Posted by Wittgenstein on September 9, 2007, at 5:39:46
In reply to Re: 'moments of meeting' » Dinah, posted by twinleaf on September 9, 2007, at 1:03:37
I find this an interesting topic - but what I wish I understood was what exactly people mean when they write about their 'younger selves/parts' or 'inner child'. Is this the distinction between ourselves now remembering and rationalising our past experiences and how these experiences actually felt and were rationalised at the time we experienced them as children? Or is it referring to a greater dissociation?
I find I can hold my earlier memories in mind but can only bear to be in touch with how it really felt or parts of how it really felt at the various points of my childhood for short intense periods - normally these memories are distanced or buffered. Being in touch in this way causes a great deal of pain and consumes such an amount of energy.
I see the analogy of a spaceman walking on the moon - most of the time is spent in the air but every now and again he touches back down to the surface briefly before propelling himself away again. Is this the dichotomy that people describe or am I missing something bigger (I realise I'm being simplistic here - hope this doesn't seem a stupid question or offensive). I.e. suppressing these feelings or allowing oneself to 'be' and 'feel' how that younger self felt.
Witti
poster:Wittgenstein
thread:781609
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/psycho/20070904/msgs/781753.html