“Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Hate multiplies hate, violence multiplies violence, and toughness multiplies toughness, in a descending spiral of destruction. The chain reaction of evil must be broken, or we shall be plunged into the dark abyss of annihilation.”
- Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
Today in our globalized world, there are many goods for trade: the latest hand-held scheduler that one can also second as a hand-held video game and phone, the new car with built-in televisions installed overhead so as to turn the children into willing drones, and yes there is even “love” to be purchased! I am not decrying industry; video games, televisions and the internet are wonderful tools, if used in moderation. But when industry and products act as addictions and distracters—especially when they distract from the spiritual—the outcome will always be a negative one. I have personally witnessed the destructive force of something as simple as video game acting as a doorway to destroy a marriage. Through this device, a married woman became involved with another man, with whom the couple had been “gaming” with.
The internet today is a wonderful instrument used by many to exchange goods. People will post their profile online and discuss all of the wonderful little tidbits about themselves. Oftentimes people online are genuinely interested in finding “love” and authentic love can be found through these media; nevertheless, in the vast majority of instances these sites promulgate the opposite of love: isolation.
In many ways, the concept of achieving love through the internet, phone or other designs of our technological world gives one a feeling of hope for the future of our community, for people are still trying to find love. Besides searching for love on the internet, people revel in love through watching romantic love movies and listening to erotic music. Definitely, the desire for loving is there, and with desire comes hope. However, if we do not know where to look for love or how to achieve loving, hope dwindles to extinction.
One problem with the modern concept of love is the idea that love means being loved instead of loving others. Indeed, loving as defined by Western society is a sort of loving “internal-externally,” or more properly termed: “narcissism.” One can often hear, “You need to fall into love”…Accidents do happen! But is love an accident, does love “just happen?” Of course many people attempt to help the accident occur, and they do this by making themselves attractive. And the construct of adorning a plume of beautiful feathers can take many forms: the masculine traits of achievements, power, affluence, or the feminine traits of aesthetics or adornment. As with the lone surfer of the waves of personal homepages, what wares can she or he bring to the table to attract or be loved?
If our Western world has a misconception about love, then what is that misconception: as alluded to above, the “accident” of falling in love. You know how the story goes: “Once there was a young man walking down the street, who walks past a corner market. In a rush, a young woman is hurrying outside the door who proceeds to crash into the young man. At first they don’t look at one another; he begins to help the young woman pick up her groceries which have fallen to the ground. He says `I am sorry I didn’t…’ Then their eyes meet, their hearts beat and they crash into love!”
This scenario may have happened to someone once before and there may have been a “sudden spark,” but is this sudden spark “love,” or an urge of a physical nature, less than it is a spiritual one?
Now to continue on with the story, “…The two begin to date and the sensations of passion are found in each moment that they are together, there two hearts beating as one and they know beyond a shadow of a doubt that they were made for each other. Their emotional bond leads to a physical one as they consummate their loving union. They decide to get married, because they are ‘soul mates.’ They live happily ever after.” Now the author’s publisher states that the first novel did so well, that the author must write a sequel.
“Part Two: After some years of love and marriage, and 2.5 children, the couple begins to contemplate within themselves, ‘I have played my cards right, I am successful in my business and hobbies, I have a good family with a good spouse, why am I lonely, dissatisfied, bored and uneasy?’ The union eventual ends, as fifty percent of current unions do, and the couple files for divorce.” The publisher does not ask for another sequel. What went wrong with this couple? Divorce is an epidemic in our society, what is going wrong in our society?
(Excerpt from my upcoming book: "Healing secrets")
Saturday, January 30, 2010
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Bipolar Disorder (cont.)
Here are some more ideas to add to my myths about bipolar disorder:
Myth: Medications don’t work for me.
For some people this may be true, but we all need to give our meds a chance. Treatment guidelines anticipate initial failures, and while no two guidelines are in agreement they are all based on the premise that eventually you will find a medication or combination of medications that will help you
Myth: Lower quality of life and sluggish cognition are fair trade-offs for reducing mood symptoms.
False. In the initial phase of treatment, meds overkill may be justified to bring your illness under control. But full recovery is based on improving your overall health and ability to function, not just eliminating mood symptoms. Over time, the side effects of medication tend to go away, so patience is advised. You may choose to live with minor side effects such as mild hand tremors. But if major side effects persist, you should work with your psychiatrist in adjusting doses or switching to different meds. The onus is on you to alert your psychiatrist to major side effects and to insist he or she take appropriate action.
Myth: Once you’ve been diagnosed with bipolar disorder, you can forget about leading a normal life.
False. Living with bipolar disorder is a challenge, and you may have to change your expectations, but you should never give up on living a rewarding and productive life.
I hope this is helpful. This issue can be very complex.
Myth: Medications don’t work for me.
For some people this may be true, but we all need to give our meds a chance. Treatment guidelines anticipate initial failures, and while no two guidelines are in agreement they are all based on the premise that eventually you will find a medication or combination of medications that will help you
Myth: Lower quality of life and sluggish cognition are fair trade-offs for reducing mood symptoms.
False. In the initial phase of treatment, meds overkill may be justified to bring your illness under control. But full recovery is based on improving your overall health and ability to function, not just eliminating mood symptoms. Over time, the side effects of medication tend to go away, so patience is advised. You may choose to live with minor side effects such as mild hand tremors. But if major side effects persist, you should work with your psychiatrist in adjusting doses or switching to different meds. The onus is on you to alert your psychiatrist to major side effects and to insist he or she take appropriate action.
Myth: Once you’ve been diagnosed with bipolar disorder, you can forget about leading a normal life.
False. Living with bipolar disorder is a challenge, and you may have to change your expectations, but you should never give up on living a rewarding and productive life.
I hope this is helpful. This issue can be very complex.
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Why Zombies Eat Brains
For some reason many of my clients have been obsessed with the subject of why zombies eat brains--at least the adolescents have been. And I guess they feel I would know the answer because I work with brains (note: I do not work physically with brains, that would be a neurosurgeon - perhaps one would get better information by consulting one of them.)
Much of my research focused on physical and psychological needs for zombies to eat brains, as well as habitat needs.
One study found that the undead have a significant reduction in the pineal gland. Perhaps Zombies are compensating for a lack of this significant area of the brain, and by eating brains they feel they will make up for the lack of theirs.
Brains are also very high in protein/nutrients.
Recent studies have shown that glial cells, which make up the bulk of a brain, have the ability to act as stem cells, at least as far as being able to replicate other brain cells. Zombies are probably going after the glial cells to help restore some of their brain function.
Brains are also rich in cholesterol, which is essential for maintaining cell membrane pliability, which is a particular problem at the low body temperatures typical of zombies in non-tropical climates.
Psychologically, the act of eating brains can ease the pain of being dead (see movie "From Beyond")This would actually make more sense, when one considers some studies which note that zombies probably don't eat for nourishment, and perhaps the act of brain-eating represents an unholy, instinctive attempt on the undead's part to regain their lost minds.
Also we need to consider that by being dead, many zombies are missing teeth, and prefer eating something that's easy on the gums.
One last idea is that zombies eat brains as a matter of managing their habitat. As is well-known, a zombie's bite will infect a normal human and turn him or her into another zombie within a matter of minutes or hours. This, of course, assumes that the attacking zombie or its pack do not completely consume the victim. Now, you figure that a solo zombie or even one or two attacking in conjunction cannot eat all of the meat parts of a given victim in one sitting. This means that if a zombie just eats an arm, pretty soon it will be joined by a one-armed zombie that is also now on the hunt. Therefore it must now compete with the nub zombies in the pursuit of tasty human flesh. Eating the brain is both satisfying and prevents the rise of new zombies, so the zombie population does not increase to unsustainable levels.
I hope this helps my clients in their obsession with the subject. For those who are my clients, please don't ask again.
Much of my research focused on physical and psychological needs for zombies to eat brains, as well as habitat needs.
One study found that the undead have a significant reduction in the pineal gland. Perhaps Zombies are compensating for a lack of this significant area of the brain, and by eating brains they feel they will make up for the lack of theirs.
Brains are also very high in protein/nutrients.
Recent studies have shown that glial cells, which make up the bulk of a brain, have the ability to act as stem cells, at least as far as being able to replicate other brain cells. Zombies are probably going after the glial cells to help restore some of their brain function.
Brains are also rich in cholesterol, which is essential for maintaining cell membrane pliability, which is a particular problem at the low body temperatures typical of zombies in non-tropical climates.
Psychologically, the act of eating brains can ease the pain of being dead (see movie "From Beyond")This would actually make more sense, when one considers some studies which note that zombies probably don't eat for nourishment, and perhaps the act of brain-eating represents an unholy, instinctive attempt on the undead's part to regain their lost minds.
Also we need to consider that by being dead, many zombies are missing teeth, and prefer eating something that's easy on the gums.
One last idea is that zombies eat brains as a matter of managing their habitat. As is well-known, a zombie's bite will infect a normal human and turn him or her into another zombie within a matter of minutes or hours. This, of course, assumes that the attacking zombie or its pack do not completely consume the victim. Now, you figure that a solo zombie or even one or two attacking in conjunction cannot eat all of the meat parts of a given victim in one sitting. This means that if a zombie just eats an arm, pretty soon it will be joined by a one-armed zombie that is also now on the hunt. Therefore it must now compete with the nub zombies in the pursuit of tasty human flesh. Eating the brain is both satisfying and prevents the rise of new zombies, so the zombie population does not increase to unsustainable levels.
I hope this helps my clients in their obsession with the subject. For those who are my clients, please don't ask again.
Monday, January 25, 2010
Bipolar Disorder
I have given a lot of thought to bipolar disorder over the last day, since I have been asked to blog on it. One thing that I have noticed about the disorder is that it is the new trendy diagnosis is psychiatry, along with Aspergers disorder. Ten years ago I noticed that ADHD also had its moment of fame. Many of my adult clients, who were children ten years ago were diagnosed with ADHD and it significantly and negatively altered their lives... Many of them didn't have ADHD, they were just boys! (See "Raising Cain", and excellent documentary on this phenomenon, PBS.com). I fear that in many ways a diagnosis of bipolar is following the same trend.
Maybe I should highlight my personal bias: I rarely diagnose people in my practice of psychotherapy. In many instances, I find diagnosing people with a disorder to be counterproductive, since many people will conform themselves to a diagnosis and become dependent on that diagnosis. For example, I had a client who was diagnosed by another practitioner to have borderline personality disorder. This client began to use this diagnosis as an excuse to avoid personal responsibility. I attempted to resolve the clients thinking errors of "I can't work anymore because of my severe problems with emotional regulation and distress intolerance". The client hadn't a problem working before the diagnosis, in fact, the client was a very successful accountant.
Anyways, back to bipolar. Although I feel clinicians should be rarely diagnose their clients, it is necessary, at times, to establish a good working treatment plan, but a clinician should focus on the treatment plan, not the diagnosis. When a client suffers from bipolar disorder, a good combination of medication and psychotherapy needs to be utilized. Oftentimes, someone suffering from this issue will only utilize one or the other, more often taking the medication route over the psychotherapy route. The combination needs to addressed, because a client who has bipolar often has a chaotic environment and disruptive interpersonal relational style.
I have also found, as with many other psychiatric disorders, bipolar is misunderstood. Although, I feel that it has recently been over-diagnosed, I also feel that many who truly have this disorder have minimized it. Here are some misconceptions:
1. Everyone has their ups and downs, so mine aren’t that serious.
Yes, everyone has good days and bad days, but when these ups and downs seriously interfere with your ability to work, relate to others and function effectively, it is advisable to seek out a psychiatrist.
2. Bipolar disorder is a mood disorder.
Half true. Bipolar disorder certainly affects mood, but it also affects cognition and the ability to perform mental tasks. Some days we can out-think Stephen Hawking. Other days we make Forrest Gump look like an intellectual.
3. Yes, but bipolar disorder is still a mood disorder.
Granted, but for most of us it is also part of a package deal that may include anxiety, substance and alcohol abuse and sleep disorders. Also, researchers are finding smoking guns linking the illness to heart disease, migraines and other physical ailments.
4. Bipolar disorder is characterized by mood swings ranging from severely depressed to wildly manic.
Not necessarily. Most people with bipolar disorder are depressed far more often than they are manic. Often, the manias are so subtle that they are overlooked by both patient and psychiatrist, resulting in misdiagnosis. People with bipolar disorder can also enter long periods of remission.
5. Mania is like being on top of the world—if you could only put it in a bottle and sell it.
You wouldn’t want to with most manias. True, some forms of mild mania are characterized by feelings of elation, but other types have road rage features built in. More severe mania turns up the heat, resulting in different kinds of out-of-control behavior that can ruin your career, relationships and reputation.
6. Bipolar disorder is caused by a chemical imbalance of the brain.
This is the simpler explanation—what you tell your family and friends. What you need to know is our genes, biology and life experience make us extremely sensitive to stress. Various stressors, such as personal relationships and financial worries, have the potential to trigger a mood episode if not effectively nipped in the bud.
7. Medications are all you need to combat bipolar disorder.
False. While medications are the foundation of treatment for bipolar disorder, recovery is problematic without a good lifestyle regimen (diet, exercise and sleep), effective coping skills and a support network. People with bipolar disorder also benefit from various forms of talking therapy and religious/spiritual practice.
I will make more comments on this in a future post... I've got to get some sleep!
Maybe I should highlight my personal bias: I rarely diagnose people in my practice of psychotherapy. In many instances, I find diagnosing people with a disorder to be counterproductive, since many people will conform themselves to a diagnosis and become dependent on that diagnosis. For example, I had a client who was diagnosed by another practitioner to have borderline personality disorder. This client began to use this diagnosis as an excuse to avoid personal responsibility. I attempted to resolve the clients thinking errors of "I can't work anymore because of my severe problems with emotional regulation and distress intolerance". The client hadn't a problem working before the diagnosis, in fact, the client was a very successful accountant.
Anyways, back to bipolar. Although I feel clinicians should be rarely diagnose their clients, it is necessary, at times, to establish a good working treatment plan, but a clinician should focus on the treatment plan, not the diagnosis. When a client suffers from bipolar disorder, a good combination of medication and psychotherapy needs to be utilized. Oftentimes, someone suffering from this issue will only utilize one or the other, more often taking the medication route over the psychotherapy route. The combination needs to addressed, because a client who has bipolar often has a chaotic environment and disruptive interpersonal relational style.
I have also found, as with many other psychiatric disorders, bipolar is misunderstood. Although, I feel that it has recently been over-diagnosed, I also feel that many who truly have this disorder have minimized it. Here are some misconceptions:
1. Everyone has their ups and downs, so mine aren’t that serious.
Yes, everyone has good days and bad days, but when these ups and downs seriously interfere with your ability to work, relate to others and function effectively, it is advisable to seek out a psychiatrist.
2. Bipolar disorder is a mood disorder.
Half true. Bipolar disorder certainly affects mood, but it also affects cognition and the ability to perform mental tasks. Some days we can out-think Stephen Hawking. Other days we make Forrest Gump look like an intellectual.
3. Yes, but bipolar disorder is still a mood disorder.
Granted, but for most of us it is also part of a package deal that may include anxiety, substance and alcohol abuse and sleep disorders. Also, researchers are finding smoking guns linking the illness to heart disease, migraines and other physical ailments.
4. Bipolar disorder is characterized by mood swings ranging from severely depressed to wildly manic.
Not necessarily. Most people with bipolar disorder are depressed far more often than they are manic. Often, the manias are so subtle that they are overlooked by both patient and psychiatrist, resulting in misdiagnosis. People with bipolar disorder can also enter long periods of remission.
5. Mania is like being on top of the world—if you could only put it in a bottle and sell it.
You wouldn’t want to with most manias. True, some forms of mild mania are characterized by feelings of elation, but other types have road rage features built in. More severe mania turns up the heat, resulting in different kinds of out-of-control behavior that can ruin your career, relationships and reputation.
6. Bipolar disorder is caused by a chemical imbalance of the brain.
This is the simpler explanation—what you tell your family and friends. What you need to know is our genes, biology and life experience make us extremely sensitive to stress. Various stressors, such as personal relationships and financial worries, have the potential to trigger a mood episode if not effectively nipped in the bud.
7. Medications are all you need to combat bipolar disorder.
False. While medications are the foundation of treatment for bipolar disorder, recovery is problematic without a good lifestyle regimen (diet, exercise and sleep), effective coping skills and a support network. People with bipolar disorder also benefit from various forms of talking therapy and religious/spiritual practice.
I will make more comments on this in a future post... I've got to get some sleep!
Friday, January 22, 2010
Random Links
- National Geographic has a wonderful interactive map of Manhattan where you can make direct comparisons with before and after the city was developed.
- In South Africa, pigeons are faster than the internet.
- Its not the appendix's fault for being useless, its our modern world.
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Here are some random Maps
George Orwell, in his essay Why I Write, says of the aesthetic desire to write that "above the level of a railway guide, no book is quite free from aesthetic considerations".
Then there is the redesigned Tokyo map. I've bought a poster of this from Zero Per Zero.
Scientists have also recently found what may be the oldest known map. Check out the overlay of animal drawings.
Finally, from the always reliably interesting Strange Maps, we have a reversed view of Europe.
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Accountability
The majority of people I see in therapy are there because they do not want to make a decision—they want me (their therapist) to make a decision for them. When I think of almost every mental or relational problem I have helped people with, there inevitably is a responsibility issue at the core of the matter. This is what the defense mechanisms of projections, displacement, splitting (triangulation), and others are defending against—personal accountability!
The following is a list of defense mechanisms(notice how many of them deal with responsibility avoidance at an unconscious, preconscious and conscious level):
Level 1 Defence Mechanisms
The mechanisms on this level, when predominating, almost always are severely pathological. These three defences, in conjunction, permit one to effectively rearrange external reality and eliminate the need to cope with reality. The pathological users of these mechanisms frequently appear crazy or insane to others. These are the "psychotic" defences, common in overt psychosis. However, they are found in dreams and throughout childhood as healthy mechanisms.
They include:
· Denial: Refusal to accept external reality because it is too threatening; arguing against an anxiety-provoking stimuli by stating it doesn't exist; resolution of emotional conflict and reduce anxiety by refusing to perceive or consciously acknowledge the more unpleasant aspects of external reality.
· Distortion: A gross reshaping of external reality to meet internal needs.
· Delusional Projection: Grossly frank delusions about external reality, usually of a persecutory nature.
Level 2 Defence Mechanisms
These mechanisms are often present in adults and more commonly present in adolescence. These mechanisms lessen distress and anxiety provoked by threatening people or by uncomfortable reality. People who excessively use such defences are seen as socially undesirable in that they are immature, difficult to deal with and seriously out of touch with reality. These are the so-called "immature" defences and overuse almost always lead to serious problems in a person's ability to cope effectively. These defences are often seen in severe depression and personality disorders. In adolescence, the occurrence of all of these defences is normal.
These include:
· Fantasy: Tendency to retreat into fantasy in order to resolve inner and outer conflicts.
· Projection: Projection is a primitive form of paranoia. Projection also reduces anxiety by allowing the expression of the undesirable impulses or desires without becoming consciously aware of them; attributing one's own unacknowledged unacceptable/unwanted thoughts and emotions to another; includes severe prejudice, severe jealousy, hypervigilance to external danger, and "injustice collecting.” It is shifting one's unacceptable thoughts, feelings and impulses within oneself onto someone else, such that those same thoughts, feelings, beliefs and motivations as perceived as being possessed by the other.
· Hypochondriasis (a.k.a. somatization): The transformation of negative feelings towards others into negative feelings toward self, pain, illness and anxiety.
· Passive aggression: Aggression towards others expressed indirectly or passively.
· Acting out: Direct expression of an unconscious wish or impulse without conscious awareness of the emotion that drives that expressive behavior.
Level 3 Defence Mechanisms
These mechanisms are considered neurotic, but fairly common in adults. Such defences have short-term advantages in coping, but can often cause long-term problems in relationships, work and in enjoying life when used as one's primary style of coping with the world.
These include:
· Displacement: Defence mechanism that shifts sexual or aggressive impulses to a more acceptable or less threatening target; redirecting emotion to a safer outlet; separation of emotion from its real object and redirection of the intense emotion toward someone or something that is less offensive or threatening in order to avoid dealing directly with what is frightening or threatening.
· Dissociation: Temporary drastic modification of one's personal identity or character to avoid emotional distress; separation or postponement of a feeling that normally would accompany a situation or thought.
· Intellectualization: A form of isolation; concentrating on the intellectual components of a situation so as to distance oneself from the associated anxiety-provoking emotions; separation of emotion from ideas; thinking about wishes in formal, affectively bland terms and not acting on them; avoiding unacceptable emotions by focusing on the intellectual aspects.
· Reaction Formation: Converting unconscious wishes or impulses that are perceived to be dangerous into their opposites; behavior that is completely the opposite of what one really wants or feels; taking the opposite belief because the true belief causes anxiety. This defence can work effectively for coping in the short term, but will eventually break down.
· Repression: Process of pulling thoughts into the unconscious and preventing painful or dangerous thoughts from entering consciousness; seemingly unexplainable naiveté, memory lapse or lack of awareness of one's own situation and condition; the emotion is conscious, but the idea behind it is absent.
Level 4 Defence Mechanisms
These are commonly found among emotionally healthy adults and are considered the most mature, even though many have their origins in the immature level. However, these have been adapted through the years so as to optimize success in life and relationships. The use of these defences enhances user pleasure and feelings of mastery. These defences help the users to integrate conflicting emotions and thoughts while still remaining effective. Persons who use these mechanisms are viewed as having virtues.
These include:
· Altruism: Constructive service to others that brings pleasure and personal satisfaction.
· Anticipation: Realistic planning for future discomfort.
· Humour: Overt expression of ideas and feelings (especially those that are unpleasant to focus on or too terrible to talk about) that gives pleasure to others. Humour enables someone to call a spade a spade, while "wit" is a form of displacement (see above under Category 3).
· Identification: The unconscious modelling of one's self upon another person's character and behavior.
· Introjection: Identifying with some idea or object so deeply that it becomes a part of that person.
· Sublimation: Transformation of negative emotions or instincts into positive actions, behavior, or emotion.
· Suppression: The conscious process of pushing thoughts into the preconscious; the conscious decision to delay paying attention to an emotion or need in order to cope with the present reality; able to later access uncomfortable or distressing emotions and accept them.
Defense mechanisms protect us from being consciously aware of a thought or feeling which we cannot tolerate. The defense only allows the unconscious thought or feeling to be expressed indirectly in a disguised form. When these defenses become dysfunctional, dangerous, deviant or distressing, a person needs to seek treatment; however, it is essential to know that many of these defenses operate within all of us. These defenses are not inherently negative, some may be quite positive, like sublimation. However and indeed, many of these defenses can contribute to responsibility avoidance. For example, I once worked with an individual who was in extreme denial surrounding his extreme heroin addiction. He had convinced himself that it was natural and even healthy for him. He felt that everyone was out to get him and as long as he could maintain his job and his relationships, there was no reason to change. In a therapy group for substance abuse, many of the group members tried to “break him.” They would challenge and confront him until they were blue in the face (literally). However, none of their efforts worked. Yet one day he presented the group with a very depressed affect which was unlike his usual bravado. He stated, “My girlfriend left me and I think I am going to get fired, all because of my drug use.” Now, the defenses were down and the group could get some real work done. He was now ready, willing and somewhat able to grow out of this dysfunction… so we thought. As the group gave him suggestions, and praised him on “seeing through the pink haze,” he began to become a little bit stoic. He then began to follow the group’s lead by asking for advice, which they in turn were eager to give. Over the next week, he practiced the behaviors that the group told him to do, began a 12-step program as they had advised, and he attempted to be as honest as he could with others, also as the group had advised. During the next group, he was absent, and he never returned. “What happened… he was doing so well?,” group members asked. On a private phone call I had with him some weeks later, he told me that the 12-step group was full of “self-righteous do-gooders,” the people he attempted to be honest with rejected him, and all the advice the group had given him had “blown up in his face.” He has made the group accountable for his failed attempts of sobriety.
How do we evoke accountability within ourselves when we may be in a state of defensiveness? It has much to do with our relationships with others and how they respond to us. Good feedback from those who care does not include advice, this will only perpetuate responsibility avoidance. Good listening is key to evoke accountability.
Thomas Gordon described some roadblocks to listening:
• Asking questions
• Agreeing, approving, or praising
• Advising, suggesting, providing solutions
• Arguing, persuading with logic, lecturing
• Analyzing or interpreting
• Assuring, sympathizing, or consoling
• Ordering, directing, or commanding
• Warning, cautioning, or threatening
• Moralizing, telling what they “should” do
• Disagreeing, judging, criticizing, or blaming
• Shaming, ridiculing, or labeling
• Withdrawing, distracting, humoring, or changing the subject
“Why are they roadblocks?” Gordon continues:
“They get in the speaker’s way. In order to keep moving, the speaker has to go around them… They have the effect of blocking, stopping, diverting, or changing direction… They insert the listener’s ‘stuff’… They communicate: One-up role: `Listen to me! I’m the expert.’ And they put-down (subtle, or not-so-subtle).”
Certainly, it is a difficult, if not an impossible job to evoke accountability in others, and very often it is difficult to evoke accountability in ourselves. The first step is to realize that there are many aspects of our lives that we do not want to investigate. The second step is to become aware of the fact that we are responsible for those aspects; we are even responsible for things outside of ourselves. In a strange way, it can be liberating to know that we are responsible for everything in our environment—we are not to blame—but we are responsible.
The following is a list of defense mechanisms(notice how many of them deal with responsibility avoidance at an unconscious, preconscious and conscious level):
Level 1 Defence Mechanisms
The mechanisms on this level, when predominating, almost always are severely pathological. These three defences, in conjunction, permit one to effectively rearrange external reality and eliminate the need to cope with reality. The pathological users of these mechanisms frequently appear crazy or insane to others. These are the "psychotic" defences, common in overt psychosis. However, they are found in dreams and throughout childhood as healthy mechanisms.
They include:
· Denial: Refusal to accept external reality because it is too threatening; arguing against an anxiety-provoking stimuli by stating it doesn't exist; resolution of emotional conflict and reduce anxiety by refusing to perceive or consciously acknowledge the more unpleasant aspects of external reality.
· Distortion: A gross reshaping of external reality to meet internal needs.
· Delusional Projection: Grossly frank delusions about external reality, usually of a persecutory nature.
Level 2 Defence Mechanisms
These mechanisms are often present in adults and more commonly present in adolescence. These mechanisms lessen distress and anxiety provoked by threatening people or by uncomfortable reality. People who excessively use such defences are seen as socially undesirable in that they are immature, difficult to deal with and seriously out of touch with reality. These are the so-called "immature" defences and overuse almost always lead to serious problems in a person's ability to cope effectively. These defences are often seen in severe depression and personality disorders. In adolescence, the occurrence of all of these defences is normal.
These include:
· Fantasy: Tendency to retreat into fantasy in order to resolve inner and outer conflicts.
· Projection: Projection is a primitive form of paranoia. Projection also reduces anxiety by allowing the expression of the undesirable impulses or desires without becoming consciously aware of them; attributing one's own unacknowledged unacceptable/unwanted thoughts and emotions to another; includes severe prejudice, severe jealousy, hypervigilance to external danger, and "injustice collecting.” It is shifting one's unacceptable thoughts, feelings and impulses within oneself onto someone else, such that those same thoughts, feelings, beliefs and motivations as perceived as being possessed by the other.
· Hypochondriasis (a.k.a. somatization): The transformation of negative feelings towards others into negative feelings toward self, pain, illness and anxiety.
· Passive aggression: Aggression towards others expressed indirectly or passively.
· Acting out: Direct expression of an unconscious wish or impulse without conscious awareness of the emotion that drives that expressive behavior.
Level 3 Defence Mechanisms
These mechanisms are considered neurotic, but fairly common in adults. Such defences have short-term advantages in coping, but can often cause long-term problems in relationships, work and in enjoying life when used as one's primary style of coping with the world.
These include:
· Displacement: Defence mechanism that shifts sexual or aggressive impulses to a more acceptable or less threatening target; redirecting emotion to a safer outlet; separation of emotion from its real object and redirection of the intense emotion toward someone or something that is less offensive or threatening in order to avoid dealing directly with what is frightening or threatening.
· Dissociation: Temporary drastic modification of one's personal identity or character to avoid emotional distress; separation or postponement of a feeling that normally would accompany a situation or thought.
· Intellectualization: A form of isolation; concentrating on the intellectual components of a situation so as to distance oneself from the associated anxiety-provoking emotions; separation of emotion from ideas; thinking about wishes in formal, affectively bland terms and not acting on them; avoiding unacceptable emotions by focusing on the intellectual aspects.
· Reaction Formation: Converting unconscious wishes or impulses that are perceived to be dangerous into their opposites; behavior that is completely the opposite of what one really wants or feels; taking the opposite belief because the true belief causes anxiety. This defence can work effectively for coping in the short term, but will eventually break down.
· Repression: Process of pulling thoughts into the unconscious and preventing painful or dangerous thoughts from entering consciousness; seemingly unexplainable naiveté, memory lapse or lack of awareness of one's own situation and condition; the emotion is conscious, but the idea behind it is absent.
Level 4 Defence Mechanisms
These are commonly found among emotionally healthy adults and are considered the most mature, even though many have their origins in the immature level. However, these have been adapted through the years so as to optimize success in life and relationships. The use of these defences enhances user pleasure and feelings of mastery. These defences help the users to integrate conflicting emotions and thoughts while still remaining effective. Persons who use these mechanisms are viewed as having virtues.
These include:
· Altruism: Constructive service to others that brings pleasure and personal satisfaction.
· Anticipation: Realistic planning for future discomfort.
· Humour: Overt expression of ideas and feelings (especially those that are unpleasant to focus on or too terrible to talk about) that gives pleasure to others. Humour enables someone to call a spade a spade, while "wit" is a form of displacement (see above under Category 3).
· Identification: The unconscious modelling of one's self upon another person's character and behavior.
· Introjection: Identifying with some idea or object so deeply that it becomes a part of that person.
· Sublimation: Transformation of negative emotions or instincts into positive actions, behavior, or emotion.
· Suppression: The conscious process of pushing thoughts into the preconscious; the conscious decision to delay paying attention to an emotion or need in order to cope with the present reality; able to later access uncomfortable or distressing emotions and accept them.
Defense mechanisms protect us from being consciously aware of a thought or feeling which we cannot tolerate. The defense only allows the unconscious thought or feeling to be expressed indirectly in a disguised form. When these defenses become dysfunctional, dangerous, deviant or distressing, a person needs to seek treatment; however, it is essential to know that many of these defenses operate within all of us. These defenses are not inherently negative, some may be quite positive, like sublimation. However and indeed, many of these defenses can contribute to responsibility avoidance. For example, I once worked with an individual who was in extreme denial surrounding his extreme heroin addiction. He had convinced himself that it was natural and even healthy for him. He felt that everyone was out to get him and as long as he could maintain his job and his relationships, there was no reason to change. In a therapy group for substance abuse, many of the group members tried to “break him.” They would challenge and confront him until they were blue in the face (literally). However, none of their efforts worked. Yet one day he presented the group with a very depressed affect which was unlike his usual bravado. He stated, “My girlfriend left me and I think I am going to get fired, all because of my drug use.” Now, the defenses were down and the group could get some real work done. He was now ready, willing and somewhat able to grow out of this dysfunction… so we thought. As the group gave him suggestions, and praised him on “seeing through the pink haze,” he began to become a little bit stoic. He then began to follow the group’s lead by asking for advice, which they in turn were eager to give. Over the next week, he practiced the behaviors that the group told him to do, began a 12-step program as they had advised, and he attempted to be as honest as he could with others, also as the group had advised. During the next group, he was absent, and he never returned. “What happened… he was doing so well?,” group members asked. On a private phone call I had with him some weeks later, he told me that the 12-step group was full of “self-righteous do-gooders,” the people he attempted to be honest with rejected him, and all the advice the group had given him had “blown up in his face.” He has made the group accountable for his failed attempts of sobriety.
How do we evoke accountability within ourselves when we may be in a state of defensiveness? It has much to do with our relationships with others and how they respond to us. Good feedback from those who care does not include advice, this will only perpetuate responsibility avoidance. Good listening is key to evoke accountability.
Thomas Gordon described some roadblocks to listening:
• Asking questions
• Agreeing, approving, or praising
• Advising, suggesting, providing solutions
• Arguing, persuading with logic, lecturing
• Analyzing or interpreting
• Assuring, sympathizing, or consoling
• Ordering, directing, or commanding
• Warning, cautioning, or threatening
• Moralizing, telling what they “should” do
• Disagreeing, judging, criticizing, or blaming
• Shaming, ridiculing, or labeling
• Withdrawing, distracting, humoring, or changing the subject
“Why are they roadblocks?” Gordon continues:
“They get in the speaker’s way. In order to keep moving, the speaker has to go around them… They have the effect of blocking, stopping, diverting, or changing direction… They insert the listener’s ‘stuff’… They communicate: One-up role: `Listen to me! I’m the expert.’ And they put-down (subtle, or not-so-subtle).”
Certainly, it is a difficult, if not an impossible job to evoke accountability in others, and very often it is difficult to evoke accountability in ourselves. The first step is to realize that there are many aspects of our lives that we do not want to investigate. The second step is to become aware of the fact that we are responsible for those aspects; we are even responsible for things outside of ourselves. In a strange way, it can be liberating to know that we are responsible for everything in our environment—we are not to blame—but we are responsible.
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Forgiveness
This is a section from my upcoming book "Healing Secrets"
There are two principles all people need to learn to overcome a lack of authenticity. These are repenting and forgiving. Repenting is essential, because this action leads to an understanding that we make mistakes, we are not perfect, and that we are “okay.” When we do something wrong, say sorry and make restitution. Asking God for forgiveness is liberating and evokes healthy shame and guilt, which as John Bradshaw states “safeguards the soul” because we will conceptualize that we have limits and boundaries, and truly we are good people who perform badly at times. Again, it is “okay,” we must not be so hard on ourselves. The danger of the shadow identity is that an individual can become dichotomous in thought, action and belief. On one extreme a person may need to be “perfect,” achieving extremely in everything. They also are compelled to show little-to-no emotions, because this is weakness. These people “have to” and “have no choice” in their need to achieve. On the other side of the spectrum of the shadow identity, an individual sees himself as a “no-good sinner” not worthy of “redemption.” Both sides of the spectrum are toxic and can lead to personal destruction.
The Greek word for which the English term “repentance” was derived denotes a change of mind, or in effect, a fresh view about God (Bible Dictionary, p. 760). This idea is truly at odds with the notions of punishment and pain, with which many people associate the term of repentance.
Forgiveness of ourselves is important and forgiveness of others is essential for our healing. Anyone who has ever been victimized—and that includes survivors of crime, accidents, childhood abuse, political imprisonment, warfare, and so on—must decide whether or not to forgive those who made the violation, even if that person is not repentant. There can be no way around this choice: either you decide to forgive the person who hurt you, or you hold on to bitterness and anger until it consumes you. Holding on to bitterness and anger can perpetuate further bitterness and anger. One example I witnessed was an individual who had been molested by a grandfather, who had passed away without ever acknowledging his wrongdoing. The survivor’s anger and desire for revenge became an obsession. She so focused on the crime that she completely missed the opportunity she had been given to learn about real love, forgiveness and letting go. In its place, she seemed to believe that hatred would satisfy her thirst for vengeance and would somehow bring healing. As a result, this individual repeated over and over, “I’ll never forgive.” One of my favorite examples to use with children and adults of a character who didn’t forgive was that of Darth Vader. He was so preoccupied with those who trespassed against him that his hatred and revenge turned him literally into a machine. What a powerful archetype Darth Vader is of vengeance.
To forgive can be a problem for some to conceptualize because it can be a concept that is obscure, especially to our Western perspective, simply because we have been bombarded by the ideas of “getting even” and “mercy is for the weak.” And many times, the concept of forgiveness gets confused with the concept of reconciliation, which is related to forgiveness. Tangentially, reconciliation and restitution are even more closely related than forgiveness and reconciliation, although all three terms are orbital. Restitution “denotes a return of something once present, but has been taken away or lost.” (Bible Dictionary. P. 761) Reconciliation comes from the Latin words re-, meaning “again,” and conciliare, which means “to bring together.”
Again, the difficulty surrounding forgiveness is an understanding of the difference between reconciliation and forgiveness. And in many instances persons who have wronged another do not “own up” to their mistakes, especially when pride is involved, thus restitution does not happen and reconciliation doesn’t take place. And when reconciliation is not present, then what is the victim to do? Most victims don’t realize that forgiveness is a choice on their part, no matter what the victimizer does, or does not, do. Furthermore, if the victimizer seeks reconciliation, that action and healing can only occur if the victim is willing and able to forgive. Forgiveness is always the victim’s, or the survivor’s, decision. Again and in addition, reconciliation is impossible except the victim/survivor is willing and able to forgive and the victimizer apologizes or restores that which has been taken or was lost. Now I have been using the verbs “willing and able” because there is something problematic concerning forgiveness—you can’t fully forgive until you can allow yourself to feel the pain you were caused. And in our Western society, it seems that everyone attempts to avoid pain, or any other emotion for that matter. This is why forgiveness can be tricky. And if we don’t feel that pain, something much more toxic will take its place—anger and revenge! This occurs because a person who does not allow the expression of pain unconsciously builds resentment. This resentment, as it builds, needs to find an outlet. This outlet may be a physical one, such as hypertension or headaches, but usually the outlet is a more psychological one, such as depression or anger (turned outward or inward towards one’s self).
I once worked with a gentleman who, after twenty years of work, was fired because of office politics. He came in to see me because of an addiction to pain pills. He was a very sophisticated individual and saw himself as an enlightened and intellectual individual. In groups, this man would make many wonderful insights into other group members. He revealed one day that he felt he was addicted to anger. Anger began to fill the void that drugs had occupied. He began to say in group, “Those bastards who took away my job… I did nothing wrong, they were intimidated by me and because of their power issues they fired me.” Of course, his former employer made no restitution, so therefore he could “never forgive them,” although at the time of his firing he had said to his wife, “Oh well, it’s not that big of a deal, I’m just going to forget about it.” He had prematurely forgiven his employer, which leads to resentment, which led him to become addicted to pain pills. Psychologically, the concept of “forget” is called “repressed.” And when something is repressed, it hangs around, under the surface, needing expression somehow, physically or emotionally. When pain is repressed, it drags down all the emotions associated with that pain, thus making forgiveness impossible, because on some level you are just “keeping score.” Forgiveness is not the same thing as forgetting. To forgive is simply to stop wishing for revenge or to stop wanting to see the other person suffer in some way. But forgiveness is not blind. Because trust has been violated you cannot just forget what happened or else the same thing might happen again.
There are two principles all people need to learn to overcome a lack of authenticity. These are repenting and forgiving. Repenting is essential, because this action leads to an understanding that we make mistakes, we are not perfect, and that we are “okay.” When we do something wrong, say sorry and make restitution. Asking God for forgiveness is liberating and evokes healthy shame and guilt, which as John Bradshaw states “safeguards the soul” because we will conceptualize that we have limits and boundaries, and truly we are good people who perform badly at times. Again, it is “okay,” we must not be so hard on ourselves. The danger of the shadow identity is that an individual can become dichotomous in thought, action and belief. On one extreme a person may need to be “perfect,” achieving extremely in everything. They also are compelled to show little-to-no emotions, because this is weakness. These people “have to” and “have no choice” in their need to achieve. On the other side of the spectrum of the shadow identity, an individual sees himself as a “no-good sinner” not worthy of “redemption.” Both sides of the spectrum are toxic and can lead to personal destruction.
The Greek word for which the English term “repentance” was derived denotes a change of mind, or in effect, a fresh view about God (Bible Dictionary, p. 760). This idea is truly at odds with the notions of punishment and pain, with which many people associate the term of repentance.
Forgiveness of ourselves is important and forgiveness of others is essential for our healing. Anyone who has ever been victimized—and that includes survivors of crime, accidents, childhood abuse, political imprisonment, warfare, and so on—must decide whether or not to forgive those who made the violation, even if that person is not repentant. There can be no way around this choice: either you decide to forgive the person who hurt you, or you hold on to bitterness and anger until it consumes you. Holding on to bitterness and anger can perpetuate further bitterness and anger. One example I witnessed was an individual who had been molested by a grandfather, who had passed away without ever acknowledging his wrongdoing. The survivor’s anger and desire for revenge became an obsession. She so focused on the crime that she completely missed the opportunity she had been given to learn about real love, forgiveness and letting go. In its place, she seemed to believe that hatred would satisfy her thirst for vengeance and would somehow bring healing. As a result, this individual repeated over and over, “I’ll never forgive.” One of my favorite examples to use with children and adults of a character who didn’t forgive was that of Darth Vader. He was so preoccupied with those who trespassed against him that his hatred and revenge turned him literally into a machine. What a powerful archetype Darth Vader is of vengeance.
To forgive can be a problem for some to conceptualize because it can be a concept that is obscure, especially to our Western perspective, simply because we have been bombarded by the ideas of “getting even” and “mercy is for the weak.” And many times, the concept of forgiveness gets confused with the concept of reconciliation, which is related to forgiveness. Tangentially, reconciliation and restitution are even more closely related than forgiveness and reconciliation, although all three terms are orbital. Restitution “denotes a return of something once present, but has been taken away or lost.” (Bible Dictionary. P. 761) Reconciliation comes from the Latin words re-, meaning “again,” and conciliare, which means “to bring together.”
Again, the difficulty surrounding forgiveness is an understanding of the difference between reconciliation and forgiveness. And in many instances persons who have wronged another do not “own up” to their mistakes, especially when pride is involved, thus restitution does not happen and reconciliation doesn’t take place. And when reconciliation is not present, then what is the victim to do? Most victims don’t realize that forgiveness is a choice on their part, no matter what the victimizer does, or does not, do. Furthermore, if the victimizer seeks reconciliation, that action and healing can only occur if the victim is willing and able to forgive. Forgiveness is always the victim’s, or the survivor’s, decision. Again and in addition, reconciliation is impossible except the victim/survivor is willing and able to forgive and the victimizer apologizes or restores that which has been taken or was lost. Now I have been using the verbs “willing and able” because there is something problematic concerning forgiveness—you can’t fully forgive until you can allow yourself to feel the pain you were caused. And in our Western society, it seems that everyone attempts to avoid pain, or any other emotion for that matter. This is why forgiveness can be tricky. And if we don’t feel that pain, something much more toxic will take its place—anger and revenge! This occurs because a person who does not allow the expression of pain unconsciously builds resentment. This resentment, as it builds, needs to find an outlet. This outlet may be a physical one, such as hypertension or headaches, but usually the outlet is a more psychological one, such as depression or anger (turned outward or inward towards one’s self).
I once worked with a gentleman who, after twenty years of work, was fired because of office politics. He came in to see me because of an addiction to pain pills. He was a very sophisticated individual and saw himself as an enlightened and intellectual individual. In groups, this man would make many wonderful insights into other group members. He revealed one day that he felt he was addicted to anger. Anger began to fill the void that drugs had occupied. He began to say in group, “Those bastards who took away my job… I did nothing wrong, they were intimidated by me and because of their power issues they fired me.” Of course, his former employer made no restitution, so therefore he could “never forgive them,” although at the time of his firing he had said to his wife, “Oh well, it’s not that big of a deal, I’m just going to forget about it.” He had prematurely forgiven his employer, which leads to resentment, which led him to become addicted to pain pills. Psychologically, the concept of “forget” is called “repressed.” And when something is repressed, it hangs around, under the surface, needing expression somehow, physically or emotionally. When pain is repressed, it drags down all the emotions associated with that pain, thus making forgiveness impossible, because on some level you are just “keeping score.” Forgiveness is not the same thing as forgetting. To forgive is simply to stop wishing for revenge or to stop wanting to see the other person suffer in some way. But forgiveness is not blind. Because trust has been violated you cannot just forget what happened or else the same thing might happen again.
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Reflections on "the Secret"
I took the plunge and read and processed aspects of the book "the Secret" along with the ideas of the " law of attraction" and I have come to find that though some of the ideas are beneficial, the inferences made in this book can be rather damaging. The ideas in this book are not new--for generations, mankind has been attempting to avoid responsibility (see my post dated July 2009). And indeed, books like "the Secret" espouse the doctrine of accountability avoidance--though, the author's idea of keeping a gratitude journal is an exceptional idea--however, if you spend your time just being grateful and sending your positive energy out to the universe, I am sorry to say, nothing will happen! This life is a life of volition, and we need to take action to have things happen for us. For so James, the half-brother of Jesus states:
Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast
faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works (James 2:17-18 KJV)
James Arthur Ray is one of the most famous self-help gurus on the concept of The Law of Attraction
He is the author of The Science of Success: How to Attract Prosperity and Create Harmonic Wealth Through Proven Principles. He is also one of the co-authors in the book/movie The Secret.
He says, “Here’s the question I want you to consider - do you treat yourself the way that you want other people to treat you?”
As Mel Lawrenz writes in an article on the Secret: "Does that sound familiar? It is a twist, a pretty severe twist, of one of the most universal principles of life called the Golden Rule, which Jesus described as “do to others as you would have them do to you." "So this tried and true egoless principle of life (“do to others...”) becomes the ultimate form of self-centeredness (“treat yourself...”).
"The Law of Attraction would lead you to believe that you are entitled to whatever you want, and that you have the power within yourself to gain it. I feel that this is one of the biggest problems of society--entitlement! And it should not be perpetuated." The book The Secret says: “Begin right now to shout to the universe: life is so easy. Life is so good. All good things come to me.” And “You deserve all good things life has to offer.” “You are the creator of you, and the law of attraction is your magnificent tool to create whatever you want in your life. Welcome to the magic of life and the magnificence of you.” Having this line of thought, would lead to an increase of narcissism and a decrease in a dependence on God... which will truly bring you what you need!
Mel Lawrenz continues: "Very different from the message of Jesus: the first will be last and the last will be first; lose your life and you will find it. "
Lawrenz concludes: "And in this we find the confusion of The Law of attraction. It is all about the Ego, for the Ego, obsessed with the Ego." Even Newsweek magazine offers this ethical critique: "On an ethical level, The Secret appears deplorable. It concerns itself almost entirely with a narrow range of middle class concerns -- houses, cars, vacations, followed by health and relationships, with the rest of humanity a very distant sixth."
It is a dangerous idea to serve yourself. Indeed, we do need to get our needs met, but if we focus exclusively on ourselves, we will be lost. One of the purposes of this life is to serve other (Moses 1:39)
Please give me feedback if you agree or disagree with my ideas, I love discussion.
In this polarized society we live in, where all truth has been determined for us by political correctness, I fear that the art of discussion has been lost
Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast
faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works (James 2:17-18 KJV)
James Arthur Ray is one of the most famous self-help gurus on the concept of The Law of Attraction
He is the author of The Science of Success: How to Attract Prosperity and Create Harmonic Wealth Through Proven Principles. He is also one of the co-authors in the book/movie The Secret.
He says, “Here’s the question I want you to consider - do you treat yourself the way that you want other people to treat you?”
As Mel Lawrenz writes in an article on the Secret: "Does that sound familiar? It is a twist, a pretty severe twist, of one of the most universal principles of life called the Golden Rule, which Jesus described as “do to others as you would have them do to you." "So this tried and true egoless principle of life (“do to others...”) becomes the ultimate form of self-centeredness (“treat yourself...”).
"The Law of Attraction would lead you to believe that you are entitled to whatever you want, and that you have the power within yourself to gain it. I feel that this is one of the biggest problems of society--entitlement! And it should not be perpetuated." The book The Secret says: “Begin right now to shout to the universe: life is so easy. Life is so good. All good things come to me.” And “You deserve all good things life has to offer.” “You are the creator of you, and the law of attraction is your magnificent tool to create whatever you want in your life. Welcome to the magic of life and the magnificence of you.” Having this line of thought, would lead to an increase of narcissism and a decrease in a dependence on God... which will truly bring you what you need!
Mel Lawrenz continues: "Very different from the message of Jesus: the first will be last and the last will be first; lose your life and you will find it. "
Lawrenz concludes: "And in this we find the confusion of The Law of attraction. It is all about the Ego, for the Ego, obsessed with the Ego." Even Newsweek magazine offers this ethical critique: "On an ethical level, The Secret appears deplorable. It concerns itself almost entirely with a narrow range of middle class concerns -- houses, cars, vacations, followed by health and relationships, with the rest of humanity a very distant sixth."
It is a dangerous idea to serve yourself. Indeed, we do need to get our needs met, but if we focus exclusively on ourselves, we will be lost. One of the purposes of this life is to serve other (Moses 1:39)
Please give me feedback if you agree or disagree with my ideas, I love discussion.
In this polarized society we live in, where all truth has been determined for us by political correctness, I fear that the art of discussion has been lost
Spiritual Concerns - Avoidance and gaining purpose
The writer of Ecclesiastes said, “To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven… A time to be born, and a time to die.” (Eccl. 3:1–2; see also Alma 12:27.) Spencer W. Kimball taught: “Death may be the opening of the door to opportunity. Of course, we are never quite ready for the change. Not knowing when it should come, we fight to retain our life. Yet we ought not to be afraid of death.” (Spencer W. Kimball, “Friend to Friend: Tragedy or Destiny?,” Friend, Apr 1974, 6). Everyone must die, but the tragedy is not found in the occurrence of death, only in the action of sin, again the “sting of death”.
The Book of Mormon prophet, Alma reflected that through the Fall “all mankind became a lost and fallen people” (Alma 12:22). He expounded to his son Corianton that “as … the fall had brought upon all mankind a spiritual death as well as a temporal, that is, they were cut off from the presence of the Lord, it was expedient that mankind should be reclaimed from this spiritual death” (Alma 42:9; see also Alma 12:16, 32; Alma 40:26; Hel. 14:16). Again, we see that a through the Fall, a need for an Atonement occurred. Only by and through Jesus Christ could one be reclaimed from both physical and spiritual death. And only through Jesus Christ and his Atonement for all of humankind could stop avoiding the spiritual concern of death, and learn to gain mental wellness through a reliance on Him who is eager to save.
Some avoid death by atheistic view of non-existence after death. Thomas S. Monson stated: “(Need to add portions of Pres. Monson’s April 2007 conference address “I know that my redeemer lives” in regards to those who don’t believe in life after death)
Gaining purpose from death
Eve, the great mother of us all, stated profoundly to Adam: “Were it not for our transgression we never should have had seed, and never should have known good and evil, and the joy of our redemption, and the eternal life which God giveth unto all the obedient.” (Moses 5:11.)
Eve rejoiced in the Fall, and the knowledge that the mortal test had begun. Now, because of their transgression, children could be born. They could now experience all of the pain, yet all of the joy that could be known as they traveled up the road to exaltation. And they now could also know the profound impact of physical and spiritual death.
As with Eve, so Adam likewise, blessed with the gift of the Holy Ghost, “blessed God and was filled, and began to prophesy concerning all the families of the earth, saying: Blessed be the name of God, for because of my transgression my eyes are opened, and in this life I shall have joy, and again in the flesh I shall see God.” (Moses 5:10.)
Adam and Eve’s eyes were open as they contemplated the need for a Redeemer after their Fall. Similarily, when we realize the fragility of life itself we can gain spiritual insight and purpose. Moreover, our realization of the finite nature of life can lead us to change our lives, when confronted with the notion of spiritual and physical death. We have many literary allusions of this: The story of War and Peace is one example. In this work, Tolstoy, the character, Pierre feels the purposelessness of his life as a Russian aristocrat. The crux of the book occurs when Pierre, after searching for his purpose in life, is captured by Napoleon’s army and sentenced to death. After watching the execution of other men, and as he prepares himself to die, he is unrepentantly reprieved. This experience gives him the purpose he was looking for. Because he was faced with his death, he came to an awareness his meaning in life, and through giving himself more completely to relationships and attempting to effusively experience every moment of life, he lives the remainder of his life full of purpose.
Many of Tolstoy’s works had these themes of ultimate concern. In “The Death of Ivan Ilyich”, Ivan is a relentless tyrant who develops a fatal illness. After his diagnosis and his realization that he was going to die, he spends the last remaining days of his life full of purpose, for he realizes “[I will] die badly because [I have] lived badly”. Truly sin is living badly, and gaining purpose in life, especially through an understanding of the gospel, is to live life full of meaning.
(next: "the Atonement's answer")
The Book of Mormon prophet, Alma reflected that through the Fall “all mankind became a lost and fallen people” (Alma 12:22). He expounded to his son Corianton that “as … the fall had brought upon all mankind a spiritual death as well as a temporal, that is, they were cut off from the presence of the Lord, it was expedient that mankind should be reclaimed from this spiritual death” (Alma 42:9; see also Alma 12:16, 32; Alma 40:26; Hel. 14:16). Again, we see that a through the Fall, a need for an Atonement occurred. Only by and through Jesus Christ could one be reclaimed from both physical and spiritual death. And only through Jesus Christ and his Atonement for all of humankind could stop avoiding the spiritual concern of death, and learn to gain mental wellness through a reliance on Him who is eager to save.
Some avoid death by atheistic view of non-existence after death. Thomas S. Monson stated: “(Need to add portions of Pres. Monson’s April 2007 conference address “I know that my redeemer lives” in regards to those who don’t believe in life after death)
Gaining purpose from death
Eve, the great mother of us all, stated profoundly to Adam: “Were it not for our transgression we never should have had seed, and never should have known good and evil, and the joy of our redemption, and the eternal life which God giveth unto all the obedient.” (Moses 5:11.)
Eve rejoiced in the Fall, and the knowledge that the mortal test had begun. Now, because of their transgression, children could be born. They could now experience all of the pain, yet all of the joy that could be known as they traveled up the road to exaltation. And they now could also know the profound impact of physical and spiritual death.
As with Eve, so Adam likewise, blessed with the gift of the Holy Ghost, “blessed God and was filled, and began to prophesy concerning all the families of the earth, saying: Blessed be the name of God, for because of my transgression my eyes are opened, and in this life I shall have joy, and again in the flesh I shall see God.” (Moses 5:10.)
Adam and Eve’s eyes were open as they contemplated the need for a Redeemer after their Fall. Similarily, when we realize the fragility of life itself we can gain spiritual insight and purpose. Moreover, our realization of the finite nature of life can lead us to change our lives, when confronted with the notion of spiritual and physical death. We have many literary allusions of this: The story of War and Peace is one example. In this work, Tolstoy, the character, Pierre feels the purposelessness of his life as a Russian aristocrat. The crux of the book occurs when Pierre, after searching for his purpose in life, is captured by Napoleon’s army and sentenced to death. After watching the execution of other men, and as he prepares himself to die, he is unrepentantly reprieved. This experience gives him the purpose he was looking for. Because he was faced with his death, he came to an awareness his meaning in life, and through giving himself more completely to relationships and attempting to effusively experience every moment of life, he lives the remainder of his life full of purpose.
Many of Tolstoy’s works had these themes of ultimate concern. In “The Death of Ivan Ilyich”, Ivan is a relentless tyrant who develops a fatal illness. After his diagnosis and his realization that he was going to die, he spends the last remaining days of his life full of purpose, for he realizes “[I will] die badly because [I have] lived badly”. Truly sin is living badly, and gaining purpose in life, especially through an understanding of the gospel, is to live life full of meaning.
(next: "the Atonement's answer")
Friday, January 15, 2010
Spiritual Concerns (continued)
The following will be included in my book "Atonement Focused Therapy":
Also, look for my book "Healing Stories" coming out this May.
As part of a discussion I began in July 2009, I have added to following as a continuation of the ideas of that posting:
Specialness and Rescuer
Ernest Becker stated “The irony of man’s condition is that the deepest need is to be free of the anxiety of death and annihilation; but it is life itself which awakens it and so we must shrink from being alive”. In his book “Existential Psychotherapy”, Irvin Yalom describes two forms of death avoidance: “Specialness” and the need for an “Ultimate Rescuer”. Specialness is a defense against death, especially when someone is faced with it [death]. A person who is dying, or has someone close to them who is dying, may begin to believe that in some way they are different and that death can not touch them, I have even heard once: “God will save me from this death… Maybe I will be translated” and the client wasn’t being facetious. But personal specialness can be more elusive as well: A client, I will name Dave, in his avoidance of death, created a shield of specialness around him. Although, he himself was not dying, nevertheless, he wanted nothing to do with aging. Robert Frost reflected: “Forgive, O Lord, my little jokes on Thee/And I’ll forgive Thy great big one on me.” At the end of treatment with Dave, when he was responsive towards his patterns, he stated that this quote by Robert Frost was his theme, but that he “merely wasn’t aware of it”.
Fear of Death
There have been many writers on the subject of the fear of death, one such writer was Heidegger. He wrote of the fear of death as the “impossibility of further possibilities”. Essentially, this was one of Dave’s issues. As stated previously, he didn’t want to limit his possibilities by making a decision, thus having an impossibility of further possibilities. Kierkegaard discussed these concepts explicitly throughout his writings. He discussed the fear of death as “non-being”. Furthermore, Kierkegaard made a clear distinction between fear and anxiety; “he contrasted fear that is fear of some thing with dread (anxiety) that is fear of no thing” (Yalom, Existential Psychotherapy, 1980). Kierkegaard added “not—a nothing with which the individual has nothing to do.” One dreads becoming nothingness, and this anxiety does not have a location, it is almost a free floating dread. Rollo May states, “it attacks us from all sides at once—a fear that can neither be understood nor located cannot be confronted and becomes more terrible still” (May, The Meaning of Anxiety, 1977). So how does a person defend against a fear of “no-thing”? Well, you could avoid the subject all together and develop a perception of personal specialness, or look for someone to rescue you in a negative way, or the healthy options rally assistance from God to overcome it. Truly, faith is the polar opposite of fear and as a person displaces their fear for a faith in Christ, fear is extinguished.
Also, look for my book "Healing Stories" coming out this May.
As part of a discussion I began in July 2009, I have added to following as a continuation of the ideas of that posting:
Specialness and Rescuer
Ernest Becker stated “The irony of man’s condition is that the deepest need is to be free of the anxiety of death and annihilation; but it is life itself which awakens it and so we must shrink from being alive”. In his book “Existential Psychotherapy”, Irvin Yalom describes two forms of death avoidance: “Specialness” and the need for an “Ultimate Rescuer”. Specialness is a defense against death, especially when someone is faced with it [death]. A person who is dying, or has someone close to them who is dying, may begin to believe that in some way they are different and that death can not touch them, I have even heard once: “God will save me from this death… Maybe I will be translated” and the client wasn’t being facetious. But personal specialness can be more elusive as well: A client, I will name Dave, in his avoidance of death, created a shield of specialness around him. Although, he himself was not dying, nevertheless, he wanted nothing to do with aging. Robert Frost reflected: “Forgive, O Lord, my little jokes on Thee/And I’ll forgive Thy great big one on me.” At the end of treatment with Dave, when he was responsive towards his patterns, he stated that this quote by Robert Frost was his theme, but that he “merely wasn’t aware of it”.
Fear of Death
There have been many writers on the subject of the fear of death, one such writer was Heidegger. He wrote of the fear of death as the “impossibility of further possibilities”. Essentially, this was one of Dave’s issues. As stated previously, he didn’t want to limit his possibilities by making a decision, thus having an impossibility of further possibilities. Kierkegaard discussed these concepts explicitly throughout his writings. He discussed the fear of death as “non-being”. Furthermore, Kierkegaard made a clear distinction between fear and anxiety; “he contrasted fear that is fear of some thing with dread (anxiety) that is fear of no thing” (Yalom, Existential Psychotherapy, 1980). Kierkegaard added “not—a nothing with which the individual has nothing to do.” One dreads becoming nothingness, and this anxiety does not have a location, it is almost a free floating dread. Rollo May states, “it attacks us from all sides at once—a fear that can neither be understood nor located cannot be confronted and becomes more terrible still” (May, The Meaning of Anxiety, 1977). So how does a person defend against a fear of “no-thing”? Well, you could avoid the subject all together and develop a perception of personal specialness, or look for someone to rescue you in a negative way, or the healthy options rally assistance from God to overcome it. Truly, faith is the polar opposite of fear and as a person displaces their fear for a faith in Christ, fear is extinguished.
Thursday, January 7, 2010
Reflections on "the Secret"
I took the plunge and read and processed aspects of the book "the Secret" along with the ideas of the " law of attraction" and I have come to find that though some of the ideas are beneficial, the inferences made in this book can be rather damaging. The ideas in this book are not new--for generations, mankind has been attempting to avoid responsibility (see my post dated July 2009). And indeed, books like "the Secret" espouse the doctrine of accountability avoidance--though, the author's idea of keeping a gratitude journal is an exceptional idea--however, if you spend your time just being grateful and sending your positive energy out to the universe, I am sorry to say, nothing will happen! This life is a life of volition, and we need to take action to have things happen for us. For so James, the half-brother of Jesus states:
Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast
faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works (James 2:17-18 KJV)
James Arthur Ray is one of the most famous self-help gurus on the concept of The Law of Attraction
He is the author of The Science of Success: How to Attract Prosperity and Create Harmonic Wealth Through Proven Principles. He is also one of the co-authors in the book/movie The Secret.
He says, “Here’s the question I want you to consider - do you treat yourself the way that you want other people to treat you?”
As Mel Lawrenz writes in an article on the Secret: "Does that sound familiar? It is a twist, a pretty severe twist, of one of the most universal principles of life called the Golden Rule, which Jesus described as “do to others as you would have them do to you." "So this tried and true egoless principle of life (“do to others...”) becomes the ultimate form of self-centeredness (“treat yourself...”).
"The Law of Attraction would lead you to believe that you are entitled to whatever you want, and that you have the power within yourself to gain it. I feel that this is one of the biggest problems of society--entitlement! And it should not be perpetuated." The book The Secret says: “Begin right now to shout to the universe: life is so easy. Life is so good. All good things come to me.” And “You deserve all good things life has to offer.” “You are the creator of you, and the law of attraction is your magnificent tool to create whatever you want in your life. Welcome to the magic of life and the magnificence of you.” Having this line of thought, would lead to an increase of narcissism and a decrease in a dependence on God... which will truly bring you what you need!
Mel Lawrenz continues: "Very different from the message of Jesus: the first will be last and the last will be first; lose your life and you will find it. "
Lawrenz concludes: "And in this we find the confusion of The Law of attraction. It is all about the Ego, for the Ego, obsessed with the Ego." Even Newsweek magazine offers this ethical critique: "On an ethical level, The Secret appears deplorable. It concerns itself almost entirely with a narrow range of middle class concerns -- houses, cars, vacations, followed by health and relationships, with the rest of humanity a very distant sixth."
It is a dangerous idea to serve yourself. Indeed, we do need to get our needs met, but if we focus exclusively on ourselves, we will be lost. One of the purposes of this life is to serve other (Moses 1:39)
Please give me feedback if you agree or disagree with my ideas, I love discussion.
In this polarized society we live in, where all truth has been determined for us by political correctness, I fear that the art of discussion has been lost
Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast
faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works (James 2:17-18 KJV)
James Arthur Ray is one of the most famous self-help gurus on the concept of The Law of Attraction
He is the author of The Science of Success: How to Attract Prosperity and Create Harmonic Wealth Through Proven Principles. He is also one of the co-authors in the book/movie The Secret.
He says, “Here’s the question I want you to consider - do you treat yourself the way that you want other people to treat you?”
As Mel Lawrenz writes in an article on the Secret: "Does that sound familiar? It is a twist, a pretty severe twist, of one of the most universal principles of life called the Golden Rule, which Jesus described as “do to others as you would have them do to you." "So this tried and true egoless principle of life (“do to others...”) becomes the ultimate form of self-centeredness (“treat yourself...”).
"The Law of Attraction would lead you to believe that you are entitled to whatever you want, and that you have the power within yourself to gain it. I feel that this is one of the biggest problems of society--entitlement! And it should not be perpetuated." The book The Secret says: “Begin right now to shout to the universe: life is so easy. Life is so good. All good things come to me.” And “You deserve all good things life has to offer.” “You are the creator of you, and the law of attraction is your magnificent tool to create whatever you want in your life. Welcome to the magic of life and the magnificence of you.” Having this line of thought, would lead to an increase of narcissism and a decrease in a dependence on God... which will truly bring you what you need!
Mel Lawrenz continues: "Very different from the message of Jesus: the first will be last and the last will be first; lose your life and you will find it. "
Lawrenz concludes: "And in this we find the confusion of The Law of attraction. It is all about the Ego, for the Ego, obsessed with the Ego." Even Newsweek magazine offers this ethical critique: "On an ethical level, The Secret appears deplorable. It concerns itself almost entirely with a narrow range of middle class concerns -- houses, cars, vacations, followed by health and relationships, with the rest of humanity a very distant sixth."
It is a dangerous idea to serve yourself. Indeed, we do need to get our needs met, but if we focus exclusively on ourselves, we will be lost. One of the purposes of this life is to serve other (Moses 1:39)
Please give me feedback if you agree or disagree with my ideas, I love discussion.
In this polarized society we live in, where all truth has been determined for us by political correctness, I fear that the art of discussion has been lost
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)