Psycho-Babble Psychology | about psychological treatments | Framed
This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | List of forums | Search | FAQ

Re: Attachment Theory?

Posted by alexandra_k on January 25, 2014, at 18:37:52

In reply to Re: Attachment Theory? » alexandra_k, posted by Twinleaf on January 25, 2014, at 8:12:35

Yes, I think you are right.

Do you know if Shore or anyone else working on attachment theory has anything much to say about Autism?

I'm familiar with the stuff on Austism as lack of theory of mind... Depends a bit on what you mean by theory of mind... But it is looking like that perhaps isn't the most helpful characterization... I'm interested in other conceptions... That might be... Illuminating.

I guess there is a notion of Autism as failure of attachment... Attachment system is... Broken. Or otherwise f*ck*d up.

Temple Grandin wrote about how hugs were too much for her to bear... But she used to like getting under the couch cushions and having her sister sit on them. She found the deep pressure soothing. Or the squeeze machine... Cattle find pressure / the closeness to be calming... I guess some people do find straight jackets and seclusion cells to be calming... At least some of the time... I think that is why I love my foam roller so much... It... Desensitises me (or something) in a way I find helpful. Like how some kids that are really sensitive to tactile stimulation (e.g., crying because of scratchy clothes or tags or whatever) can benefit from being firmly brushed... There are films of little kids... It is curious to watch... They sort of like it... Just like watching a puppy or something that isn't quite sure whether they like it and then you get them in just the right place and they think it's great.

They are cases where people claim that they find other peoples presence / closeness to be... Arousing / stimulating rather than calming. So in terms of emotion regulation... What ones wants (in terms of soothing regulation, anyway) is to be... Left alone.

There is a 'solitary foraging' hypothesis. I don't know the specifics of the hypothesis, but I quite like the idea of a difference (a viably different behavioural strategy / way of being) rather than an across the board deficit. People are fun insofar as they are arousing or stimulating. They are a supersalient feature of the environment, indeed. One gets depressed or under-stimulated to the point of stupor without some imput from them (over a prolongued period), for sure. But... How can one relax around their unpredictability and their tendency to be our greatest threat?? I mean... That isn't a traumatic or unrealistic way to view people... We are in fact our own worst enemies. The worst things that have happened to people have been things that were deliberately inflicted by people.

 

Thread

 

Post a new follow-up

Your message only Include above post


Notify the administrators

They will then review this post with the posting guidelines in mind.

To contact them about something other than this post, please use this form instead.

 

Start a new thread

 
Google
dr-bob.org www
Search options and examples
[amazon] for
in

This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | FAQ
Psycho-Babble Psychology | Framed

poster:alexandra_k thread:1058503
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/psycho/20131211/msgs/1059505.html