Hypomania

In today’s New York Times there is a curious article about “hypomania” – a condition in which individuals feel energized, in an elevated mood, eager to overcome obstacles and launch new projects all the time (some refer to this as “exuberance”), without ever experiencing the emotional crashes typical of a manic-depressive state. I am wondering whether such a neurological abnormality should be rewarded by existing socioeconomic systems at the expense of others – as it is now. Oh, some will say, but through their efforts those hypomaniacs benefit others and the larger society, don’t they (Henry Ford is cited as a typical carrier of the syndrome)? Maybe to some extent they do, but what if we have reached a stage where restlessness and innovation in some areas (like neuroscience, nanotechnology, communications and information technology, etc.) are beginning to undermine common notions of what it means to be human? Plus, in a competitive environment there will be increased pressure on individuals to become hypomanic even if they have not been neurologically wired as such through their adolescence. What if I don’t want to be in overdrive all the time? What if I don’t want to be “normal” in this new sense of the word where an artificially created neurological/mental state comes to be seen as essential to competitive success, widely accepted, and thus – normal? The consequences are obvious – I’ll be punished with decreased income, status, etc. Is that right? Can a society of hyperactive hypomaniacs (or one dominated by such types) even stop to ponder similar questions? What about all those other kinds of performance enhancement therapies we’ll be pressured (or seduced) to embrace – from stimulant drugs to neuroimplants and genetic modification? What happens to individual liberty in a socioeconomic context which rewards what a blog pundit calls “neurocompetitive advantage” – as a vehicle for increased and ceaseless productivity?