“All that we are is the result of what we have thought. The mind is everything. What we think, we become.”
- Maharishi Mahesh Yogi
Many individuals find themselves in one of five character states or “camps”. Many of the reasons for an allegiance to these camps may have to do with genetics, environment or psychic makeup. However all of these allegiances have to do with choice.
Each of us creates our own reality—or in other words—our own paradigm. And to change these realities can be difficult, but often necessary.
It must be emphasized that through the following analysis, individuals can only have traits that are comparable with these camps, for everyone is their own diagnostic category. Thus it must be realized that the following “camps” are for use towards understanding, not for use towards labeling.
The “camps” to be introduced are flexible and by choice one can navigate in and out of each criteria. And indeed, as one will see, at times we can have our proverbial foot in two or three camps within a short period of time.
The biased
This is the camp in which all narcissists inhabit, for the biased, the world revolves around them and their own needs are of salient importance to themselves. However this camp is too broad to be inhabited by only the narcissists, for this is a camp that has been described in psychological theories in terms of “defenses”, for the biased is in defense towards more community oriented ideas of reality. Developmentally, this camp would be attributed to a dependent person, for the biased is truly in a state of reliance on other people for there support. And to contrast from the narcissist, a biased person can also rely on others to assume responsibility, and sometimes this overwhelming need of others can lead to neurosis and regression to earlier states of personal development. And neurosis can often find itself present in the next camp—the enmeshed. Everyone has been in this camp of the biased at one time or another and at birth everyone was exclusively a resident in this camp, for infants are totally dependant on others for their survival. A person in their early years relies on mother to feed, cloth and secure the person and although many adults do not need these basic physical needs, symbolically, many adults are psychologically dependent on others for their needs. The biased, and especially the narcissist can also be likened to an astronomical phenomenon—a black hole. These entities of outer space have attributes of such great gravity that even light itself can not escape its density. This is much like the biased, who would say “it is all about me”, “my wants, my needs”, “give me, give me.” As the black hole sucks the energy out a star or other heavenly bodies, the biased suck the energy out of people. But hopefully, most people can overcome this state of selfishness, to become a more fully functional being, however many people vacillate from this camp to other camps.
The best example of the biased person is the person who at a party is the first to talk about themselves. Indeed it is human nature to want to be understood and in some cases to be the center of attention, but the biased is the first to tell another about their accomplishments, their interests. Once another takes their turn to talk about themselves, the biased will become disinterested, unless in listening, they can gain something towards themselves through the process of the relationship. Of all of the camps, the biased are individuals who would understand the authentic concept of love the least.
The enmeshed
This is home of the neurotics and co-dependants. Much like the biased, the enmeshed are like black holes, with the distinction that the enmeshed are black holes who find other black holes to mutually suck one another’s energy away. In this seductive dance, the two enmeshed find a downward spiral of negativism and at times even destruction.
Once there was a young woman, who through a life of substance abuse and self destruction (e.g. cutting) found a friend at a local bar, who had a life similar to her own. At a very young age both of these women had been physically abused, and both of them had in turn been adopted through foster care. Both had lead a life of self mutilation, which lead them to residential treatment. The two instantly “hit it off”. Soon both of them were calling each other to go out to coffee and to double date. They began to talk about going into business with one another. Both of the women were into the “punk” scene and felt like they should design a line of clothing towards their interested style. After a short while, both of the women were seeing each other two, three, four times per day. They began to talk about the “old life” and started glorifying their old drug use. Slowly meeting for coffee, became meeting for marijuana, and then meeting for marijuana became meeting for heroin. As both of them slid down the path of self destruction, one of the women’s therapist began to become aware of the relapses and advised her to stop the relationship. This created a response of “I don’t have a problem and if I did, she has nothing to do with it.” They had both become two black holes stealing each others light and following a path of annihilation.
Oftentimes, the enmeshed can be much more subtle then the above example, such as the father and son, who need to spend all of their free time with each other, because they were filling the void of their lost mother and spouse. They become psychically tied to one another and the split can cause high levels of anxiety.
The enmeshed can be explained further by exploring the binary-orbital distortions found among them, which in some ways relate to the psychoanalytic concepts of
Transference (emotional reactions that are assigned to current relationships but originated in earlier experiences) added to the concept of parataxic distortions (inaccurate perceptions one has about actions, feelings, thoughts and motives of those with whom emotional relationships are found), however, binary-orbital distortions exist only in a one on one relationship. These distortions are parataxic distortions which are mutually shared. Much as the idea of shared delusions can have an effect on a group of religious zealots, who, for example belief that their leader is a god, such as the David Koresh clan of Waco, Texas in the 1990’s, those who have a binary-orbital distortion share almost identically the same distortion with each other. These distortions can only be found among the enmeshed, because there must be two who share these distortions and no more than this number of individuals. Also, binary-orbital distortions can be synonymous with mutual obsession.
Many times among the enmeshed these binary-orbital distortions are mistaken for love. Statements such as “you compete me”, or “I can’t live without you” are in essence binary-orbital distortions, because they show a surrendering of oneself exclusively to the needs of another. Again, the previous statements must be shared between the enmeshed for it to be a binary-orbital distortion. These feelings maybe felt as authentic, but often they are misguided notions of reality.
Now those who are of this camp can experience authentic love, however often times, their binary-orbital distortions are so severe that the two individuals become so “glued” onto each other, that they can not function outside of that union, essentially they become a selfish “one”, and their union is an alliance of mutually shared object interest. Many abusive relationships stem from this type of relationship. If we consider the Drama Triangle below, we can find the victim, rescuer and the persecutor of this triangle within this camp.
A person who experiences authentic love transcends the drama triangle, because they have the self respect to not be the victim, they are assertive enough to stand up to the persecutor, they are compassionate enough to not oppress and they are independent enough to not make excuses to rescue or collude. If they have been exposed to a traumatic event, these individuals through an understanding of choice with willingness to take charge of their lives, become survivors of the trauma. They understand that past trauma can be a profound influence on their lives, but they are not determined or controlled by this trauma.
Before we move onto the next camp, this would be an opportune time to introduce the following chart, the hierarchy of needs:
A Hierarchy of Human Needs
(Maslow, 1962; Miller, 1981; Weil, 1973; Glasser, 1985; Whitfield 1987)
Survival
Safety
Touching, skin contact
Attention
Mirroring and echoing
Guidance
Listening
Being real
Participating
Acceptance
Opportunity to grieve and grow
Support
Loyalty and trust
Accomplishment
Altering one’s state of consciousness
Sexuality
Enjoyment of fun
Freedom
Nurturing
Self Actualization
As we search these camps, one can see that each of these human needs can fit into each camp as a person’s character develops.
Now consider, if number 1 (Survival) and number 2 (Safety) are not being fulfilled in a person’s life, all of the other needs will not be met, because the individual is focused primarily on getting these two needs met. Indeed, guidance, listening, enjoyment of fun can not be fulfilled if a person is starving and searching for the next meal.
The biased and the enmeshed live their lives desperately seeking the first ten needs found on this list. They are obsessed with being accepted, finding guidance and attention. And their belief is that they are barely surviving. Their belief that the world in not a safe place stifles their growth and they live a life stuck in a negative cycle of toxic guilt and shame.
Now as we consider the camp self objectivist, it will be discovered that these individuals have fulfilled many of the lower ten human needs on this scale, and are actively engaged in fulfilling the remaining ten.
The self objectivist
The narcissists can have their foot placed in this camp as well as they can in the camp of the biased and enmeshed, but they can not maintain this camp for long, for this state is inhabited and maintained by independent people who are emotionally mature and in many ways have climbed to the top of the hierarchy of human needs to become “self actualized”, or have achieved a full development of one’s individual potentials (but only in the scope of one’s self). Whereas, the biased and the enmeshed are fixated in lower stages of development, e.g. physiological needs, safety needs, needs of belonging, etc. The self objectivist may have found balance in their lives. Many of society’s leaders are found among the self objectivist, but this camp can be very lonely as well.
For example: Sarah’s life was a life of organization and ambitions. She had graduated top of her class from a prestigious Ivy League university. Through self discipline and down and dirty hard work, she had made her little start up company into a fortune 500 organization. Sarah had three houses, a private jet and millions of dollars. She would date from time to time, but “relationships took too much effort… besides I need to focus on what is important in life, my career.” Eventually, Sarah was married to a wealthy engineer. However, Sarah started to wonder within herself, “Why do I feel empty? I have played all of the right cards?” And Sarah had met all of the goals that she had set out for herself to accomplish since college. Sarah even had a good heart and would often donate large amounts of money to charities. Wasn’t this who she was suppose to be? Western society would define Sarah’s life as an ultimate success? So why did her misery eventually lead her to find answers through psychoanalysis and quick fix self actualization seminars? Was it that her relationship with her father was a relationship of ambivalence, and because of object loss, through the death of a loved one at an early age, she had intellectualized and sublimated her life, as her analyst claimed? She was a very independent person and many people aspired to be her, so what was the answer to her predicament? Or maybe there wasn’t one?
The self objectivists are definitely more psychically and socially mature than the biased and the enmeshed. For the self objectivist has achieved formal reasoning and mature thought, and much of their cognition (thought) is in line with the folkways and mores (traditions and rules) of the established norms. They also have a smaller amount of thought distortions than do the biased and the enmeshed, for they can conceptualize outside of themselves or their immediate other. Indeed, this mature cognition is more complex than the abstract manipulations that are part of the repertoire of the biased and enmeshed. Cognition with the self objectivist is flexible, open and adaptable, unlike the dichotomous, all or nothing thoughts and attitudes of the previous two camps. Moreover, the self objectivist can at times function in the emotional realm and intellectual realm of thought and affect simultaneously, thus having a more objective view of reality, whereas the previous two camps vacillate between extreme emotion and intellectualization which often is the causal factor in acute thought distortions. The emotional and cognitive functioning of the self objectivist is post-formal in nature, meaning that as self objectivists deals with a chaotic world, they rely on subjective experience and intuitions as well as logic as navigators. They can deal with ambiguity, uncertainty, inconsistency, contradiction, imperfection and compromise. Indeed, unlike the previous two camps, the self objectivist can see the grays of reality, and do not think in terms of black and white (right verses wrong, intellect verses feelings, etc.).
As one can see, the self objectivist can be a “self actualized” individual, having overcome many of the dependent needs of the biased and enmeshed. However, as we will see, the self objectivist can be in touch with authentic loving, but has a difficult time maintaining it because of their nature of being “independent”—or focusing on the “one”.
The villager
This is the community oriented person, who is interdependent, realizing that he or she needs themselves and others to get what they both need and want. The villager understands that he or she can stand alone, but prefers to have a relationship with another to strive to find unity in balance. As with the self objectivist, the villager is a self actualized individual, however actualization doesn’t exist within the villager, but actualization occurs with others in the villager’s life—self actualization becomes community actualization.
Both the self objectivist and the villager experience authentic loving at times, the villager often experiences true love at an exponentially greater rate than does the self objectivist, because the villager’s understanding of reality often exists outside of his or her own need.
Earlier in discussions one and two, the example to the “classic love story” was told. The young man and women run into each other at a corner market and fall “instantly” and “madly” in love with one another. The question was alluded to: “Why didn’t their relationship work” The answer is in a greater understanding of the difference between the self objectivist and the villager. In this fictional story, which was previously discussed, both of these people were independent individuals. They both held good jobs and both wanted much of the same things from life; security, money, family, happiness. They seemingly had a strong foundation built on the ideals that were taught to them from an early age. So why didn’t the marriage take? There are many individuals like these two people.
Whereas the biased was likened to a black hole and the enmeshed could be two black holes sucking energy from one another, the villager is like a binary star, in orbit around each other. Independently each member of the binary system has an actualized amount of it’s own energy, however through its unity the system has even greater power and mutually benefits the other and the universe around it. Many marriages are based on either the enmeshed, self objectivists, or villagers, and the villagers are the ones who succeed, for they are built on mutual benefit and self-less action. But the villager even goes beyond this, for the villager is not only interdependent with a significant other, but interdependent with his or her ecology. Even in a great union of support between two people, authentic loving can be lost, when the union attempts to achieve love in exclusively in the realm of that union, because authentic love must occur outside the one, and many times “the one” is the union, because the couple has become united. And authentic love occurs outside unions, with those who at times do not reciprocate the loving action taken by the individual or the union. For example, the villager will be self-less even towards those who are selfish, like the narcissists. When there is no reward for a good deed, with the exception of furthering love, you will find the villager and especially the universalist, which will be explored through the next camp. The villager at times realizes this and has a greater understanding that the community is interrelated and what effects one part of the community, among one union or relationship, effects the whole community.
Thus we can see that the “classic love story” could not succeed in the realm of the union. Because the two individuals were only thinking of their own needs individually and at times within only their union or relationship. The conceptions possessed by the villager were not part of their schema and values, thus the union itself dissolved, for the union, or the relationship was not supported by the mutual energy of the community, nor possibly was it even allowed in the relationship.
In a marriage between villagers, the community is still current within the couple’s hearts. The needs of the community are of importance to the couple, which negates isolation within the union. Oftentimes, individuals get “stuck in the rut” of daily living—get up, go to work, come home, watch some television, go to sleep—they are satisfied and comfortable in a life of mutual isolation with each other. As the husband and wife become one through matrimony, they feel that they have arrived—“why concern myself with others, I have my one true love, and a couple of kids on the way.” They forget, or were never even aware that they live in an ecology, where one action has an effect on other actions and outcomes. If one couple begins to fall into mutual narcissism, the community might follow, and a status quo of narcissism will be established in that community.
The villager is aware of the fact that one must be active in their community and break the bonds of mutual narcissism found within many unions of people. To be active beyond one mutual relationship will bring energy and constant rejuvenation to that very relationship. And that union will be actively participating continuously in authentic loving of others.
The universalist
Universilists transcend the limits of being placed in a camp, it would be more appropriate to put them in a league. This individual has realized the vicissitudes of others and is oriented towards the “brotherhood of mankind” and has realized a spiritual side through love—which love comes through service to others. They are those who are extrinsic-interdependent, relying on the spiritual side of their nature. This individual would be associated with other titles such as solitary, sojourner, or even saint. They can be in tune with what is known as “Essence” which is synonymous with No-Mind (Existential), suchness (Zen), the eternal now, or God’s Will. Essence is essentially a state of mind in which one experiences love in it’s basic form, that of love in balance, love in synthesis, beyond the black and white, beyond the dichotomous notions of this-or-that. The universalist feels this in-tunement, or at-one-ment, for the universalist has past through the other previously mentioned camps and has gained an understanding of his or her own awareness of self, others, environment and the universe. The universalists experiences transcendence of the usual perceptions of alienation and isolation, and this comes as a unifying experience achieved through union with other people, nature, knowledge, religion, etc. Indeed, the universalist may feel rooted in a divine communion. The true universalist is in and of themselves authentic love, for they are full of the action of love, or charity. The universalists do not only operate in the realm of relationships between, but in relationships with-out. They are not merely in relationship with a spouse, a friend, a community, an ecology, but the universe.
The universalists are individuals who are active with C.O.R.E., as it applies to authentic love. CORE is an acronym representing: Cohesiveness (or balance), Orientation (or awareness), Resilency, and an understanding of the Existential. CORE will be discussed in more detail in later discussions. Sufficient for our current discussion, CORE is essentially the Universalist themselves; for they are balanced in their perceptions of reality as they chose to understand the synthesis (the grays) in life, not the dichotomies (black and whites) of life. The universalist is also active in perusing self awareness, for through self awareness, a greater understanding and wisdom, truth and authentic love can be conceptualized. And to be a universalist, we must realize acceptance by simply existing as we are.
