![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 23 of 23. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Racer on October 21, 2000, at 20:52:49
Don't ask what brought this on, but it came to mind in reading the Reason to live post above.
This relates to depression and trying to find reasons to live, somehow. At least for me it does.
A lot of people on this board have mentioned not knowing when to trust ourselves. We talk about distorted thoughts, needing reality checks, etc. "something" sometimes rescues us from our suicidal plans.
Maybe we're just not good liars?
Most of the world can understand things like social cues that leave me (at least) clueless. Could it be that our symptoms come in part because our minds are trying to reconcile something our instincts tell us are lies? I wonder if we're more sensitive or more tuned in to body language, and have a harder time reconciling it to what we're being told is the truth?
Let's say the boss says that he really wants us to succeed with this new project. What is his body language telling us? Could the depression be because we've been told so many times that our instincts are wrong that we are afraid to trust that response telling us that this boss is setting us up to be fired? Maybe part of the problem is that we've internalized that doubt in our initial responses?
I've worked with horses now for about 30 years, and I can watch a horse, or a dog, or a kid, and sometimes an adult human, and I can tell you a fair amount about what's going on. I can watch a horse come around a corner toward a line of fences and tell you what's likely to happen. I can watch a horse come out of his/her stall and tell you what sort of a mood he/she is in. I can watch a group of horses in a field, and tell you a lot about both social standing in the group and individual temperaments within ten minutes. My own horse could probably tell you my mood before she even sees me, just by the sound of my footsteps, and I know that. I can literally think a command, and she'll carry it out -- not telepathy, but my body language changing as I think "can-ter" or "and-walk" or whatever I want her to do.
With human adults, though, I find that what my non-verbal assessment tells me is often in conflict with what my brain tries to tell me. Sometimes, I feel 'illiterate', and can't figure out why I'm so uncomfortable. Later, I'll realize that I was getting signals that I wasn't paying attention to. The body language I wasn't clued into conciously enough was telling me something I really needed to know.
Could that be a part of our dis-ease? (Note to Greg: I like that, because it is a 'dis' 'ease' that we're experiencing, isn't it?) Maybe relief comes from being able to integrate our non-verbal clues into our conciousness?
For women, especially, it is very dangerous not to pay attention to the non-verbal clues. I've been attacked several times when I have told myself that I'm being 'ridiculous' by feeling creeped out by someone. For men, the danger is usually not as immediate, though it can be.
Any responses?
Posted by ksvt on October 22, 2000, at 20:34:08
In reply to Really weird theory inspired by Reason to live, posted by Racer on October 21, 2000, at 20:52:49
> Don't ask what brought this on, but it came to mind in reading the Reason to live post above.
>
> This relates to depression and trying to find reasons to live, somehow. At least for me it does.
>
> A lot of people on this board have mentioned not knowing when to trust ourselves. We talk about distorted thoughts, needing reality checks, etc. "something" sometimes rescues us from our suicidal plans.
>
> Maybe we're just not good liars?
>
> Most of the world can understand things like social cues that leave me (at least) clueless. Could it be that our symptoms come in part because our minds are trying to reconcile something our instincts tell us are lies? I wonder if we're more sensitive or more tuned in to body language, and have a harder time reconciling it to what we're being told is the truth?
>
> Let's say the boss says that he really wants us to succeed with this new project. What is his body language telling us? Could the depression be because we've been told so many times that our instincts are wrong that we are afraid to trust that response telling us that this boss is setting us up to be fired? Maybe part of the problem is that we've internalized that doubt in our initial responses?
>
> I've worked with horses now for about 30 years, and I can watch a horse, or a dog, or a kid, and sometimes an adult human, and I can tell you a fair amount about what's going on. I can watch a horse come around a corner toward a line of fences and tell you what's likely to happen. I can watch a horse come out of his/her stall and tell you what sort of a mood he/she is in. I can watch a group of horses in a field, and tell you a lot about both social standing in the group and individual temperaments within ten minutes. My own horse could probably tell you my mood before she even sees me, just by the sound of my footsteps, and I know that. I can literally think a command, and she'll carry it out -- not telepathy, but my body language changing as I think "can-ter" or "and-walk" or whatever I want her to do.
>
> With human adults, though, I find that what my non-verbal assessment tells me is often in conflict with what my brain tries to tell me. Sometimes, I feel 'illiterate', and can't figure out why I'm so uncomfortable. Later, I'll realize that I was getting signals that I wasn't paying attention to. The body language I wasn't clued into conciously enough was telling me something I really needed to know.
>
> Could that be a part of our dis-ease? (Note to Greg: I like that, because it is a 'dis' 'ease' that we're experiencing, isn't it?) Maybe relief comes from being able to integrate our non-verbal clues into our conciousness?
>
> For women, especially, it is very dangerous not to pay attention to the non-verbal clues. I've been attacked several times when I have told myself that I'm being 'ridiculous' by feeling creeped out by someone. For men, the danger is usually not as immediate, though it can be.
>
> Any responses?I've discovered that I sometimes project my own feelings onto other people particularly when I'm depressed. My angst becomes theirs; my own self criticism is interpreted to be someone else's disatisfaction with me. Because I am aware that I do this sometimes, I do not trust my instincts. The other thing I do particularly with my children, is impute feelings to them that I might have if I were in a similar situation. I think we all do this. The difference is that my feelings tend to be somewhat distorted and I don't always recognize the distortion. I worry for instance about them feeling bad about themselves under circumstances that many people could probably handle quite well without internalizing things. Does this make sense? ksvt
Posted by stjames on October 22, 2000, at 20:45:23
In reply to Really weird theory inspired by Reason to live, posted by Racer on October 21, 2000, at 20:52:49
It's very human to think one thing but do another.
I feel that the non verbal clues tend to indicate
what we are really thinking.james
Posted by Racer on October 23, 2000, at 0:54:42
In reply to Re: Really weird theory inspired by Reason to live, posted by stjames on October 22, 2000, at 20:45:23
> It's very human to think one thing but do another.
> I feel that the non verbal clues tend to indicate
> what we are really thinking.
>
> jamesAbsolutely! And that was what I was thinking about. If we're told over and over again, "oh, don't worry about it, everyone likes you", but we see the subtle body language saying something else, maybe we learn NOT to trust ourselves. Maybe if we trusted ourselves a bit more, we'd be less depressed?
(I ran out of Effexor, and am suffering terribly, so if I'm not making sense, you'll know why!)
I know that when I feel good, I am more aware that my 'instincts' are true and valid, while depression makes me doubt them. WHen I believe myself, I function much, much better overall. I stand up for myself better, and fight back more effectively. When depression helps me along, I find myself trying to fit into what other people tell me more, and that's when things fall apart -- usually pretty spectacularly.
Maybe when my brain is better, I'll be better able to express what I meant....
BTW, Hi, stjames! How're you doin', you wonderful fella, you? And thanks again for helping me through that dark time last year. It meant a lot to me, I don't know if I ever thanked you.
Posted by coral on October 23, 2000, at 7:02:34
In reply to Really weird theory inspired by Reason to live, posted by Racer on October 21, 2000, at 20:52:49
Dear Racer,
Boy, did you hit the nail on the head! For me, when I'm depressed, accurately assessing what I'm thinking is one of the hardest parts. One technique I've found helpful is to consciously separate what I'm feeling from what I'm thinking --- which is some times VERY difficult to do, but gets easier with practice. It's easy to be overwhelmed by the feelings. As an example, just last Friday, one client requested additional work (more money - several thousand dollars) and another client rejected a $ 600.00 project. Friday was a moderately bad day for me, and had I allowed myself, I would've fixated on the loss of business rather than celebrating the newly gained business. I FELT like a failure and felt rejected. By forcing myself to look at it logically, I was able to diminish the negative feelings and concentrate on the positives. Candidly, though, there are times when the black cloud is so thick, the most I can do is hibernate, curl up some place warm. I also know that when I'm engulfed in that black cloud, I shouldn't put myself some place where I could harm my business ---- based on exactly what you said, the non-verbal clues I'd be sending out would be as black as coal, in spite of the positive words I'd be uttering.
But, a strange thing happened a few weeks ago - when this depressive episode hit, I decided I'd "tough it out" and force myself to make marketing calls. Even though I was physically trembling, could barely dial the telephone, everyone I called responded positively and we picked up three new accounts. Jokingly, my business partner said I should make more marketing calls when I was depressed since I was so successful. So, I'm confused as hell about what happened that day. The only explanation I can come up with so far is that my timing was serendipitous. The clients needed and wanted what I was marketing and the positive results had nothing to do with my "successful" selling abilities that day. Sorry for rambling . . .I guess I don't ignore any feelings, especially when I'm depressed. Frankly, some of my perceptions when depressed were far more accurate than those when I wasn't depressed.
You mentioned being attacked when you'd ignored internal warnings, feeling they were ridiculous. On that point, EVERY time I've had one of those warning bells go off, depressed or not, that I've ignored, I've regretted it. Fear can be an incredible survival mechanism.
Posted by Noa on October 23, 2000, at 17:39:03
In reply to Re: Really weird theory inspired by Reason to live, posted by coral on October 23, 2000, at 7:02:34
I wonder how many of us grew up in homes where we had to become "meteorologists", in the sense of having to constantly assess the climate from non-verbal cues, to know how safe/dangerous it was.
This can make us more vigilant and aware of environmental cues, but can also lead to over-magnifying when we interpret the cues. In the book Mapping the Mind, there is a nice explanation of the role of the amygdala in this kind of hypersensitivity to environmental cues. Apparently, either from innate constitution, or with early difficult experiences, some people have quick-reacting amygdalas. So, when environmental cues are taken in, the signals go to the thalamus, and then are routed both to the cortex (thinking, logic, language) and to the amygdala (fear, survival, etc.), but the pathway to the amygdala is a lot shorter than it is to the cortex, so we can react first, and think later, and if our reactions are strong enough, the thinking gets distorted or weakened. I guess cognitive type therapies aim to strengthen the thinking part to sort of override the reactive part (amygdala). Also, the amygdala apparently is developed early, whereas the parts of the brain that store long term memory and the cortical thinking brain, develop later. So, we can have emotional reactivity that dates back to before we could think word-thoughts to try to interpret the feelings.
There is an issue of Newsweek out now that focuses on birth-three years of age. There was one piece in it about innate temperament, but how early expereinces and parenting could shape just how strongly the temperament affects the rest of life, and also how certain temperaments in babies lead to certain parental reactions, causing an escalating pattern. Apparently there are programs to help parents understand their infants' temperaments and teach skills to deal with the babies in a way that doesn't get them stuck in bad patterns.
Which brings me back to the hypersensitivity to environmental cues thing that Racer introduced (Thank you, Racer): perhaps a lot of us have such sensitivity as our innate temperament, and then, because of a "lack of fit" between us and our parents, or because of just plain hard lives early on, this sensitivity, or reactivity, became even more pronounced (having to read the "weather", etc.)
Posted by Racer on October 24, 2000, at 0:11:05
In reply to Re: Really weird theory inspired by Reason to live, posted by Noa on October 23, 2000, at 17:39:03
Fascinating! I know something about my very earliest experiences, because they fit into a pathological experience in my family:
My mother and my aunt both became pregnant at the same time. My father married my mother, though they hadn't planned on doing so. My aunt's boyfriend, who had planned to marry her, realized the problems inherent in their situation (he was black, she white, it was the early sixties), and ran away. My aunt went home to their parents, had the baby, and gave him up for adoption. My mother asked my grandmother to help her with her newborn. My grandmother sent my aunt, three weeks after her own baby was born and taken away. My mother says that she was afraid to touch me in front of my aunt. I know that is part of my problem, that initial lack of security. (At least, I've seen that sort of thing with animals and other children, so I assume it's part of it.)
Then again, I've got a lot of the characteristics of both parents, in terms of watching others carefully and trying to 'fix' things for them, and the barometric thing.
Hm, now I'll have to think more...
So, noa, can you tell me who wrote that book? Sounds wonderful, is it as interesting as it sounds, academic or popular? Readable?
Thanks!
Posted by noa on October 24, 2000, at 6:54:14
In reply to Re: Really weird theory inspired by Reason to live » Noa, posted by Racer on October 24, 2000, at 0:11:05
Very readable, Racer--it is on the Read! page. It is kind of a coffee table book, in fact--nice graphics and short text.
Posted by laural on October 24, 2000, at 8:58:48
In reply to Re: Really weird theory inspired by Reason to live, posted by coral on October 23, 2000, at 7:02:34
what you said about getting more clients that day you were depressed. sometimes in selling jewelry i've found that when youre sick or depressed you can carry it off by coming across as very real, like you are so confident in yourself that you don't have to put on a show for the customer. then they don't feel as threatened or manipulated and some people really appreciate that. it just runs pretty smooth. : ) laural
Posted by laural on October 24, 2000, at 9:13:47
In reply to Re: Really weird theory inspired by Reason to live, posted by Noa on October 23, 2000, at 17:39:03
> I wonder how many of us grew up in homes where we had to become "meteorologists", in the sense of having to constantly assess the climate from non-verbal cues, to know how safe/dangerous it was.
Also, the amygdala apparently is developed early, whereas the parts of the brain that store long term memory and the cortical thinking brain, develop later. So, we can have emotional reactivity that dates back to before we could think word-thoughts to try to interpret the feelings.
>interesting hypothesis--what a neat study that would make, only i suppose also pretty cruel. its funny because i was just about to skim past this thread because i couldn't really relate--maybe it sounds like i had a bad home life, but the first 2 years of my life were picture perfect. my father and mother were both incredibly loving and wonderful, at about age three, when i was speaking and writing, (devoping cognitive abilities) dad split and things got kinda rough, but the change was so sudden. i only remember them argueing once and i asked them to stop and they did.
so maybe those first 2 years somehow made me more capable at trusting myself, more confident. i'm actually the opposite in some aspects because when i get sick nobody can tell me i'm not thinking logically--at least when i'm manic or schizo, when i'm depressed i can sort of tell that i distort things terribly and i ask for someone to make decisions for me
which, by the way, sounds lke sucha good idea. i wish there were people out there (tell me if there are) that could come to your house everyday and make you brush your hair and do the dishes and go to work and take your pills--laural
Posted by laural on October 24, 2000, at 9:22:51
In reply to to noa, posted by laural on October 24, 2000, at 9:13:47
p.s.
i also think i may have some kind of lack of awareness about body language etc. as i have been raped and molested and been the target of sexual harrassment.
i don't think i'm too wise about other people, i think i trust too easily and do not recognize warning signs.
i honestly have absolutely no idea how anyone thinks of me on this board, if i'm overstepping boundaries, too obsessive at posting, etc
and while i'm not openly asking you to tell me about myself : ) please do not hesitate to be AS BLUNT AS YOU WISH--i honor honesty above all--laural
Posted by shar on October 24, 2000, at 10:01:33
In reply to Re: Really weird theory inspired by Reason to live, posted by Noa on October 23, 2000, at 17:39:03
First, I confess I have not read every post on this thread, so please forgive any repetition.
It has taken me years to recognize that if my gut tells me something is wrong, it probably is.
This happened with my last job (the one I was fired from) and on several other important occasions.
As for reading people, I've said before that kids who grow up with abuse are often very good at reading behaviors, because it is a survival mechanism.
So, the nuances of body language, or the "feeling" we get that something isn't right, should be--in my opinion--listened to with respect.
Shar
Posted by coral on October 24, 2000, at 14:12:26
In reply to to coral, posted by laural on October 24, 2000, at 8:58:48
Dear Laural,
You may have hit the bull's eye. When I'm not battling the beast, I'm strong, assertive, charging full-steam ahead, and have been told I was intimidating. When the beast is sitting on my shoulder, I'm anything BUT intimidating, so maybe that "realness" you mentioned is the key and why I managed to be successful that day. Thanks for the thoughts!!!!!
Coral
what you said about getting more clients that day you were depressed. sometimes in selling jewelry i've found that when youre sick or depressed you can carry it off by coming across as very real, like you are so confident in yourself that you don't have to put on a show for the customer. then they don't feel as threatened or manipulated and some people really appreciate that. it just runs pretty smooth. : ) laural
Posted by pullmarine on October 26, 2000, at 21:21:44
In reply to Really weird theory inspired by Reason to live, posted by Racer on October 21, 2000, at 20:52:49
> A lot of people on this board have mentioned not knowing when to trust ourselves.I think this is true for everyone.
We talk about distorted thoughts, needing reality checks, etc. "something" sometimes rescues us from our suicidal plans.
>
> Maybe we're just not good liars?
I think the good liars are mostly the people who are un-depressed. they are very good at lying to themselves.
>
> Most of the world can understand things like social cues that leave me (at least) clueless. Could it be that our symptoms come in part because our minds are trying to reconcile something our instincts tell us are lies?Abos-f-cking-lutely!
I wonder if we're more sensitive or more tuned in to body language, and have a harder time reconciling it to what we're being told is the truth?
>
YUP!!> Let's say the boss says that he really wants us to succeed with this new project. What is his body language telling us? Could the depression be because we've been told so many times that our instincts are wrong that we are afraid to trust that response telling us that this boss is setting us up to be fired? Maybe part of the problem is that we've internalized that doubt in our initial responses?
Makes a great deal of sense to me!
>>
> With human adults, though, I find that what my non-verbal assessment tells me is often in conflict with what my brain tries to tell me. Sometimes, I feel 'illiterate', and can't figure out why I'm so uncomfortable. Later, I'll realize that I was getting signals that I wasn't paying attention to. The body language I wasn't clued into conciously enough was telling me something I really needed to know.
>
> Could that be a part of our dis-ease?I find this term so offensive!!!
JOHN
Posted by noa on October 27, 2000, at 6:43:19
In reply to Re: Answers to weird theory , posted by pullmarine on October 26, 2000, at 21:21:44
> I think the good liars are mostly the people who are un-depressed. they are very good at lying to themselves.
--and some of them might be "carriers" of depression. ;^ )
Posted by pullmarine on October 27, 2000, at 7:03:45
In reply to Re: Answers to weird theory , posted by noa on October 27, 2000, at 6:43:19
> > I think the good liars are mostly the people who are un-depressed. they are very good at lying to themselves.
>
> --and some of them might be "carriers" of depression. ;^ )yes! yes ! yes! Why didnt I think of that!
Noah. You're a genius!!!!
JOHN
Posted by Racer on October 27, 2000, at 16:25:54
In reply to Re: Answers to weird theory , posted by pullmarine on October 26, 2000, at 21:21:44
> > Could that be a part of our dis-ease?
>
> I find this term so offensive!!!
>
>
> JOHNJohn, you cut the next part of that sentence, the parenthetical comment that I referred to a lack of ease in our lives, a 'dis' ease, not a disease as in a bunch of pathological symptoms. Greg used it, and I really like it because it seems to describe what I'm going through at least: a lack of ease in my life. An un-easy existence.
Sorry you didn't like it, I didn't mean it to offend anyone. I still like it, and still thank Greg for coming up with it.
Posted by pullmarine on October 29, 2000, at 1:20:09
In reply to Re: Noa, the brains on feet Answers to theory !!!, posted by pullmarine on October 27, 2000, at 7:03:45
She wrote:> >
> > --and some of them might be "carriers" of depression. ;^ )
>
JUSt read an article on schizogenesis that described how people can literally cause schizophrenic breakdowns in others.see RD Laing, The Self and Others, p.131 >
Does anyone have any more data or articles about this?
> JOHN
Posted by noa on October 29, 2000, at 10:36:15
In reply to Schizogenesis Noa's View. more info anyone?? » pullmarine, posted by pullmarine on October 29, 2000, at 1:20:09
That was a prevailing view a long time ago---schizophrenegenic mothering--based on psychdynamic views of the disease. But it has been replaced by a lot of new knowledge about the neurobiology of schizophrenia.
My joke about "carriers" of depression---I guess it could be taken both literally and figuratively. For example, in my family, I probably inherited a predisposition to depression from both parents' families, tho neither of my parents has had depression. So, I came into this world with that vulnerability, and perhaps even in the most wonderful parenting environment, perhaps I would still have had the illness. However, I think that my mother is sort of a figurative "carrier" as well, in that she externalizes all her conflicts--quite critical of others, etc. The mismatch between my sensitivity and her criticalness = serious depression.
But with schizophrenia, I believe the research shows that overwhelmingly, biology overrides environment.
In a recent special issue of Newsweek, there was an article about how innate temperament in infants precipitated maladaptive parenting behaviors in otherwise capable parents, causing a pattern of interactions that escalates the problems the babies were born with in the first place. So, the influence is bidirectional.
Posted by coral on October 29, 2000, at 10:40:27
In reply to Schizogenesis Noa's View. more info anyone?? » pullmarine, posted by pullmarine on October 29, 2000, at 1:20:09
Dear John,
I can't comment on the schizogenesis, but as a management consultant, I can tell you that certain supervisors, managers and even co-workers will never get ulcers but they're carriers. We've tracked it and in the "carriers" departments, there are statistically significantly higher incidents of illness, absenteeism, turnover, workers comp, and harassment claims. When these individuals are transferred to other departments, the negative markers appear.
The brutality and cruelty that some people seem to unthinkingly, routinely inflict on others is appalling. As a consultant, I move much faster to recommending job-jeopardy improvements, therapeutic intervention and/or termination than years before. When someone in authority (supervisor or manager) is damaging to people, intervention must occur. It's the only responsible course of action.
Posted by pullmarine on October 29, 2000, at 14:48:19
In reply to Re: Schizogenesis Noa's View. more info anyone??, posted by noa on October 29, 2000, at 10:36:15
> That was a prevailing view a long time ago---schizophrenegenic mothering--based on psychdynamic views of the disease. But it has been replaced by a lot of new knowledge about the neurobiology of schizophrenia.
Yes, which does not exclude the possibility or likelyhood that environmental processes may be the cause of schizophrenic breakdowns.Before U say no, please read the section I was refering to!
>
> My joke about "carriers" of depression---I guess it could be taken both literally and figuratively. For example, in my family, I probably inherited a predisposition to depression from both parents' families, tho neither of my parents has had depression. So, I came into this world with that vulnerability, and perhaps even in the most wonderful parenting environment, perhaps I would still have had the illness. However, I think that my mother is sort of a figurative "carrier" as well, in that she externalizes all her conflicts--quite critical of others, etc. The mismatch between my sensitivity and her criticalness = serious depression.
>
> But with schizophrenia, I believe the research shows that overwhelmingly, biology overrides environment. I'm not so sure. As far as I know psythcological reactions occur along a continuum, with some reactions being more severe than others.
>
> In a recent special issue of Newsweek, there was an article about how innate temperament in infants precipitated maladaptive parenting behaviors in otherwise capable parents, causing a pattern of interactions that escalates the problems the babies were born with in the first place.Yes, this makes sense, but is the temperament entirely inborn?
So, the influence is bidirectional.
Do u mean that both inate and environmental factors interact?
JOHN
Posted by noa on October 30, 2000, at 8:12:14
In reply to Re: Schizogenesis Noa's View. more info anyone?? » noa, posted by pullmarine on October 29, 2000, at 14:48:19
> Yes, this makes sense, but is the temperament entirely inborn?There is a lot of research (Chess and Thomas) showing most babies are definitely born with clear temperamental styles.
>
> So, the influence is bidirectional.
>
> Do u mean that both inate and environmental factors interact?Yes--they definitely interact, and what's more, innate characteristics can shape environment and environemnt can shape subsequent development.
Posted by noa on October 30, 2000, at 8:14:28
In reply to Re: Schizogenesis Noa's View. more info anyone?? » noa, posted by pullmarine on October 29, 2000, at 14:48:19
John, while environment can lead to triggering breakdowns, and perhaps exacerbating the course of an illness, I *think* the research shows that schizophrenia has such a strong biological base, that environment is a fairly weak influence.
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Social | 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.