I think ugh fields are about something fairly small and simple, it is different.
When I as 15, I was weak in every sense, nerves (anxiety), borderline mentally ill, scrawny body etc. As I desperately did not want to admit it, because it sucks, and I wanted to convince myself I am strong, I externalized the self-hate and started to hate on other people’s weakness (not actual individuals, but as a principle), saying things like the weak don’t deserve to live and should go extinct to make room for the strong etc. in order to convince myself I am strong. But it didn’t really work. It did not really work for Nietzsche either, who inspired me to do this… and especially when I was confronted by people who took offense when I exhorted how altruism is slave morality, and those people were strong and succesful in every possible way, yet they were altruists, basically they were paladins, I needed to exert more and more convoluted mental gymnastics to convince myself they are actually weak and I am somehow actually strong. Back then it felt like being a non-understood genius, a genius who is not understood because other people are stupid. But much later when I realized the folly, it felt like being in a mental fog, mental haze back then.
Hypothesis: what you can think is affected by the state of your nervous system.
Have some neurology on the subject—I’m not jumping to any conclusions about whether you have a background of trauma, these are just the books I know about.
If basic common playground bullying counts as one then yes. Hm, it checks out. Boys between 6 and 12 have rather harsh ways of establishing a hierarchy of strength, courage and general ranking and it is possible that it is traumatic in a way that the subject does not even recognize. Does that ever happen that people are conscious about their own coping methods but are not too conscious about the trauma they are coping with?
My problem with the whole theory is that I am prone to pull a reversed stupidity on Freudism. I.e. if Freud was wrong that everything is about coping with childhood traumas then I tend to think nothing is. I also tend to think it is way, way too easy, it is suspiciously easy, because it sounds like blaming others in order to avoid facing a defect in the self.
In an Unspoken Voice has it that PTSD is a result of not being able to do normal simple movements such as running, punching, or pushing away when under high stress. There’s a solution—when the stress is over, go away for a bit and shake.
Animals do this, but for various reasons—the stress goes on for too long, or it feels socially or personally inappropriate to collapse and shake—the uncompleted movements can get stuck in the memory and the trauma continues in the body and imagination.
It wouldn’t surprise me if “ordinary” childhood bullying would be enough to have a traumatic effect, especially on someone who was immobilized while being bullied.
Does that ever happen that people are conscious about their own coping methods but are not too conscious about the trauma they are coping with?
I think so. There’s a lot of that around rape, where the person who was raped is showing symptoms of PTSD, but thinks that the way they were treated doesn’t count as rape.
I found it was useful to frame traumatic effects (in my case, a tendency to freeze) as part of the normal human range rather than a defect. Also, there’s research that the biggest predictor of PTSD is the amount of previous trauma.
I recommend Dorothy Fitzer’s videos. She specializes in people with anxiety and takes a gentle, sensible approach to becoming more comfortable in the world.
Interesting. So the way it differs from Freudism is that the idea is not that getting hurt gives you problems, but not being able to react to hurt or stress (even environmental stress if I get it right) in basic ways does so?
Yes., bearing in mind that this theory says that some basic ways work much better than others—for example, telling the story over and over (which is something a lot of people do) may not be nearly as useful as going to physical movement.
There’s also a school of more conventional psychology (sorry, I don’t know which one) which holds that what happens to you isn’t the fundamental thing—what’s important is what conclusions you draw from what happened to you.
Sounds like unsuccessful rationalization or compartmentalization. Unsuccessful probably because the fog wasn’t ‘able’ to lock you into a stable state. You mention lots of contact to other people so I guess that prevented it.
I think ugh fields are about something fairly small and simple, it is different.
When I as 15, I was weak in every sense, nerves (anxiety), borderline mentally ill, scrawny body etc. As I desperately did not want to admit it, because it sucks, and I wanted to convince myself I am strong, I externalized the self-hate and started to hate on other people’s weakness (not actual individuals, but as a principle), saying things like the weak don’t deserve to live and should go extinct to make room for the strong etc. in order to convince myself I am strong. But it didn’t really work. It did not really work for Nietzsche either, who inspired me to do this… and especially when I was confronted by people who took offense when I exhorted how altruism is slave morality, and those people were strong and succesful in every possible way, yet they were altruists, basically they were paladins, I needed to exert more and more convoluted mental gymnastics to convince myself they are actually weak and I am somehow actually strong. Back then it felt like being a non-understood genius, a genius who is not understood because other people are stupid. But much later when I realized the folly, it felt like being in a mental fog, mental haze back then.
Hypothesis: what you can think is affected by the state of your nervous system.
Have some neurology on the subject—I’m not jumping to any conclusions about whether you have a background of trauma, these are just the books I know about.
Complex Trauma: From Surviving to Thriving This one has some material about rage getting turned outward or inward.
In an Unspoken Voice: How the Body Releases Trauma and Restores Goodness
If basic common playground bullying counts as one then yes. Hm, it checks out. Boys between 6 and 12 have rather harsh ways of establishing a hierarchy of strength, courage and general ranking and it is possible that it is traumatic in a way that the subject does not even recognize. Does that ever happen that people are conscious about their own coping methods but are not too conscious about the trauma they are coping with?
My problem with the whole theory is that I am prone to pull a reversed stupidity on Freudism. I.e. if Freud was wrong that everything is about coping with childhood traumas then I tend to think nothing is. I also tend to think it is way, way too easy, it is suspiciously easy, because it sounds like blaming others in order to avoid facing a defect in the self.
In an Unspoken Voice has it that PTSD is a result of not being able to do normal simple movements such as running, punching, or pushing away when under high stress. There’s a solution—when the stress is over, go away for a bit and shake.
Animals do this, but for various reasons—the stress goes on for too long, or it feels socially or personally inappropriate to collapse and shake—the uncompleted movements can get stuck in the memory and the trauma continues in the body and imagination.
It wouldn’t surprise me if “ordinary” childhood bullying would be enough to have a traumatic effect, especially on someone who was immobilized while being bullied.
I think so. There’s a lot of that around rape, where the person who was raped is showing symptoms of PTSD, but thinks that the way they were treated doesn’t count as rape.
I found it was useful to frame traumatic effects (in my case, a tendency to freeze) as part of the normal human range rather than a defect. Also, there’s research that the biggest predictor of PTSD is the amount of previous trauma.
I recommend Dorothy Fitzer’s videos. She specializes in people with anxiety and takes a gentle, sensible approach to becoming more comfortable in the world.
Interesting. So the way it differs from Freudism is that the idea is not that getting hurt gives you problems, but not being able to react to hurt or stress (even environmental stress if I get it right) in basic ways does so?
Yes., bearing in mind that this theory says that some basic ways work much better than others—for example, telling the story over and over (which is something a lot of people do) may not be nearly as useful as going to physical movement.
There’s also a school of more conventional psychology (sorry, I don’t know which one) which holds that what happens to you isn’t the fundamental thing—what’s important is what conclusions you draw from what happened to you.
Sounds like unsuccessful rationalization or compartmentalization. Unsuccessful probably because the fog wasn’t ‘able’ to lock you into a stable state. You mention lots of contact to other people so I guess that prevented it.