![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 20 to 44 of 44. Go back in thread:
Posted by dj on June 26, 2000, at 7:21:19
In reply to Mind/Body/Dominance (Lefty Here), posted by shar on June 24, 2000, at 17:20:49
> It's thought in some scientific communities that different sides of the body "hold" different functions due to cerebral organization. So, if one side of the body is noticeably different than the other, it could be due to dominance of the side (more likely to tense up the dominant arm or leg maybe) or due to the brain function the side is carrying out. (I did a paper on this many moons ago.)
>So, Shar, way back then or since did or have you (or anyone else) come across any writings on how one balances out these patterns so that one side does not dominate and distort hence knocking the balance out of whack?
Posted by shar on June 26, 2000, at 20:52:23
In reply to Re: Mind/Body/Dominance , posted by dj on June 26, 2000, at 7:21:19
> So, Shar, way back then or since did or have you (or anyone else) come across any writings on how one balances out these patterns so that one side does not dominate and distort hence knocking the balance out of whack?DJ
Hmmmm. I wonder if dominance necessarily equals distortion? For example, we know that the two sides of our bodies are not perfect mirror images of each other. Thus, if we tried to do an asana in which we were standing balanced on one foot, we would probably not be perfectly straight up and down. We would have to be a few mm's to the left or right, probably, in order to balance.So, it's anybody's guess if the brain balances in a similar way. It does a little more on the right to compensate for an absence on the left? I don't know, but that would seem fairly likely. The researchers had a very hard time calling anyone pure lefty or pure righty; most of us are in between somewhere. That's probably where our balance is.
And, it's hard to separate mind/body/spirit if we are talking about total balance (as in yin and yang). We don't see a lot in the universe or nature that is perfectly balanced (right=left), we see more right>left or left>right; so maybe the whole thing is a process rather than a phenomenon?
I didn't get the answer because I don't think anyone had asked that question. You are unique!
Namaste--
S
Posted by dj on June 26, 2000, at 22:54:38
In reply to Dominance and Distortion » dj, posted by shar on June 26, 2000, at 20:52:23
> I didn't get the answer because I don't think anyone had asked that question. You are unique!
>Ahhhh, but are we not all in our balances, similar yet different, the same yet not? Methinks yes!
Very good thoughtful answer on your behalf, regardless. I imagine that if one side gets too distinct from the other that our systems go out of whack in attempting to correct course as they counterbalance from one extreme to another.
However,a small adjustment here and there and we stay on course generally, I believe. Though if we don't make those small adjustments conistently we can gradually tend toward imbalance, just like water coursing over a rock and wearing it down invariably, day by day, molecule by molecule.
I've been re-reading "Zen and the Art of Motorcylce Maintenance for about the 10th time in over the past 25 years or so. And I'm still learning and understanding more and more from my heavily annotated copy, which informs, delights and startles me consistently and thoughtfully. Zap!
Namaste!
dj
Posted by KarenB on June 26, 2000, at 23:38:42
In reply to Re: ice water - OUCH!, posted by CarolAnn on June 24, 2000, at 10:10:20
> My experience: it hurt like heck and all it did was make me dizzy! Chalk it up to one more "quick fix" that doesn't work, I guess. It's still an interesting idea though. CarolAnn
Wrong ear, CarolAnn.:)
Karen
Posted by Sara T on June 27, 2000, at 9:20:58
In reply to Mind/Body/Dominance (Lefty Here), posted by shar on June 24, 2000, at 17:20:49
> But, problems were believed to stem from this feature. Left-handed people are significantly more likely than "people in general" to be found in psychiatric populations (hospitals). And, lefties tend to be overrepresented in certain occupations, such as architecture, and the arts. The docs cited the different cerebral organization as contributing to this.
>
> However, to throw a wrench into things, docs have a hard time determining handedness because it is unusual to find "pure" lefties or "pure" righties (but moreso pure lefties). And that begs the question of ambidexterity and how that plays out.
>
> Nobody had looked at ambidexies much when I turned in the paper.
>
> SharShar -
I'm a lefty too, and I have a degree in Art and Architecture, as well as having a rich history of depression, anxiety and ADD. Hmmm....Actually, the is a recent book out on handiness, I think it's called THE LEFT HANDED SYNDROME. I've also found a bunch of web sites for left handers and studies of handiness. Some have a test you can take to see just how left or right dominated you are. I turned out to be mildly left handed and close to ambidextrous.
My daughter is also left handed and very left dominant.
Sara T
Posted by shar on June 27, 2000, at 15:26:21
In reply to Re: Mind/Body/Dominance (Lefty Here), posted by Sara T on June 27, 2000, at 9:20:58
I turned out to be mildly left handed and close to ambidextrous.
>
> My daughter is also left handed and very left dominant.
>
> Sara TSara,
Well, your educational background and mental health sure back up what the docs said! Pretty unbelievable -- art and architecture!!
I wonder if kids now can be more left handed than when I was growing up (50's) and starting school. I was allowed to write with my left hand, but it was a right handed world. I wonder if your daughter has more lefty latitude that may allow her to choose her left hand more?
I am very ambidextrous, as is my mom who would have been a lefty but had to use her right hand in school, ...the bad old days.
I was married to a carpenter who was profoundly left-handed/footed/etc. It was so weird to see him cut with scissors and sharpen a pencil and stir things, etc. with his left hand! And, to use power tools, hammers, etc. I'm a righty for all of that!
Secretly, I like being a little different....
Shar
Posted by Sara T on June 27, 2000, at 18:32:08
In reply to Re: Mind/Body/Dominance (Lefty Here) » Sara T, posted by shar on June 27, 2000, at 15:26:21
> I turned out to be mildly left handed and close to ambidextrous.
> >
> > My daughter is also left handed and very left dominant.
> >
> > Sara T
>
> Sara,
>
> Well, your educational background and mental health sure back up what the docs said! Pretty unbelievable -- art and architecture!!
>
> I wonder if kids now can be more left handed than when I was growing up (50's) and starting school. I was allowed to write with my left hand, but it was a right handed world. I wonder if your daughter has more lefty latitude that may allow her to choose her left hand more?
>
> I am very ambidextrous, as is my mom who would have been a lefty but had to use her right hand in school, ...the bad old days.
>
> I was married to a carpenter who was profoundly left-handed/footed/etc. It was so weird to see him cut with scissors and sharpen a pencil and stir things, etc. with his left hand! And, to use power tools, hammers, etc. I'm a righty for all of that!
>
> Secretly, I like being a little different....
>
> SharShar,
I don't know how she'll be with writing, she likes to draw. She starts Kinder in the fall. I am hoping though that she doesn't have any learning disorders like dyslexia or ADD. I say this because she also had some mild dyspraxia (problems integrating bilateral large motor movement and motor planning, like pedaling a tricycle). So I have already had her in Occupational Therapy.
She's carrying on the family traditions too. She's got some real anxiety and phobias and will be entering a therapy treatment for it this summer.
My other child, a boy, is right dominant, and he's got Asperger's Syndrome (a mild form of autism). Is this from having a left-handed mother?
Sara T.
Posted by shar on June 27, 2000, at 20:19:13
In reply to Re: Mind/Body/Dominance (Lefty Here), posted by Sara T on June 27, 2000, at 18:32:08
Sara,
In my research there was never any link made about "passing along" cerebral organization. I would be quite surprised if there was a connection between mom's handedness and child's symptomology.There weren't any studies that I found that talked about that. Especially since the docs were still trying to figure out handedness in the originial person and what that might mean. The offspring will have to wait.
I would be more tempted to look in the direction of genetics, but that is also a fuzzy field. No one has ever come up with a good answer for the person who has all the genes but not the disease or problems one would expect. And, the person who doesn't have the genes but has the problem.
At any rate, I hope it is not something you are feeling guilty about. If so, don't! That won't do you or your kiddos any good, and there's no evidence for it!
Shar
Posted by shar on June 27, 2000, at 20:30:36
In reply to Re: Dominance, Distortion n Zen..., posted by dj on June 26, 2000, at 22:54:38
Yes, dj, I agree if we are always having to make corrections, never really in balance, we will eventually know beyond doubt that we are wacky and/or out of whack!
When I first read Zen, in my misspent youth, there were parts I got and others I didn't. One of the ones that I did not get was the writing an essay about the brick. Now, as age and time have weathered (ripened?) me and expanded my horizons, I think I could easily write that essay! There are so many perspectives now, that weren't there in my younger days.
It is a wonderful book!
One of my favorite books that is sort of Zen for the clueless is called "A Gradual Awakening" by Cohen (I believe) who was a student of Ram Dass. It was the first time I understood what was meant by Zen or Dao or whatever school of thought. Or what Being meant.
Namaste--
Shar
Posted by anita on June 28, 2000, at 17:37:51
In reply to Re: Some 2-brained theories a radical approach to..., posted by noa on June 22, 2000, at 12:28:46
Hi Noa,
I have a very similar problem with "different states" of being or identity. I seem to have distinct "Anitas", mostly based on mood and style of thinking, and ultimately in behavior (e.g., social or withdrawn). My psychiatrist actually thought I might have MPD, but I don't; despite the discreet states, I am always "Anita", and I have a strong sense of general identity.
I have, however, mild dissociative issues, mostly derealization and a general spacing out. Do you have these? Technically I've been diagnosed with DID, NOS. What's interesting to me is that when I go thru periods of _not_ experiencing these "state" shifts, I am rather dysfunctional, unemotional, and apathetic. SSRIs seem to do this to me. I'd be interested to hear more about your experience -- feel free to email me directly!
anita
> The theory of a more mature and less mature hemisphere in an individual is intriguing to me, as some of the work I do in therapy is trying to integrate different "states" I experience. They are not really true dissociative states, but in terms of how I experience myself and the world emotionally, they are fairly distinct. Over time, they are less separate from each other. Kind of like going from a tv that requires you to change the channel altogether to one that has a split screen, or at least a preview inset. Or at least maybe two sets on different channels in the same room.
>
> I could see this laterality approach fitting with my experience of different states. One state is definitely more akin to an immature, nonverbal, egocentric way of seeing things, while the other major state (there are variations of these two basic states) is more mature, verbal, logical, has more perspective taking ability, etc. The less mature state for me is associated with hopelessness and helplessness, while the more mature one is hopeful and in a more problem solving mode. It really affects cognitive skills, too, like looking at a concrete problem and reacting to it. In the less mature state, it is hard for me to differentiate the aspects, or parts of a problem, and to imagine a sequence of steps to take to solve it. In the more mature state, I can often automatically get into action by conceiving a problem solving sequence and just start on the first step and procede. In the immature state, I and the problem are not separate from each other. My difficulty approaching the problem BECOMES the problem, and then I lose all distinction--I am the problem, the problem is me. In the more mature state, I see the problem as outside myself with clear boundaries. In the immature state, I usually withdraw and try to avoid the problem. In the more mature state, I am more likely to just deal with the problem.
>
> Often I am in a state that is somewhere between these two polar ends of the continuum.
>
> I have heard of other techniques that attempt to cross over the hemispheres and sort of break patterns of behavior--I guess they fall into the category of occupational therapy or Alexander technique or Feldenkreis, perhaps? I really don't know. I only have a vague awareness of these approaches. Also, maybe even some of the Ericksonian hypnosis type of techniques--Cindy, any thoughts?
Posted by noa on June 28, 2000, at 18:42:28
In reply to To Noa re. different states, posted by anita on June 28, 2000, at 17:37:51
Like you, I don't feel my identity is fractured in any way, either. There is a dissociative quality to what I experience, but it is entirely in the emotional experience of myself.
When I was on Prozac, I noticed I was relatively unemotional. I couldn't cry even when it would have been appropriate, and it felt like a loss.
On the meds I use now, that is not the case, and I am able to experience the full range of emotions. But because I still struggle with getting lost in these "states" during some emotional experiences, it is a challenge to feel certain emotions without going into a downward spiral, a whirlwind of all the negative emotions. Similarly, the FEAR of getting lost in one of these states prevents me from allowing myself to experience my emotions more freely.
But I am getting much better at it.
I think true MPD, of the Sybil type, is quite rare, but I do think there are plenty of people who have some lack of integration of different experiences of themselves. To lump this into the category of DID is unfortunate, I think. I think there are many more types of dissociative experience besides identity disorders, and MPD or DID has too many controversial associations to it that it would be better to conceptualize a class of dissociative disorders differently than just under DID.
Posted by BBob on June 28, 2000, at 18:48:10
In reply to To Noa re. different states, posted by anita on June 28, 2000, at 17:37:51
Anita,Except for the diagnoses, your personality description fits me well. I enjoy a wide range of emotional conditions, which are not always that enjoyable. When I need to, I can engage almost anyone in dialogue sufficient to elicit otherwise guarded information, but if I don't discipline myself, as is required in a professional setting, I can be somewhat provacative. I tend toward both socialization and withdrawal. I attribute a lot of my makeup, especially low attachment and an ability to quickly attach and disengage, to my transient childhood. What little I know of my family history suggests those who taught me language and behavior at times practiced warlike behaviors and were often transient from one generation to the next, and within many specific generations.
The dissassociative state you mentioned is what caught my attention. To me, that is simply slipping into a sublinguistic category of thought. Some would say I am apathetic - perhaps based on my messy desk, piles of laundry and weeks worth of dishes. But socially, I tend to be concerned far beyond my apparent reach. Now, me, I consider that a positive trait, and one which I would instill in any responsible person. My hunch is we tend to focus more on our individuality and in dong so divest ourselves of the power to influence "the herd" and the direction of life in general.
In my thinking, dissassociative states tend to allow me to detach from ego and orient my behavior toward a far more broad set of human and life-oriented interests. The problem I sometimes suffer is that I will be thinking in my deeper brain and when I try to use language, I will slur or tangle words, which can cause loss of regard from some people.
My generalized social concern seems to have been instilled in me at an early age. I have at times found myself advocating the merits of non-verbal and non-logical thinking. I think maturity is a condition of our mid-brain and our cerebral cortex, though in various individuals, one or the other might be more poorly developed.
Anyway, that's my three cents on that.
....and a caviat, this is posted for consideration, not in an attempt to get advice about how to manage myself.
> Hi Noa,
>
> I have a very similar problem with "different states" of being or identity. I seem to have distinct "Anitas", mostly based on mood and style of thinking, and ultimately in behavior (e.g., social or withdrawn). My psychiatrist actually thought I might have MPD, but I don't; despite the discreet states, I am always "Anita", and I have a strong sense of general identity.
>
> I have, however, mild dissociative issues, mostly derealization and a general spacing out. Do you have these? Technically I've been diagnosed with DID, NOS. What's interesting to me is that when I go thru periods of _not_ experiencing these "state" shifts, I am rather dysfunctional, unemotional, and apathetic. SSRIs seem to do this to me. I'd be interested to hear more about your experience -- feel free to email me directly!
>
> anita
>
>
> > The theory of a more mature and less mature hemisphere in an individual is intriguing to me, as some of the work I do in therapy is trying to integrate different "states" I experience. They are not really true dissociative states, but in terms of how I experience myself and the world emotionally, they are fairly distinct. Over time, they are less separate from each other. Kind of like going from a tv that requires you to change the channel altogether to one that has a split screen, or at least a preview inset. Or at least maybe two sets on different channels in the same room.
> >
> > I could see this laterality approach fitting with my experience of different states. One state is definitely more akin to an immature, nonverbal, egocentric way of seeing things, while the other major state (there are variations of these two basic states) is more mature, verbal, logical, has more perspective taking ability, etc. The less mature state for me is associated with hopelessness and helplessness, while the more mature one is hopeful and in a more problem solving mode. It really affects cognitive skills, too, like looking at a concrete problem and reacting to it. In the less mature state, it is hard for me to differentiate the aspects, or parts of a problem, and to imagine a sequence of steps to take to solve it. In the more mature state, I can often automatically get into action by conceiving a problem solving sequence and just start on the first step and procede. In the immature state, I and the problem are not separate from each other. My difficulty approaching the problem BECOMES the problem, and then I lose all distinction--I am the problem, the problem is me. In the more mature state, I see the problem as outside myself with clear boundaries. In the immature state, I usually withdraw and try to avoid the problem. In the more mature state, I am more likely to just deal with the problem.
> >
> > Often I am in a state that is somewhere between these two polar ends of the continuum.
> >
> > I have heard of other techniques that attempt to cross over the hemispheres and sort of break patterns of behavior--I guess they fall into the category of occupational therapy or Alexander technique or Feldenkreis, perhaps? I really don't know. I only have a vague awareness of these approaches. Also, maybe even some of the Ericksonian hypnosis type of techniques--Cindy, any thoughts?
Posted by noa on June 28, 2000, at 18:58:05
In reply to Re: To Noa re. different states, posted by BBob on June 28, 2000, at 18:48:10
>
> ....and a caviat, this is posted for consideration, not in an attempt to get advice about how to manage myself.
Bobb, this is boundary setting elegantly executed. Well done.
Posted by dj on June 29, 2000, at 2:32:54
In reply to Re: Dominance, Distortion n Zen..., posted by shar on June 27, 2000, at 20:30:36
> When I first read Zen, in my misspent youth, there were parts I got and others I didn't. One of the ones that I did not get was the writing an >essay about the brick.
>
> It is a wonderful book!
>Tis a wonderful book and even more brilliant and insightful on each reading, though I have yet to connect with an essays on bricks in it...
Another equally wonderful book, in somewhat of the same vein is "Long Quiet Highway: Waking Up in America" by Natalie Goldberg. I saw her in a writing workshop a few years ago. Bang on! As she noted to someone who had lots of 'excuses' for not writing: "Just shutup and write!" As a link to "Zen and the Art..." Robert Pirsig's son who is featured in both books, though very briefly in the latter as he comes to a cruel and sad end.
I've been reading a bit of Krishnamurti lately. Now there's a brilliant man who writes like an insightful angel of elequence.
Posted by noa on June 29, 2000, at 8:33:19
In reply to Re: To Noa re. different states, posted by BBob on June 28, 2000, at 18:48:10
Bobb's post also reminded me that it is important to remember that dissociation does not always equal pathology. There are many ways that dissociation serves us well, both in everyday life and at times of stress or trauma.
I think that to be a good actor one probably needs to be able to dissociate somewhat, to become the character.
Many of us dissociate somewhat while driving--we go on autopilot and daydream and lose track of where we are, all the while we are getting to where we need to go.
Getting lost in thought is a form of dissociation.
Good writers probably need to do some form of dissociating to place themselves into scenes and to see things from the point of view of characters.
Same probably goes for people who need to visualize in order to create technological innovations--to be able to place oneself at different angles and see things not from ones own point of view, but as if one is part of the workings of a techological device or system.
I am sure there are many more examples.
Posted by Sara T on June 29, 2000, at 12:37:16
In reply to Re: Mind/Body/Dominance (Lefty Here), posted by shar on June 27, 2000, at 20:19:13
> At any rate, I hope it is not something you are feeling guilty about. If so, don't! That won't do you or your kiddos any good, and there's no evidence for it!
>
> SharThanks Shar,
No I don't feel guilty. It's all in the role of the dice. It was just my attempt at black humor because somedays I get discouraged.Sara T.
Posted by shar on June 29, 2000, at 20:59:19
In reply to Re: Mind/Body/Dominance (Lefty Here) » shar, posted by Sara T on June 29, 2000, at 12:37:16
> It is curious to me that what I've read in these posts about dissociation and what I've read elsewhere about Zen and some Eastern ways of thinking, it sounds like dissociation might be a healthy way of dealing with many situations. As Noa pointed out, it has been useful for many of us.
When Cohen talked about an exercise for Westerners (seeing one's feelings as a train, each feeling, each thought, a boxcar, going by in front of us while we watch) I think he was talking about a type of dissociation or transcendence. That's sort of disengagement that allows us to step back, count to 10 (figuratively speaking), see what is happening without getting drawn into the drama.
I think many of my own problems result from being too drawn in, taking things too personally, not being detached enough to see a larger picture, not feeling separate from others.
So, I agree that this can be a good thing, and can be cultivated.
Bbob: if you read this, isn't all thought sublinguistic? Or are there other types?
Just my ramblings.
S
Posted by dj on June 29, 2000, at 21:19:33
In reply to Zen and Learning Dissociation: Sara T, DJ, posted by shar on June 29, 2000, at 20:59:19
> I think many of my own problems result from being too drawn in, taking things too personally, not being detached enough to see a larger picture, not feeling separate from others.
>
> So, I agree that this can be a good thing, and can be cultivated.
>Laura Archea Huxley wrote a book called "You Are Not the Target", 20 years ago, based on the principal of detachment, which is what much buddhist training and other techniques (yoga, etc.) focus upon - experiencing pain and pleasures and seperating those sensations from the feeling of suffering and ectasy or what have you that we attach to them.
In "Undoing Depression", Richard O'Connor also talks about cultivating detachment, creativity and an ability to experience things as they are, not as we learn to distort them to be...
Sante!
dj
Posted by harry b. on June 29, 2000, at 23:09:18
In reply to Re: Zen and Learning Dissociation: Sara T, DJ, posted by dj on June 29, 2000, at 21:19:33
I hesitate to bring this into the discussion but I
will.The use of peyote and lsd (there are others but these
are representative of past, continuing, and modern
cultures) are attempts at achieving this dissociation,
or, as I prefer to call it (borrowing from Carlos
Castaneda) a separate reality.I don't advocate recreational use of these substances,
but I do believe they could be used to help one
recognize the state of dissociation.
hb
Posted by dj on June 30, 2000, at 1:27:34
In reply to Re: Zen and Learning Dissociation, posted by harry b. on June 29, 2000, at 23:09:18
> The use of peyote and lsd (there are others but these are representative of past, continuing, and modern cultures) are attempts at achieving this dissociation,or, as I prefer to call it (borrowing from Carlos Castaneda) a separate reality.
>
> I don't advocate recreational use of these substances, but I do believe they could be used >to help one recognize the state of dissociation.With proper preparation, guidance and intention they could potentially help one on many fronts, if up to dealing with whatever might come up...and if not up to dealing with taking one's mind to the edge and beyond, and with improper guidance to boot they could be very dangerous...
Sante!
dj
Posted by BBob on June 30, 2000, at 18:18:52
In reply to Zen and Learning Dissociation: Sara T, DJ, posted by shar on June 29, 2000, at 20:59:19
(shar asked)
>Bbob: if you read this, isn't all thought sublinguistic? Or are there other types?I suppose that is a good question, and you caught me writing quicker than I was thinking.
What I really meant was probably cortical thought as opposed to subcortical activity, though that too is a poor distinction. I could say constructed thought - that is more like what I was thinking about, but, again, that is less than specific. We have cultural constructs, which is pretty much what I meant when I blurted out linquistic thought, but we also have deeper emotional constructs which are way sublinquistic, though they were likely *constructed* early in our lives.But I would defend the notion of linguistic thought, in a general sense. We talk about “thinking out loud,” when our musings and perceptions seem to couple in real time with spoken (or written) words. We are familiar with “subvocalizations” in which thoughts are constructed as words but not elevated to the level of muscular expression. Since thought is more like quantum fields of energy in neural networks, I was trying to suggest thoughts that involve and include linguistic areas of the brain, as opposed to those centered elsewhere, especially deeper in the mid-brain.
There is probably a lot written about what is thought, and there was a thread on the board about it recently. “Thought” is in itself an arbitrary distinction. My hunch is that thought stretches from the sensory experience through perception and on into analysis and memory.
For example, when the motion of an object stimulates the peripheral neurons in our retina, signals race to the superior culliculus which is closely connected with our neck and head muscles, and which impulsively makes us tend to focus on the motion with more precise feature detecting neurons associated with the center of the retina. We saw something move and thought we had better take a closer look. Some people would likely say this is not thought, but I tend to imagine thought being a continuum, ranging from sensory perception to advanced, frontal-cortex thought.
This view presumes that context is an element of thought, and accounts for the parts of our cultural constructs that we store outside of our brain. The view essentially recognizes mind as larger than brain. Planets, mountains, trees, books, buildings, words and perceptions can all considered to be thought in some way - our thoughts, in an eastern view, and thoughts of the elements, in the animistic view. In western language, we often refer to the written word as “thoughts.” These words, for example are my thoughts on the subject of thought.
The reason a broader view of mind is important to the study, practice and pursuit of mental health is that the recognition of mind as including our environmental/cultural context allows mental health caregivers to embrace the widely asserted need for social support as part of a treatment regime that might also include manipulation of neurochemistry.
Disassociation, among other things, lets us disengage from both external and internal parts of mind to restructure or reorient. The risk of dissociation, as some have suggested in this thread, might be that we fail to reassociate in an orderly or consistent manner.
My ecopsychological view is that disassociation from human constructs, with the intent of reassociating with other life forms and natural systems, allows us to tap into an order and a momentum for which we are not constantly responsible. We can thus be more like creation than the creator.
Well - typically wordy of me. Maybe my frequent wordiness is why I am so keen on disassociating.
Posted by shar on July 1, 2000, at 1:54:19
In reply to Re: Linguistic thought and disassociation, posted by BBob on June 30, 2000, at 18:18:52
Sort of like a distinction between pure (maybe even nonverbal) instinct, instinctual action, mediated instinctual action, up to "here's what I think about that." That kind of continuum?
S
Posted by harry b. on July 1, 2000, at 12:22:18
In reply to Re: Linguistic thought and disassociation, posted by BBob on June 30, 2000, at 18:18:52
> Disassociation, among other things, lets us disengage from both external and internal parts of mind to restructure or reorient. The risk of dissociation, as some have suggested in this thread, might be that we fail to reassociate in an orderly or consistent manner.
>
Never had it, am ignorant about it, (as I suppose
are most docs who perform it), but this describes
pretty well my concept of how ECT works.Pardon the interuption
hb
Posted by JennyR on July 1, 2000, at 16:27:01
In reply to Re: Linguistic thought and disassociation, posted by BBob on June 30, 2000, at 18:18:52
In response to BBob's writing, I want to mention something.
After a whole lot of therapy, I've come to realize that there were some very basic beliefs/outlooks I had about life that I had never verbalized, not even in my own head which nevertheless guided my behaviors and attitudes. Ways of viewing the world, basic premises, laid down early that are never actually thoughts or expressed in words - so "sublinguistic" would fit.
For example, I am someone who always loved time alone. Who, in my marriage, was the one who was always the very independent one. Books I've read describe couples describe the partners as being on a "pursuer-distancer" or "fuser-isolator" continuum. I am the distancer, I am always seeking out time and distance, in all sort of ways. Always seeking to keep firm boundaries and not merge too much. Through therapy and a lot of discussion of childhood, I sort of came to realize that I do have this underlying belief that alone is best. That alone is safest. That when alone I can rely on myself and I know I'll be okay. That on some deep level I really believe closeness is risky, dangerous. That particularly when I'm having a hard time and am hurting, I feel I need to go off and be alone. Like a wounded animal going off to lick their wounds. Because under it all I don't believe another person can be a source of comfort. And that if you truly let your guard down and really let yourself be vulnerable, you will be decimated. I have come to see that these are basic views I have, though they were never spoken in words til lots of therapy got me down some very deep layers. And I see all this stuff comes from how things were in my house as a kid. A mother who was very cold and angry and unaffectionate and could be very vicious, who didn't care ever what I thought or felt. A father who favored my brother because he was a boy. My brother, who is 6 years older, loved to tease and pick on me. And when my parents came to break it up, I was the one who got in trouble because I couldn't calm down. And I got hit a lot. And my parents fought a lot. So I mostly only felt safe when I kept to myself either in my room or out of the house.
The point here is we form ideas about the world, views, premises, perspectives that are not in words and therefore maybe not thought at all. Yet they can be so basic to how we behave in the world and how we perceive things and what we expect. I think a lot of what therapy is is discovering those deep underlying assumptions which have never been voiced or put into words but which guide you. When you discover them you can re-evaluate them, or evaluate them for the first time. Then you can then have more options.
Posted by BBob on July 1, 2000, at 21:46:04
In reply to My thoughts on thinking, posted by JennyR on July 1, 2000, at 16:27:01
Scott:
-----thanks for the comments above - (re:deceny). I certainly don’t hold the high ground on netequette and, in a successful climbing expedition, everyone in the party safely summits.
_______________________ ___ _______________________
shar - re: your question “Sort of like a distinction between pure (maybe even nonverbal) instinct, instinctual action, mediated instinctual action, up to "here's what I think about that.” That kind of continuum?----- Yeh, something like that. The categories you mention seem like well-defined constructs used by an academic community that I don’t really know, but the suggested range agrees with my animistic suggestion that instinct is part of a continuum of thought. Animal languages are said to be hardwired in their brains, but I am not convinced our learned languages and fabricated human constructs are always that free of driving instinctive and environmental mandates... unless we can successfully disassociate.
_______________________ ___ ________________________
harryb - re: your comment, “Never had it, am ignorant about it, (as I suppose are most docs who perform it), but this describes pretty well my concept of how ECT works.”----- I’m afraid I would agree. The efficacy of ECT is likely (IMHO) related to the way it massively disrupts troublesome associations within the brain. The risks are likely similar to those of other disassociative techniques, from drugs to cult membership to physical feats - the danger (besides broken bones or physical damage resulting from current in ECT) is the possible destruction of useful constructs. The ethical dilemmas arise in the way some people are not fairly warned of the risks, or are denied opportunities for a more gentle way to break away from troubling mental constructs, some of which might be rooted in social situations.
_______________________ ___ ________________________
JennyR:
------ jeez I like it when I can help more than hurt! I don’t really hang with the professional therapists, but my impression is their effort is aimed, as you suggest, at getting these subconscious notions integrated into the more highly constructed parts of the mind that rely heavily on language for their orientation. Even though I am a writer now, my personal desire is that we rely less on our constructed, often verbal parts of our mind, and instead that we heal, integrate and trust our deeper minds. There is a philosophical divide there, but the indigenous view often holds that the rocks, trees and other non-humans are our elders. In that view, our “old brain” would be the elder part. While many therapists might say we need to grow out of the primative influence of our old brain, other commentators suggest our old brains are damaged by the childish influences of our hastily constructed, unstable “new brain.”Rozack’s name was mentioned in a thread above - he is a Cal State (?) professor who for a while ran an ecopscyhology program. A less academic ecopsychologist, Mike Cohen, (ecopsych.com) is somewhat of a fanatic about the primacy of the old brain. It was after reading his material that I engaged in what seemed like a ridiculous exercise in which we say “I feel best when (observing some natural environment) because...” Well, as ridiculous as it was, that exercise preceded my eventual and gradual upturn from one of the darker periods of my recent life. I did not “go native” as i would have preferred, but by articulating with my verbally integrated mind my deepest preferences, I felt safer venturing into the no-mans-land of industrial society with the confidence that deep inside, I know what I really prefer. But that is me...
Well, nature-boy stuff aside, it is interesting that this thread evolved from discussing the possible impact of asynchronous activity between the mid-brain and the cerebrum to discussing the way “talk therapy” helps integrate the sub-vocal emotional constructs into the “higher, advanced” constructs of the very verbally oriented cerebral cortex. To me, this suggests some truth to Cohen’s idea that the old brain, when fed its traditional fare of natural environments, is the mature brain and the new brain, full of cultural constructs and verbalizations, is the one driving us to madness.
But then, wherever we go, there we are...
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.