], [>], [>]
Sangamo Journal, [>], [>], [>]
Saturday Review, and Randall, [>]
Sayre, Jim, [>]
Schizophrenia, time of emergence of, [>]
Schumann, Robert, [>]
Science, nineteenth-century progress in, [>]
Scott, John M., [>], [>]–[>]
Scott, Sir Walter, [>]
Scott, Winfield, [>]
Seasonal affective disorder (SAD), [>]. [>]
Second Great Awakening, [>], [>]
Sedgwick, Ellery, [>]
Self
Lincoln’s view of, [>]
See also Individualism
Self-Destruction in the Promised Land (Kushner), [>]
Self-education, of Lincoln, [>]–[>]
Self-improvement and self-advancement
culture of, [>]
insanity seen as danger from, [>]–[>]
and failure identity, [>]–[>]
and Lincoln, [>]–[>], [>]
and fear of failure, [>], [>]
and fear of insanity, [>], [>]
Logan’s advice on, [>]
mesmerism as, [>]
“Self-made man,” [>]–[>]
and insanity, [>]–[>]
Lincoln seen as, [>]
Sellers, John, [>]
Senate, U.S.
Lincoln’s attempt for (1855), [>]–[>]
Lincoln’s campaign for against Douglas (1858), [>], [>]–[>], [>]–[>]
Separate Baptism, [>]
Seward, William, [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>]–[>]
Shakespeare, William
and fatalism, [>]
and humor as therapy, [>]
Lincoln’s preferences in, [>], [>]
Richard II, [>]
Shalala, Donna, [>]
Sharp, Granville, [>]
Sherman, William Tecumseh, [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>]
Shields, James, [>]
Shiloh, battle of, [>]
Shneidman, Edwin, [>], [>]
Short, James, [>], [>]
Shutes, Milton, [>]
Simon, John Y., [>]
Simon, Paul, [>]
“Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God” (Edwards sermon), [>]
Sisson, Caroline, [>]
Six Months in the White House (Carpenter), [>]
Slater, Lauren, [>]
Slave power
and Douglas, [>]
and Lincoln on Kansas-Nebraska Act, [>]
Lincoln’s confronting of, [>]–[>]
and pecuniary interest, [>]
Republican party against in Illinois, [>]
Slavery, [>]–[>]
and John Brown’s raid, [>]
and Civil War, [>]–[>]
and Dred Scott case, [>], [>]
and 1850 compromise, [>]
and 1860 election, [>]
and Kansas-Nebraska Act, [>]–[>], [>]–[>], [>], [>], [>]–[>]
and Kansas violence, [>]–[>]
and Lecompton constitution, [>]
and Lincoln, [>], [>], [>], [>], [>]–[>], [>]–[>], [>]–[>], [>]
and Cooper Union speech, [>]–[>]
December 1862 message to Congress, [>]
emancipation as Civil War aim, [>]
and Emancipation Proclamation, [>]–[>]
“House Divided” speech, [>]
in letter to Speed, [>]–[>]
and Lincoln-Douglas debates, [>]–[>]
plan to encourage slaves to flee to Union lines, [>], [>]. [>]
and racism, [>]–[>], [>], [>]–[>] (n.140)
and slow pace of reform, [>]
and Missouri Compromise, [>]–[>], [>], [>]
racism allied with opposition to, [>]
regulation of in territories as issue, [>]
spectrum of opposition to, [>]–[>]
and Uncle Tom’s Cabin, [>]
Slavney, Phillip R., [>]
Sloth, and melancholy, [>]
Smith, James, [>]
Smith-Rosenberg, Carroll, [>]
Socrates, Aristotle on, [>]–[>]
Solitude: A Return to the Self (Storr), [>]
Solomon, Andrew, [>]
Southern Literary Messenger, [>]
Sparrow, Elizabeth (aunt), [>]
Sparrow, Thomas (uncle), [>]
Speed, James, [>], [>]
Speed, Joshua Fry, [>]–[>], [>]–[>], [>]–[>]
biographical material on, [>] (n. 28)
depression and nervous breakdown of, [>], [>], [>], [>]
Lincoln’s counsel on, [>], [>]–[>], [>], [>]
and Matilda Edwards, [>]–[>], [>], [>]
1862 visit of, [>], [>]–[>]
engagement and marriage of, [>], [>], [>]–[>], [>], [>]
introduces Lincoln to Edwards family, [>]–[>]
and Lincoln correspondence with Drake, [>]
on Lincoln and religion, [>]
on Lincoln and Mary Todd, [>], [>], [>]
and Lincoln’s depression, [>]
on Lincoln’s granting appeal, [>]
Lincoln’s letters to, [>], [>]–[>], [>]–[>], [>], [>], [>], [>]–[>], [>], [>]–[>], [>]
and Lincoln’s poem on suicide, [>], [>]
Lincoln’s relationship with ended, [>], [>]–[>]
and Lincoln’s sexuality, [>], [>]–[>]
and Lincoln’s visit to Farmington, [>]–[>]
literature on, [>]. [>]
on mother’s gift of Bible to Lincoln, [>]
and slavery, [>]
Speed, Lucy Gilmer (mother), [>], [>], [>]
Speed, Mary (sister), [>], [>], [>]
Speed, William (brother), [>]
Speed family, emotional difficulty in, [>]
Spoon River Anthology (Masters), [>]
Springfield, Illinois, [>]
Douglas and opponents speak in, [>], [>]
limited social activity in, [>]
Lincoln in, [>]–[>], [>]
Lincoln’s parting tribute to, [>]–[>]
Lincoln’s plans to return to, [>]
medications bought in, [>]
mesmerism and similar movements in, [>]–[>]
Standard Oil Company, Lincoln pamphlet published by, [>]
Stanton, Edwin M., [>]
Stevenson, Nathaniel, [>]
Storr, Anthony, [>]
Storytelling, by Lincoln, [>], [>]–[>], [>], [>], [>]
as youth, [>]
Stowe, Harriet Beecher, [>], [>],172
Strozier, Charles, [>]–[>]
Stuart, John Todd, [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>]
Stuart, Margaret, [>]
Styron, William, [>], [>], [>] (n.40)
Sublimation, as adaptation, [>]
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, [>]
Suffering
Aeschylus on, [>]
and greatness, [>]
Lincoln sees as agent of growth, [>], [>]
and Lincoln’s greatness, [>], [>]
See also Depression; Melancholy; Melancholy of Abraham Lincoln
Suicide
of Meriwether Lewis, [>]
in Lincoln’s thoughts, [>], [>]–[>], [>], [>]
vs. desire to accomplish, [>], [>]
during first breakdown, [>], [>],167
and refraining from carrying knife, [>], [>], [>]
during second breakdown, [>], [>]
and “suicide watch,” [>], [>]
“Suicide’s Soliloquy, The,” [>]–[>], [>]
Sumner, Charles, [>]
Suppression, as adaptation, [>]
Sweetser, William, [>]
Swett, Leonard, [>], [>]
Syphilis, Lincoln’s fear of, [>]
Taggart, Jacob, [>]
Taming of the Shrew, The (Shakespeare), [>]
Taney, Roger, [>]
Tarbell, Ida, [>], [>]
Taylor, Zachary, [>], [>]
Technology, nineteenth-century progress in, [>]
Temperance movement, [>]
and Lincoln,
[>], [>]–[>]
Tenth Amendment, [>]
Terkel, Studs, [>]
Terror management theory, [>] (n.136)
Thomas, Benjamin, [>], [>]
Thoreau, Henry David, [>]
Tocqueville, Alexis de, [>]
Todd, Mary, [>]–[>], [>], [>]
Elizabeth Edwards on engagement of, [>]
premarriage life of, [>]
and Lincoln historians, [>], [>]
and Lincoln’s impulsiveness, [>]
on Lincoln’s melancholy, [>]
Lincoln’s pondering whether to marry, [>], [>]
Randalls on, [>], [>]–[>]
See also Lincoln, Mary
Todd, Robert, [>]
Tolstoy, Leo
Lincoln anecdote related by, [>]-[>]
mood disorder of, [>]
spiritual crisis and conversion of, [>]
Tripp, C. A., [>]
Trumbull, Lyman, [>], [>], [>], [>]
Twain, Mark, [>]
Uncle Tom’s Cabin (Stowe), [>]
United States
as “City on the Hill,” [>]
individualism in, [>]
liberty and mobility in, [>]
market revolution in, [>]–[>]
religious liberty in, [>]
scientific and technological progress in, [>]
Second Great Awakening in, [>]
self-improvement culture in, [>]–[>], [>]
slavery in, [>]–[>] (see also Slavery)
westward expansion of, [>]
University of Iowa Writers’ Workshop, mood disorders at, [>]
USA Today, [>]–[>]
Vaillant, George, [>], [>]
Vandalia, bill to replace as capital, [>]
Varieties of Religious Experience, The (James), [>], [>], [>]–[>]
Venereal disease, Lincoln’s fear of, [>]
Vicksburg, capture of, [>], [>]
Villard, Henry, [>], [>]
Vitalism, [>]
Wallace, Frances, [>]
Ward, Artemus, [>]
on Lincoln the rail-splitter, [>]. [>]
Washburne, Elihu, [>], [>]
Washington, George
in analysis of Lincoln’s dream, [>]
as freethinker, [>]
Washington Temperance Union, [>]–[>]
“Watchmaker God,” [>]–[>]
Webb, Edwin, [>], [>]
Webster, Daniel, [>], [>], [>], [>]
Weed, Samuel R., [>]
Weed, Thurlow, [>], [>]
Weik, Jesse, [>], [>], [>], [>]
Welles, Gideon, [>], [>]–[>]
Whig party, [>]
and Henry Clay for president, [>]
demise of, [>], [>]
in 1848 presidential race, [>]
and Know-Nothing group, [>], [>]
and Lincoln, [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>]
and Mexican-American War, [>]
Whig party (cont.) and reason, [>]
and slavery, [>], [>]
White, Horace, [>]
Whitney, Henry C., [>], [>]–[>], [>], [>], [>]–[>]
Widmer, John, [>]
Wilberforce, William, [>]
Wills, David, [>]
Wills, Garry, [>]
Wilson, Douglas, [>], [>], [>], [>]–[>], [>]
Wilson, Edmund, [>]
Wilson, Henry, [>]
Wilson, Robert L., [>]–[>], [>], [>], [>]
Wilson, Woodrow, [>]
Winkle, Kenneth, [>]
Winthrop, John, [>]
Wordsworth, William, [>]
Works Projects Administration (WPA), oral histories by, [>]
Young, James Harvey, [>]
Young Mr. Lincoln (motion picture), [>]
Zane, Charles, [>]
Zeus, as model for Lincoln statue, [>]
“You Remind Me of Charlie Munger”
Matchups and Magnet Places
Similarity is a good place for us to start, because common interests and sensibilities usually bring future partners together in the first place. I saw three kinds of meetings: an introduction made by a mutual acquaintance; an encounter at a place of common interest; and a seemingly chance meeting that turned out to be driven by a subterranean similarity.
In 1957, a twenty-seven-year-old investor in Omaha, Nebraska, pitched some family friends named Edwin and Dorothy Davis to join a fund he managed. Dr. Davis hardly seemed to listen. But after he conferred with his wife, they agreed they’d put in $100,000—most of their net worth, and a huge sum to the investor, Warren Buffett, whose portfolio at the time came to $300,000.
Buffett asked Dr. Davis why he’d take such a big risk. “You remind me of Charlie Munger,” Davis replied. Two years later, when Munger, a thirty-five-year-old lawyer in Los Angeles, returned to his hometown of Omaha for a visit, the Davis family arranged for the two men to meet. Thus began the partnership behind what’s probably the most successful investment operation in the history of capitalism.
The human mind naturally matches like and like. It satisfies a primal need. It’s like those memory games children play. You turn over a card showing a watermelon, and a sudden appetite arises: seeking the other watermelon card feels as natural and urgent as breathing.
In pretty much the same way, people match friends they think have things in common. That’s why one day in 1971, a teenager named Bill Fernandez introduced a sixteen-year-old high-school friend named Steve to another Steve, a twenty-year-old college kid who lived on Fernandez’s block. “One day,” Fernandez remembered, “Steve Jobs bicycled over to hang out with me and do electronics projects in the garage, and out in front was [Steve] Wozniak washing his car. So I thought to myself, Okay, this Steve is an electronics buddy. He’s an electronics buddy. They’d probably like to meet each other.”
Sometimes introductions spring from practical needs. When Józef Kowalski discovered that his young Polish friend Marie Skłodowska, a physics student in Paris, needed lab space, he thought she might get help from a physicist he knew named Pierre Curie.
In a screenplay about great partners, a conduit like Edwin Davis or Bill Fernandez or Józef Kowalski would be excised, because we cherish the romantic notions of matches made by fate.
But if there is such a thing as fate, it works through human agents. Unlike in the movies, where the girl who will change the hero’s life just walks up to him in the doctor’s waiting room, most significant real-life connections emerge from other connections. Consider a study by the sociologists Duncan J. Watts and Gueorgi Kossinets on how friendships form on a university campus. Roughly 45 percent of new pairs met through mutual friends, and another 41 percent of new pairs met through mutual friends and shared contexts (like classes). The formation of new ties varied with network distance, meaning that individuals who were separated by two intermediaries (that is, they shared neither friends nor classes) were thirty times less likely to become friends than individuals who were separated by just one intermediary.
The fact that sublime, life-changing introductions often emerge from other, more mundane relationships may seem obvious to the socially sophisticated, but it’s a crucial lesson for those of us who seek to connect from a place of relative isolation. As John Cacioppo and William Patrick observed in their book Loneliness: Human Nature and the Need for Social Connection, people starved for intimacy tend to lose their bearings even in ordinary encounters. Frustrated with the awkwardness they feel, they may retreat further. The way up from the bottom of this social staircase is not to leap straight for the top but to simply take the first step: Say hello to the guy in the elevator. Make eye contact in the conference room. For God’s sake, call your mom. Even the smallest moment of authentic contact can be elevating. Like a pianist warming up with scales before tackling a sonata, we can use social niceties or bland factual exchanges to set ourselves up for the possibility of something more advanced—sharing a risky idea, say.
Just as loneliness can be a downward spiral, so can connection whorl us up into higher sphe
res. When we get moving, we can move quickly, because, as the science of social networks shows, we’re even more broadly interconnected than we realize. A 2011 study of Facebook found that, of its 721 million users at the time, the average number of links from one arbitrarily selected person to another was 4.74—less, even, than the “six degrees of separation” made famous in John Guare’s play of that name.
But making those links isn’t necessarily easy. In fact, some clusters of society can be devilishly hard to penetrate. One key to fluid movement is what the psychologist Karen Fingerman calls “consequential strangers.” These are people outside your inner circle who have enough interest in you to make connections but enough distance from you to be exposed to interesting people in other spheres. According to a study by the sociologist Mark Granovetter, well over half of a sample of professionals in Newton, Massachusetts, got their jobs through personal connections. And more than 83 percent of the personal connections that led to jobs involved only occasional or rare contact.
Lincoln's Melancholy Page 52