![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
[email protected]Shown: posts 1 to 25 of 38. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by 64bowtie on May 9, 2004, at 0:35:55
I hear over and over, that many are in terrible emotional pain, real and imagined. What is emotional pain? I didn't just fall off the turnip truck.......
Do many feel these pains in thier gut? The gut being heart, stomach, intestines, and diaphram, does the pain happen because stuff doesn't fit?
What doesn't fit? Is it our expectations? Is it something someone said (a story about stuff)?
Why can't we accept and go on, without tearing our selves to shreds?
Really! What is the pain? what does the pain mean?
Rod
Posted by shar on May 9, 2004, at 2:06:53
In reply to I wonder, what.....?, posted by 64bowtie on May 9, 2004, at 0:35:55
Rod,
Do you not have emotional pain?
Shar
Posted by finelinebob on May 9, 2004, at 3:11:37
In reply to I wonder, what.....?, posted by 64bowtie on May 9, 2004, at 0:35:55
What's pain in the first place? Wherever the message starts, the confirmation is going to come from whatever part of your brain that controls pain. Stub your toe. Sit on a tack. Have a firecracker go off by your ear. Realize just how alone you are. Is one any more imagined than another?
I don't know -- maybe emotional pain doesn't trigger the same place in our brains as physical pain.
I do know that my emotional pain is quantifiable, because I know from experience how much physical pain I need to cause myself in order to distract me from my emotional pain. One of the core precepts of the hard sciences is that if you can measure it, it must exist.
I also know that pain is pain. There is nothing objective about it (even if it CAN be measured). Be happy because somewhere out there, there is someone whose life is worse than yours? Quantity doesn't validate or invalidate whatever pain you feel. Pain is.
I can remember "heartaches", but I can't say that most of my emotional pain has a place inside of me. Maybe that's why, oh, staying awake until my head spins and my eyes hurt can distract me from it. Maybe that's a good thing, maybe not.
What does it mean? You sit on a tack. Your skin sends a signal to your brain, and your brain figures out that something is seriously wrong! I guess emotional pain is the same. I'm not saying that everything's okay if you don't feel the pain (no pain, you're sane? Nah!), but the opposite sure is true. If you're feeling it, there is a valid reason for it.
Just because it starts in your head and ends in your head doesn't mean its imaginary.
flb
Posted by 64bowtie on May 9, 2004, at 4:24:28
In reply to Re: I wonder, what.....?, posted by finelinebob on May 9, 2004, at 3:11:37
I am concerned that others are not being encouraged to develop a strategy to manage emotional pain, which is a coping skill, apparently by their professionals. I didn't make this up. I hope I am only being naive or narrow minded and that all do work on better coping skills after all. I just don't hear it as being important in their posts.
I really enjoyed your response. You did think through my post. I thank you for that.
I do recognise my emotional pain. I just don't let it run my moment-to-moment life. I have dealt with my internal demons, my internal conflictedness, and share my strategies freely.
I am so grateful for the Babble community and Dr. Bob's steady hand at keepin' it workin' good. I appreciate Dinah's sharpness and deputy work. And, above all, I enjoy the humor. I miss the cantancorousness of Larry-Hoover and Zen-Hussey, as well as the brilliance of BadHairCut.
I may be new to you, as you are new to me. Let's keep up the good work.
Rod
Posted by 64bowtie on May 9, 2004, at 4:28:59
In reply to Re: I wonder, what.....?, posted by shar on May 9, 2004, at 2:06:53
I do recognise my emotional pain. I just don't let it run my moment-to-moment life. I have dealt with my internal demons (my internal conflictedness), and share my strategies freely.
Rod
Posted by finelinebob on May 9, 2004, at 4:44:16
In reply to Please be clear.... » finelinebob, posted by 64bowtie on May 9, 2004, at 4:24:28
I was just thinking outloud ... and glad you asked the question. You couldn't be more right -- we still live in a world that tells us to stop bellyaching if we're not bleeding. It's hard enough dealing with the pain ... shutting that attitude out of our heads just makes it that much harder.
flb
Posted by Racer on May 9, 2004, at 8:05:13
In reply to Re: Please be clear.... » 64bowtie, posted by finelinebob on May 9, 2004, at 4:44:16
And there you've hit on something that I know has been a big problem for me: not being able to acknowledge my pain, because it's *only* emotional and therefore not *real.* I think we do a real disservice to ourselves and others by looking for the quantifiable in our pain. It's like what you wrote about the people you worked with at CF, that their pain wasn't worse because they knew people who died, because we can't compare pain that way. It is as bad as we think it is, and when we try to talk ourselves out of it, we just hurt ourselves more.
Or, at least, that's the way it's been for me.
By the way, I haven't said it before, but "Welcome back!" I remember your site from way back before, because I have ties to the Calligraphic World around us. (Hermann Zapf was stuck in the states by the attacks, did you know that? He and his wife were here and couldn't get home again until they restarted air travel.) Glad you're sounding as though your feet are on the right path for you.
Posted by Brio D Chimp on May 9, 2004, at 8:45:19
In reply to I wonder, what.....?, posted by 64bowtie on May 9, 2004, at 0:35:55
I thought this article from webmd was interesting.
I think the pain is real. The pain is a signal that we are lonely and need love and social connection and meaning in the same way someone dying of thirst is in agonizing pain because they need water.
I think the pain can also take on a life of its own and lose any potential value as a stimulus to take care of our needs. ( Severe Depression for example)
Original article:
http://aolsvc.health.webmd.aol.com/content/Article/75/89657.htm--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hurt Feelings Truly Hurt
By Daniel DeNoon
WebMD Medical News Reviewed By Brunilda Nazario, MD
on Friday, October 10, 2003Oct. 10, 2003 -- The pain of hurt feelings is as real as the pain of physical injury, new brain studies show.
The findings appear in the Oct. 10 issue of the journal Science. UCLA researcher Matthew D. Lieberman, PhD, used real-time brain scans to map brain activity in people feeling social distress.
The findings: The areas of the brain that light up when a person feels physical pain also light up when a person's feelings are hurt.
"We use physical metaphors to describe social pain like 'a broken heart' or 'hurt feelings,'" Lieberman says in a news release. "Now we see that there is a good reason for this."
The Pain of Monkey-in-the-Middle
Remarkably, the experiment by Lieberman and co-workers Naomi I. Eisenberger and Kipling D. Williams, PhD, didn't hurt the 13 student volunteers very much.
Encased in an MRI brain-scanning machine, the students played a simple video game. They were one of three players tossing a virtual ball to one another. At first, the students had to watch as the other two players tossed the ball. Then their controls became active, and they played for awhile. But soon the two other players -- computerized stooges, really -- played only with each other. As the students realized they were being left out, it hurt.
This made the area associated with pain light up. The more activity in a student's pain area, the more painful the student rated the experience.
"We can say being excluded doesn't matter, but rejection of any form still appears to register automatically in the brain," Lieberman says.
The Healing Power of Language
But the pain area wasn't the only part of the brain to become active. Being left out also activated an area associated with language and the regulation of emotion. Students with more activity in this area reported less pain.
"Verbalizing distress may partly shut down the areas of the brain that register distress," Lieberman says. "The regulating abilities of the prefrontal cortex may be why therapy and expressing painful feelings in poems and diaries is therapeutic."
Humans Are Social Animals
Why did the human brain evolve to feel emotional pain? In this we aren't alone. Social loss triggers distress signals in the brains of other animals whose survival depends on social bonds, notes an accompanying editorial by Jaak Panksepp, PhD. Panksepp is a researcher at Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, Ohio, and Northwestern University, Evanston, Ill.
"Psychological pain in humans, especially grief and intense loneliness, may share some of the same neural pathways that elaborate physical pain," Panksepp writes.
The reason appears to be survival. Emotional pain hurts. We move closer to others to relieve the pain. Over millions of years, we've evolved this to a fine art.
"These findings show how deeply rooted our need is for social connection," Eisenberger says in a news release. "There's something about exclusion from others that is perceived as being as harmful to our survival as something that can physically hurt us, and our body automatically knows this."
Love Conquers Pain
If all this is true -- and more study is needed -- it stands to reason that love might be an antidote.
"Throughout history, poets have written about the pain of a broken heart. It seems that such poetic insights into the human condition are now supported by neurophysiological findings," Panksepp notes. "Will the opposite also prove to be the case -- that socially supportive and loving feelings reduce the sting of pain? A reasonable working hypothesis is that social feelings such as love are constructed from brain neural circuits that alleviate the feelings of social isolation."--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SOURCES: Eisenberger, N.I. Science, Oct. 10, 2003; vol 302: pp 290-292. Panksepp, J. Science, Oct. 10, 2003; vol 302. News release, University of California, Los Angeles.
© 2003 WebMD Inc. All rights reserved.
Posted by smokeymadison on May 9, 2004, at 11:00:08
In reply to I wonder, what.....?, posted by 64bowtie on May 9, 2004, at 0:35:55
wow, that article really hit home. that social excusion can elicit pain in the same way that physical pain can, and that sort of talking yourself through it can lessen the pain is exactly what is going on with me right now. i have been using psychobabble as an outlet, to sort of make my feelings public. then i can turn from them and go to sleep easier at night. i suppose that my last post made it seem that i was totally letting my feelings rule my life.
well, i AM trying to handle them, and what i wrote was one way of doing that. right now i am feeling a little defensive b/c of what rod said. but at the same time, it is something i need to work on. so rod, how do you manage feelings so well? i am open to suggestions.
Posted by Dinah on May 9, 2004, at 13:03:10
In reply to Re: I wonder, what.....? » 64bowtie, posted by Brio D Chimp on May 9, 2004, at 8:45:19
Posted by 64bowtie on May 9, 2004, at 13:41:17
In reply to Re: Please be clear.... » 64bowtie, posted by finelinebob on May 9, 2004, at 4:44:16
> we still live in a world that tells us to stop bellyaching if we're not bleeding.
>
> flb<<< Thanx flb. What is "bellyaching"? I belonged to a study group of professionals that pursued that very question to it's bitter end over a six year period.
What I can tell you is that children can tell other children to stop bellyaching. If you hear a grown-up using this same "meat-axe, knuckle-dragging" technique on another grown-up, they haven't made it to adulthood, no matter how old they are.
True, real, emancipated adults, have discovered they have many new and fantastic skills, abilities, and attributes, giving them options to study for helping others mediate bad-things in the others' lives. The "conservative talk show host" doesn't give you options for thinking about a subject. Unfortunately, some Religions don't give followers options for thinking about God, and change what that means midstream. ...can make us feel crazy!
Most troubling is the grown-up parent who hasn't made it to adulthood. Their behavior shows internal-conflictedness. Diabolical is when they demand allegiance to their "word", and each day it's a "new word"! Alcohol and other drugs of choice, helps these poor souls forget they changed the rules, day to day.
We come here "hardwired" to avoid-dissatisfaction. We can overcome the "pitfalls" of this element of our nature, if we can ever see past the layer after layer after layer of bad habits foisted on us by those who came before us. They induce (force) us to adopt their dysfunctional, chaotic model, steeped in denial and indecision, as our blueprint for life.
John Bradshaw said it like this, "Want a tech-manual of how to make a schizophrenic? Its called 'Normal Parenting in America'!" I wonder how many held onto that quote over the years, or how many let it in one ear and out the other?
Denial.... is not just a river in Egypt...
Dysfunction is a collection of bad habits. Denial is the locked-door of unchanged behavior. Indecision helps us throw away the key to that door. Anger and fear are reactions to implore others to help us overcome our dissatisfactions, some real while others are imagined.
My contention is that therapists are being trained to help overcome the wrong stuff, which is why the word "cure" is such a dirty word. Also, ever wonder why therapy just seems like "the same old stuff, just a different day!"...???
I am a small voice..........
Rod
Posted by finelinebob on May 9, 2004, at 14:25:59
In reply to Re: Re: Bellyaching etal » finelinebob, posted by 64bowtie on May 9, 2004, at 13:41:17
> Denial.... is not just a river in Egypt...
Hmmm ... so are we Americans worse at psychology or geography? I'd bet most Americans think Denial is somewhere in Europe or South America.
;^)
I think there's a Cult of Rationality out there that is the root of the problem. The cultural ghosts of BF Skinner and Behaviorism are still too strong. People should act rationally, and irrational behavior is to be shunned and feared.
Yeah, right.
I remember rather clearly being upset about what some other kids were saying to me. Can't remember what they said, but I remember what my dad said: "Just because someone calls you a 'rat-tailed baby babboon', it doesn't mean that you are one." Well, I'm sorry dad, but the way MY mind works, yes it does. A rational response doesn't take away the pain.
If you ask me, irrationality is more natural than rationality. So, perhaps irrational pains and fears are more natural and more real than rational ones. But that's just me.
flb
Posted by 64bowtie on May 9, 2004, at 14:36:16
In reply to Re: I wonder, what.....? » 64bowtie, posted by Brio D Chimp on May 9, 2004, at 8:45:19
>>>"Will the opposite also prove to be the case -- that socially supportive and loving feelings reduce the sting of pain?"
><<<Thanx for this great article...
What is not said is that replacing bad habits, that take up our time and distract us from what we are about, can and must be re-written. As the process of replacing bad-habits with good-habits unfolds, a remarkable transcendance occurs. All habits have a "set-up"; a precondition which takes place. Once we start adopting options and optional behavior (and optional timing for behavior), freedom from the chaotic model and the "set-up", evaporates around us. Bad-feelings are extinquished. Good-feelings follow.
All our lives we seek good-feelings. There always seems to be a shortage of good-feelings. This makes us seek them even more. All the time we continue to stumble over bad-feelings. Those who are able to hide their bad-feelings seem attractive to us; we wanna be just like them. Since we are "hardwired" to avoid bad-feelings, The highest value is to seek good-feelings. It never works that way!!!
If we wait for others to tell us how to feel-good, we'll never get there. As adults, we can process options and make decisions. Life is not about seeking good-feelings. Life is not about avoiding dissatisfaction because we come "hardwired" for that.
Life is about seeking knowledge and understanding which we do by both thinking and feeling in some context appropriate concert of our logic and emtotions. We then can see clearly our unmistakeable path to freedom. Good-feelings then follow, not the otherway around. Alcohol, drugs, and 'Meds', may make us feel good, but don't produce the path to freedom, and thus to the good-feelings we are seeking.
Expectations happen to us. Expectations are for children. Options are for adults. Adults act on options. Make mine options. I'll leave expectations to the children. We do best when we replace general avoidance with discovery of the new. We study new stuff with our logic and our emotions. This is discovery. Freedom is an adult attribute, close behind discovery.
Rod
Posted by 64bowtie on May 9, 2004, at 14:49:21
In reply to Re: Re: Bellyaching etal, posted by finelinebob on May 9, 2004, at 14:25:59
>
> ;^)
>
>
> If you ask me, irrationality is more natural than rationality. So, perhaps irrational pains and fears are more natural and more real than rational ones. But that's just me.
>
> flb<<< Natural no, common yes.
\:^) Rod
ps:(not meant to irritate)
Posted by finelinebob on May 9, 2004, at 14:58:23
In reply to Re: Re: Re: » finelinebob, posted by 64bowtie on May 9, 2004, at 14:49:21
Posted by Racer on May 9, 2004, at 15:20:24
In reply to Re: Re: Bellyaching etal, posted by finelinebob on May 9, 2004, at 14:25:59
>
> I think there's a Cult of Rationality out there that is the root of the problem. The cultural ghosts of BF Skinner and Behaviorism are still too strong. People should act rationally, and irrational behavior is to be shunned and feared.
>
> Yeah, right.
>
You know, that fits right in with a couple of recent debate-style conversations I had recently, with two different scientists. One is a particle physist, and we were talking about Rationality versus Human Nature. Specifically, we were talking about science education, and the problems there are reaching girls, but the general is probably the more interesting issue. Sure, we're rational animals, we can reason, but we're also Mammals, Vertebrates, and more and more we try to avoid that part of our nature. Watch the animals around you: they don't behave rationally, they act on their instincts. Guess what? We, human beings, have instincts, too. Those instincts are evolutionary artifacts that may no longer be adaptive for us in our concrete jungles, but they are no less real. Pain avoidance, for example, makes really good sense when the world around us is such a painful, dangerous place as the early savannas. These days, though, aside from a few sliced thumbs when the carrot rolls or a really nasty paper cut, the pain we experience tends to be more psychological, or emotional, or social, than physical -- but it is no less real. We really do a disservice to our unique place in the wider world by denying our animal natures, that which links us to our hominid forebears, because it is part of what makes us human. We are *not* pure mind, Pure Reason is a concept that has very little to do with reality.There's a new organization for science education, modeled after the Boy Scouts, that has proposed gender segregation in their programs. Gee, everyone is up in arms: "That's 'Separate But Equal' and it's unconstitutional! It's *wrong*!" In the conversations I've had about this group, every woman over 35 has said it's a GREAT thing to have girls learning science away from boys. The Politically Correct crowd, though, say that it shouldn't be a problem to teach science to girls and boys together, because we should be able to get past the sex roles and just learn. OK, great idea, great abstraction, but in the Real World, there's a hell of a lot of pressure on adolescent girls when boys are around. It Just Is. That's the problem with trying to live in The World As It Should Be. Really simple: maybe it's the way it should be, but it ain't the way it is.
The other conversation was with an oncologist at the National Cancer Institute. It was about medical care, and whether Patient Care was a priority for appropriate medical care. We never did agree on it... But we were split on the same lines: It Shouldn't Matter if the patient feels rapport with the doctor, since the drugs do the work. It Shouldn't Matter But It Does.
> I remember rather clearly being upset about what some other kids were saying to me. Can't remember what they said, but I remember what my dad said: "Just because someone calls you a 'rat-tailed baby babboon', it doesn't mean that you are one." Well, I'm sorry dad, but the way MY mind works, yes it does. A rational response doesn't take away the pain.
>Similar experiences, including the invalidation, and I'd say that it hurt more that way, when there was no one to turn to who understood. (It was always me having to understand -- and I do and did understand, but you know what? They lied to me: To understand all is not to forgive all, it's just that all that pain and anger gets turned in on me instead of being directed in the appropriate direction and processed. Guess where that leads?)
> If you ask me, irrationality is more natural than rationality. So, perhaps irrational pains and fears are more natural and more real than rational ones. But that's just me.
>
> flbYou know, you've really got something there -- and it's something I'd love to take up, but haven't the energy right now to express myself. I may try again later, if I can. I think, though, that "rational" is an artificial construct that does us a lot more harm than good. Sometimes it's just a case of finding the basis for the seemingly irrational. (Like a horse I had who couldn't be tied: found out years later someone had tied her badly to a log, she got scared and pulled back -- and the log chased her! Of course the feeling of being trapped would stay with her, even if there was no immediately apparent reason or rationality behind it. You have to look for the basis of the response, before you say it's irrational.)
Thank you very much for bringing up some really interesting ideas, and doing so with so many fewer words than it takes me ;-D
Posted by finelinebob on May 9, 2004, at 15:59:35
In reply to Re: Re: Bellyaching etal, posted by Racer on May 9, 2004, at 15:20:24
> Thank you very much for bringing up some really interesting ideas, and doing so with so many fewer words than it takes me ;-D
What?! Me, concise?!
In a past life (prior to 09/2000), I was an educational psychologist and science educator, so the gender issue with teaching science is very familiar. Valerie Lee at Michigan has done some studies showing through both statistical analyses of large data sets and more ethnographic studies of particular classrooms that (1) there is a great deal of evidence supporting the idea that girls learn science better in single-sex classrooms, and (2) a lot of that has to do with how boys take over discussions of scientific topics and how teachers, male and female, support this behavior of shutting off girls and encouraging the boys without realizing it.
I don't know if I'd call rationality an "artificial" construct, but it certainly is a cultural construct. In fact, it may be the defining construct of "Western" culture: Cogito ergo sum. The mind is separate from the body. The mind is rational, the body isn't. Thoughts are of the rational mind, emotions are of the animal brain. Rene Descartes may have caused more damage wrestling with his "evil demon" than the rest of our demons combined.
Oops ... sorry, you've got me Hermeneutics all hot and bothered! If you folks want to experience pain, just try reading Heidegger and Habermas! OUCH! If someone ever suggests trying to be philosophical about your pain, reading Gadamer is NOT what they mean!
flb
Posted by 64bowtie on May 9, 2004, at 16:32:49
In reply to Re: Bellyaching philosophically, posted by finelinebob on May 9, 2004, at 15:59:35
Cogito ergo sum. (Rene Descartes)
...and Damasio has a current best seller called,
"Descartes Error", discussing your tenet.Czek it out
Rod
Posted by spoc on May 9, 2004, at 18:41:20
In reply to Re: Re: Bellyaching etal, posted by Racer on May 9, 2004, at 15:20:24
> ...That's the problem with trying to live in The World As It Should Be. Really simple: maybe it's the way it should be, but it ain't the way it is. <
---
*** Yes, and I think most people CAN regurgitate or guess what the "right" and ideal way to feel about and proceed on things is. So apparently with the kinds of issues at hand here, knowing how it Should Be, or being taught how to guess right about how it Should Be, doesn't in itself translate into improvement or action. This isn't the same as saying "...and therefore we are absolved of responsibility." It's just saying that maybe promoting awareness of a very ideal World as it Should Be (and Us as we Should Be) as a step in the healing/moving on process doesn't have impact where it counts. And assumes things that can't be assumed about what things are like for all others.----
> ...I think, though, that "rational" is an artificial construct that does us a lot more harm than good. Sometimes it's just a case of finding the basis for the seemingly irrational. (Like a horse I had who couldn't be tied: found out years later someone had tied her badly to a log, she got scared and pulled back -- and the log chased her! Of course the feeling of being trapped would stay with her, even if there was no immediately apparent reason or rationality behind it. You have to look for the basis of the response, before you say it's irrational.)<---
*** And the "basis of the response" can also be that it FEELS different -- and IS different -- to be in various people's brains. It may be easy to assume that everyone else has the same amount of chemical balance, energy, clarity, etc. available to them each day when they open their eyes. And that all of those who overcome great obstacles to be consistently happy people did so all by choice and determination; and all those who seemed to have it all (or certainly nothing to complain about) who have still managed to be unhappy are also doing so by choice. People deserve much credit for their hard-won victories, but I doubt that in all cases either result is due only to choosing to take responsibility for their own happiness.That everyone is born with the same tools and abilty to choose happiness would also almost seem to imply that there is no such thing as an inborn component of personality. Someone who is going to need to adopt a whole different personality that is not their nature will face different things than someone for whom these ideal philosophies come rather naturally. Which isn't to say they shouldn't try, but the purveyor of positive thinking may not really know what that particular challenge feels like, and how long it may take to change. OR, what constitutes a great improvement already for that person.
So for whatever reason, people may be surprised what it would feel like to wake up with and go through the day, or life, with someone else's brain. And I don't just mean because of what they are thinking or obsessing about and choosing to focus on. There are organic differences, that some of those who are able to consistently embrace positivity and momentum have not experienced and can't speak for. They may *think* they would make all the same choices and do all the same things, but how can they *know* that? This should at least be considered in formulating a philosophy that is supposed to fit all, and be justified in making blanket unflattering inferences about those who don't fit it.
And again, this doesn't absolve anyone from taking responsibility for at least improving what they need to, and hopefully intending to continue doing so. But maybe extreme idealism with its implicit comments on character won't take them further and may take them in reverse. I doubt it is as simple as happiness being nothing but a choice; that all people regardless of individual makeup (historical, medical, emotional, etc.) are equally capable of choosing it; and that the failure to do so could only reflect immaturity and weakness.
---
> Thank you very much for bringing up some really interesting ideas, and doing so with so many fewer words than it takes me ;-D---
*** Now of course that is something I've noticed and like about you Racer! ;- )
Posted by Racer on May 9, 2004, at 19:09:24
In reply to Re: Re: Bellyaching etal » Racer, posted by spoc on May 9, 2004, at 18:41:20
I couldn't tell if you were agreeing or disagreeing with me, or if you had noticed that I type too much and didn't like it? Oh, well...
You did say so many things, though, that I absolutely agree with, and am glad you were here to state them so much more clearly than I could have done. Thank you.
We are all different, and we do experience life and its incidences differently, and thank goodness for that! Imagine, the whole world just like me? We'd never speak, never leave the house, and type like banshees! {{shudder}} That's why it was so wounding to hear so many times that I couldn't be hurt badly enough to cry as a kid. You know? How could anyone else know what it felt like? And, considering how it felt to me, think how frightening the world must be, if this wasn't enough to cry about? (Remember, my mother was the one who doesn't believe in disease or medicine or wounds that don't involve arterial gushers...) We are different, and all deserve respect for those differences. And yes: our traumas do not absolve us from trying. What road that trying takes is up to the individual, and for some people, I think choosing to be professional patients or professional victims may be valid choices for a time. {{shrug}} Whatever, right?
Wow! Whatever happened to the 70s? Remember those slogans like "Different strokes for different folks?" Maybe I'm dating myself, maybe I'm just having a flashback, but there was value to those ideas. Just not to the shag carpeting on the walls, 'K?
(My imaginary motto: "Doing Good does not absolve you from the responsibility of doing it Well.")
Posted by spoc on May 9, 2004, at 19:37:41
In reply to LOL! Thanks -- I think... » spoc, posted by Racer on May 9, 2004, at 19:09:24
***Racer, agreed! So I guess we win then. Whew, glad THAT'S settled! Ha ha. It's destined to be one of those agree-to-disagree things between many, and I will now state as you did that my energy to say much more is questionable. But I had to say something. Note to potential responders: any observations such as "That is all fine if one prefers to instead choose to remain unhappy, or to be stuck in the past" would be missing the entire point of my last post, but I may have to let it go by me and hope someone else takes it up.
-----
> I couldn't tell if you were agreeing or disagreeing with me, or if you had noticed that I type too much and didn't like it? Oh, well.. <----
***I was agreeing. And, as far as your statement about making your points more or less the 'long way,' I was relating to the time and care you take in expressing yourself. For I can rarely do it any other way myself, even when I *really* want to, or when I am giving myself a headache! :- D
> You did say so many things, though, that I absolutely agree with, and am glad you were here to state them so much more clearly than I could have done. Thank you.
>
> We are all different, and we do experience life and its incidences differently, and thank goodness for that! Imagine, the whole world just like me? We'd never speak, never leave the house, and type like banshees! {{shudder}} That's why it was so wounding to hear so many times that I couldn't be hurt badly enough to cry as a kid. You know? How could anyone else know what it felt like? And, considering how it felt to me, think how frightening the world must be, if this wasn't enough to cry about? (Remember, my mother was the one who doesn't believe in disease or medicine or wounds that don't involve arterial gushers...) We are different, and all deserve respect for those differences. And yes: our traumas do not absolve us from trying. What road that trying takes is up to the individual, and for some people, I think choosing to be professional patients or professional victims may be valid choices for a time. {{shrug}} Whatever, right?
>
> Wow! Whatever happened to the 70s? Remember those slogans like "Different strokes for different folks?" Maybe I'm dating myself, maybe I'm just having a flashback, but there was value to those ideas. Just not to the shag carpeting on the walls, 'K?
>
> (My imaginary motto: "Doing Good does not absolve you from the responsibility of doing it Well.")
Posted by Angela2 on May 9, 2004, at 19:48:01
In reply to I wonder, what.....?, posted by 64bowtie on May 9, 2004, at 0:35:55
Here are my thoughts on your post...
Emotional pain and physical pain are the same metaphorically, because with emotional pain, it is our heart that is supposed to be hurt and in pain.
Emotional pain can bring on physical pain. When someone goes through a bad breakup they may vomit up everything they eat. Or when someone is embarrassed or mad or something they may cut themselves. I wonder why. Is this how these two "pains" are connected? Does one always lead to the other? I don't know...I gotta go take a bath. Sorry I can't get into it deeper.
Posted by Racer on May 10, 2004, at 0:21:34
In reply to Re: LOL! Thanks -- I think... » Racer, posted by spoc on May 9, 2004, at 19:37:41
But, hate to tell you this -- I type 'em as fast as I think 'em, and as fast as I would say them in conversation. That's how come I often get so wordy...
But, again, I'm glad I agree with someone who has such good things to say.
Posted by 64bowtie on May 10, 2004, at 12:49:47
In reply to Re: Re: Bellyaching etal » Racer, posted by spoc on May 9, 2004, at 18:41:20
> ---
> *** Yes, ~~~ people CAN regurgitate or guess what the "right" and ideal way to "f_e_e_l" about and proceed on things is.
> (from your response to Racer)<<<PROBLEM......
Please consider the crisis we are all in, that because of time and timing and poor guidance, we are all left making decisions from our gut; from our feelings. We can't properly evaluate "rightness" from feelings. Feelings are too ephemoral and fleeting to be trusted doing that task by themselves, alone. Armed with knowledge and understanding, we can allie our feelings to thinking, and tackle "anything". This is an adult skill children are not wired for.CRISIS......
An alagory of the crisis I refer to is seen most easily in public. On occasion I ride the busses in San Francisco. I witness the lowest-common-denominator of parenting at times. Parents will "unthinkingly" lash out in violence at their children. It takes no thinking or logic to brutalize another person. If they employed caring and options in this circumstance, the children would have a better chance of seeing the true differences between "rightness" and "wrongness".Yes, I was a child and yes, I am a parent. Please don't waste any time defending the actions of anyone who "problem solves" with violence and coercion. If you don't get my message, I apologise for my cautious wordiness.
SUGGESTION......
I suggest we all discipline ourselves to attach two things to decisions from now on. At first, without discipline, some will find it impossible. Some still think that de-nial (denial) is the "unthinkable", because its only a river in Egypt, so they will find this impossible, also.From now on we attach a two item czeklist to our decisions. Attach a component of caring and a component of options to to improve each of our decisions. The "caring" elegantly satisfies the feeling aspects of healthy decision making. Options cannot be arrived at by feelings alone, so therein "options" elegantly add the logic, or thinking, component to the decision process.
UN-THINKING.......
When we ask a person, "What do you think?" How many times do they respond, "Well, I feel ~~~ "...? See what I mean? Try this out for awhile. To me its scarey!FREEDOM and PERSONAL POWER......
...and this is exactly how people give up their "personal power". Freedom comes with personal power attached (ala Anthony Robbins). We cannot be free-talking, free-reasoning, and free-working from our feelings alone. Sure, its our oldest habit. For some of us, so is dysfunction. Is there a better way?SOLUTION......
Add "caring" and "options" to all of our decisions and see where that takes us. Turn it into a "wait-and-see" process (another adult practice not well understood by children). Do it because we are adults, and adults "can"!Rod
Posted by spoc on May 10, 2004, at 16:13:46
In reply to Re: Re: Re: That's it! » spoc, posted by 64bowtie on May 10, 2004, at 12:49:47
> Yes, I was a child and yes, I am a parent. Please don't waste any time defending the actions of anyone who "problem solves" with violence and coercion. If you don't get my message, I apologise for my cautious wordiness.
---
***Rod, this could in no way have been in response to anything I said or prompted by anything I said. I do not want things posted in a response purporting to be to me, that makes it appear that I must have somehow been advocating or excusing such a thing. In fact, my post addressed nothing of that nature or even that general subject whatsoever, and I find it misleading for you to post such a thing as though it is in response to some actual opinion I expressed.In general here, I think we have gone off on two completely different subjects (and the above was most certainly never one of them regardless). In my post I only addressed your initial statement that in all cases, people are somehow choosing to hold onto their pain and get stuck. I did so by noting that there are also chemical and organic differences between people's brains. Meaning that pace and definition of improvement will vary, although of course no one is excused from the responsibility to do something. But, that using a standard of improvement that sees anything falling short of some black and white standard (to be reached while not using meds either) as childlike "bellyaching" isn't warranted.
I did not and do not advocate shirking one's own responsibility in changing; constantly seeking pleasure and avoiding pain; or adopting a permanent "victim mentality." My gut reaction is always that people should be self-aware and look at themselves first. I am also familiar with and not arguing against the tenets of motivational speakers. What I noted was only the above, which is based on accepted research rather than opinion. Biological differences are one reason why one size doesn't fit all; and why electing to be sane or stable enough to simply choose this ideal is not in fact a simple, equally-available option, which could expediently be embraced by all.
Because, you asked. "What is the reason, (is)there more than one reason?" If you mean now that it was actually a rhetorical question only, that means discussion shouldn't follow, as the conclusion was predetermined. But regardless of that, this is an age-old subject that in the situation at hand needs to be left at "agree to disagree." Please. In advance I will respect that you may not even agree that there are sometimes biological components, but either way, please respect that I don't wish to debate it.
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Psychology | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
[email protected]
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.