought provide tools that could help us manage our mood swings, which are also outside of philosophy. Many religious traditions also offer ways to feel better.

And isn’t modern psychology largely geared toward improving one’s moods, which resulted in forms of therapy such as Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Dialectical Behavioral Therapy, Jungian Analysis, Shadow Work, et cetera? It only shows that humans have been concerned with mood fluctuations for a long time. ‘Mood swings’ are of all ages.

Roman Emperors had mood swings, as did composers like Beethoven, monarchs like Henry VIII, and writers like Charles Bukowski. Even the gods were moody sometimes, thus shaping the destinies of the many, often driven by turbulent emotions. Thank you for watching.