![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 16 of 16. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Gabbix2 on August 29, 2005, at 19:11:54
In reply to Re: does it really? » Gabbix2, posted by alexandra_k on August 29, 2005, at 1:24:05
>
> Some of them you get by virtue of being human. Humans tend to respond to snakes and spiders with a fear response. But over time... We can learn to inhibit this fear response...
>You can, and I can, but I don't believe it's fair that because we are able to, that it's a possiblity for everyone.
Some people can work their way out of a depression, I can't though. I think people are far to complex in emotional make up for anyone other than the person themselves to make a determination as to what they can achieve.
Posted by gardenergirl on August 29, 2005, at 19:11:54
In reply to Re: does it really? » gardenergirl, posted by Gabbix2 on August 28, 2005, at 23:33:29
> >
> > I feel the need to say that I absolutely own my reactions to posts which upset me. Posts do not "make me" feel anything.
> >
> Do you think everyone should be able to resist feeling if they are hurting or terrified of something? I'm wondering where the line is..meaning, if you were caught in a fire, should you be able to choose something other than fear because It wasn't the fire that made you feel afraid?Hi Gabbi,
I'm not at all saying that owning feelings means that you can "choose" not to feel something or should resist something. Heck, I'm about as emotional as they come. What I mean by owning feelings is understanding that the feeling lies within you. If a person were completely indifferent to something, i.e. not hard or soft-wired to respond to a stimulus with an emotional reaction--they wouldn't. But we do respond with emotions. It's part of what makes us human and each of us unique.And you can darned well be sure I'd be afraid of fire. That's definitely a part of my make-up. But it's *my* fear. It's *inside* me. And in your example, it comes as a response to the threat. But I can also feel fear at the thought of fire. What *caused* that?
And because I'm certainly not perfect, I suppose saying "I absolutely" anything is not actually correct.
gg
>
Posted by alexandra_k on August 29, 2005, at 19:11:54
In reply to Re: does it really? » alexandra_k, posted by Gabbix2 on August 29, 2005, at 2:01:56
> > Some of them you get by virtue of being human. Humans tend to respond to snakes and spiders with a fear response. But over time... We can learn to inhibit this fear response...
> You can, and I can, but I don't believe it's fair that because we are able to, that it's a possiblity for everyone.
So some people might never be able to get over a fear response to snakes / spiders?
> Some people can work their way out of a depression, I can't though.
Oh. I think I get what you mean. I'm not saying that people can just think nice thoughts and then everything is magically all better. Really. I'm not trying to say that at all.
You see...
Emotions are supposed to be interpretations of levels of physiological arousal. In depression the levels of physiological arousal are pretty low.
You can alter your levels of physiological arousal a fair bit via thought (think of something scairey and feel your heart begin to race, think of something peaceful and feel that response slow down) but IMO that is more of a moderating effect...
>I think people are far to complex in emotional make up for anyone other than the person themselves to make a determination as to what they can achieve.
Maybe...
But with fear responses to specific stimuli...
If the simuli just stays there...
Eventually...
The persons body gets tired and can't sustain the level of physiological arousal any more.
Eventually...
They feel better.There are techniques like this for specific phobias. They work on the levels of arousal and habituation (that if you are in the presence of a stimulus for long enough your body will run out of fear response basically).
These are typically used in conjunction with cognitive techniques (power of positive thinking).
And more effective still with medications (IMO to assist with physiological baseline)
So its not just about one factor, rather a combination of many...
but this is something i'd like to study rather than something i have studied...
Posted by Gabbix2 on August 29, 2005, at 19:11:54
In reply to Re: does it really? » Gabbix2, posted by alexandra_k on August 29, 2005, at 3:09:51
> > > Some of them you get by virtue of being human. Humans tend to respond to snakes and spiders with a fear response. But over time... We can learn to inhibit this fear response...
>
> > You can, and I can, but I don't believe it's fair that because we are able to, that it's a possiblity for everyone.
>
> So some people might never be able to get over a fear response to snakes / spiders?
>Yes, that's what I mean. We aren't all the same, I know there are phobia techniques, and ways'of teaching oneself to think but no, I don't think these things are effective for everyone.
There are too many unknowables.
> Oh. I think I get what you mean. I'm not saying that people can just think nice thoughts and then everything is magically all better. Really. I'm not trying to say that at all.
>> No, I'm not thinking you were saying that, I shortened my example cause this wasn't really something I'd meant to discuss.
My comparison there was, are people who believe that with certain techniques, (beyond cheer up) any one can overcome depression. I don't believe that's true, I don't think anything is true for everyone, and when it comes to emotional reactions, especially those with mental illnesses.
> Emotions are supposed to be interpretations of levels of physiological arousal. In depression the levels of physiological arousal are pretty low.
>
> You can alter your levels of physiological arousal a fair bit via thought (think of something scairey and feel your heart begin to race, think of something peaceful and feel that response slow down) but IMO that is more of a moderating effect...
>YOU can, once again I'm saying that's true for you, it's probably true for many, but it's not true for everyone. And the thing is, I'm not talking about anything *moderating* here,
I'm talking about the generalizations and absolutes.> >I think people are far to complex in emotional make up for anyone other than the person themselves to make a determination as to what they can achieve.
>
> Maybe...
>
> But with fear responses to specific stimuli...
> If the simuli just stays there...
> Eventually...
> The persons body gets tired and can't sustain the level of physiological arousal any more.
> Eventually...
> They feel better.
>
> There are techniques like this for specific phobias. They work on the levels of arousal and habituation (that if you are in the presence of a stimulus for long enough your body will run out of fear response basically).
>
> These are typically used in conjunction with cognitive techniques (power of positive thinking).
>
> And more effective still with medications (IMO to assist with physiological baseline)
>
> So its not just about one factor, rather a combination of many...
>
> but this is something i'd like to study rather than something i have studied...
>
>
>
Not everyone has acess to these types of treatments or therapists either, which is another reason I don't like to generalize about who can do what. Others can only work on so many aspects of themselves The situation has to be perfect on just about every level.Anyway, this isn't really something I'm into discussing right now : ) Especially on the admin board. It's not an issue for me, this is something I do, but I dislike the idea that "because I can do it, everyone can"
Posted by Gabbix2 on August 29, 2005, at 19:11:54
In reply to Re: does it really? » Gabbix2, posted by gardenergirl on August 29, 2005, at 2:35:43
> > >
> > > I feel the need to say that I absolutely own my reactions to posts which upset me. Posts do not "make me" feel anything.
> > >
> > Do you think everyone should be able to resist feeling if they are hurting or terrified of something? I'm wondering where the line is..meaning, if you were caught in a fire, should you be able to choose something other than fear because It wasn't the fire that made you feel afraid?
>
> Hi Gabbi,
> I'm not at all saying that owning feelings means that you can "choose" not to feel something or should resist something. Heck, I'm about as emotional as they come. What I mean by owning feelings is understanding that the feeling lies within you.Well, yes, that's true, but if you can't choose to feel another way, then isn't that saying that certain posts have the power to make people upset?
They bring it out in them.. each person is unique but we all have things we react to, and can't change that, and in some areas people tend to have common reactions, so I would think.. you can do something knowing that it's going to "make someone"
What I mean is, we all have different physical pain thresholds too, but if someone smacked me, I would say that they hurt me, even though someone else may not have been bothered by it.
I'm not going to take responsibility for my reaction to being hit. So I'm wondering where the fine line is about "making me feel" and "I feel"
Posted by gardenergirl on August 29, 2005, at 23:33:38
In reply to Feelings - Gardener Girl » gardenergirl, posted by Gabbix2 on August 29, 2005, at 6:54:37
Hi Gabbi,
You make good points, and to some extent, this is really a semantic argument. I suppose my challenge to the idea of "make me feel" is more from a stance versus parsing out cause and effect. It feels to me to be a more empowered stance to know that *I* am reacting versus *you* (metaphorical you) are causing me to act.The former feels stronger and optimistic, whereas the latter feels a bit like twisting in the wind.
I suppose it's just a knee-jerk reaction of mine to that phrase "make me feel".
gg
Posted by Gabbix2 on August 30, 2005, at 0:11:31
In reply to Re: Feelings - Gardener Girl » Gabbix2, posted by gardenergirl on August 29, 2005, at 23:33:38
> Hi Gabbi,
> You make good points, and to some extent, this is really a semantic argument. I suppose my challenge to the idea of "make me feel" is more from a stance versus parsing out cause and effect. It feels to me to be a more empowered stance to know that *I* am reacting versus *you* (metaphorical you) are causing me to act.
>
> The former feels stronger and optimistic, whereas the latter feels a bit like twisting in the wind.
>
Hey GG.
It does doesn't it. I really wasn't trying to make points, honestly trying to understand.
I'm confident that I am responsible for how I act on my feelings, but not always my feelings themselves. For now that's empowering enough.. maybe I'll work on it more in my next life because I'm tired already.
Posted by alexandra_k on August 30, 2005, at 6:12:57
In reply to Re: Feelings - Gardener Girl » gardenergirl, posted by Gabbix2 on August 30, 2005, at 0:11:31
> I'm confident that I am responsible for how I act on my feelings, but not always my feelings themselves.
yeah. i think thats right. we don't choose what we do feel, we don't choose what we do think, we don't chose what we do perceive.
but we do seem to be able to manipulate what we have in various ways so as to alter how we feel, think, perceive etc in response to that.
Its tricky...
Posted by alexandra_k on August 30, 2005, at 19:11:27
In reply to Re: Feelings - Gardener Girl » Gabbix2, posted by alexandra_k on August 30, 2005, at 6:12:57
Don't get freaked - I'll explain it.
A -> [ B -> {C -> E ->} F -> ] G
........[............{D ->......}........]Okay... So its hard without being able to draw pictures... Everything inside the [square brackets] is happening inside your brain. Everything inside {this kind of bracket} is consciously experienced. A and G are outside the square brackets so they are external stimuli (A) and response (G).
So A causes changes in your brain state (or to be fair changes in your body state -> changes to your brain state) and Neither A or the next step of processing (B) are under your conscious control. This step (B) is 'pre-conscious processing'. Then those states (which aren't under your control) cause a conscious state in you (C). You didn't get to choose to experience that state! But it is true that that state is happening in you. It is certainly true that you do in fact have that emotion (thought or whatever) and it is also certainly true that you did not choose to have it occur to you.
But once it has occured to you...
I think it is supposed to depend on what state you are experiencing...
If you are angry (as an example) then part of what it means to be angry (by definition) is that you judge that something UNFAIR or UNJUST has happened. That definition isn't exhaustive, but I just want to work with that example. Anger is (sometimes) a response to perceived injustice. It might well be right that the initial perception of unfairness was involountary - it was outside your control (B). And the initial experience of anger was likewise involountary - it is outside your control (C).
(How pointless to BLAME people for the perceptions, emotions, experiences, thoughts that occur to them...)
BUT: If you are really f*cking mad AND you know that anger is a response to perceived injustice (for example - thats not supposed to be an exhaustive definition) then it might be worth having a little look at whether other interpretations are possible. So knowledge of the causes of anger (stimuli plus 'pre-conscious processing / interpretation) is what D is supposed to be. And together... C and D can cause a change in consciously experienced state (a lesser (more manageable, less painful) experience of anger (for example. Thats E.
Maybe the person didn't INTEND to do something injust (which makes it harder to be mad at them, though still possible to be mad about / disaproving of the action).
And so then one may be able to feel a little better. Less mad.
SO: The initial response just occurs (C)...
But then we have choices with respect to what we do with that response (C). What we do with it determines our response at the next instant in time (E) (another consciously experienced state and a signal to motor production areas (F)) which produces a response in the world (G).
Does this make any sense at all?????
(it is supposed to be fairly rough)
Posted by Gabbix2 on August 30, 2005, at 22:16:29
In reply to Re: Feelings - Gardener Girl » Gabbix2, posted by alexandra_k on August 30, 2005, at 6:12:57
> > I'm confident that I am responsible for how I act on my feelings, but not always my feelings themselves.
>
> yeah. i think thats right. we don't choose what we do feel, we don't choose what we do think, we don't chose what we do perceive.
>
> but we do seem to be able to manipulate what we have in various ways so as to alter how we feel, think, perceive etc in response to that.
>
Yeah, that's where I am, and I do okay most of the time, all though the sadness that comes from nowhere is really hard for me not to succumb too, even when it's inconvenient, or public (ugh)I put a little : ) beside my saying "I don't feel like discussing this right now"
Because I was too tired to say why I didn't want to discuss it, which was because I was too tired...
but I wanted you to know that it wasn't you, and I wasn't miffed.
My brain has just been taken up with too many other things right now, and I literally can't write more than a few paragraphs without
becoming drained
Posted by alexandra_k on August 31, 2005, at 18:17:36
In reply to Re: Feelings - Alexandra K » alexandra_k, posted by Gabbix2 on August 30, 2005, at 22:16:29
> Yeah, that's where I am, and I do okay most of the time, all though the sadness that comes from nowhere is really hard for me not to succumb too, even when it's inconvenient, or public (ugh)
Yeah... I'm not sure about depression... I think it might run a little differently... Not sure... In depression you (can) get a reduction in physiological arousal. That means there can be a kind of flattening in emotional responsivity. Everything feels 'dull flat and unprofitable'. I'm not sure how much (or to what extent) people can summon up heightened levels of physiological arousal solely by the power of positive thinking. Not very well I'd say from my personal experience with that.
But there isn't just one factor involved (thoughts). There are many... And so one other point of entry (much as I rail against it) is exercise. If you can get those endorphenes kicking in (your bodies natural opiates) then you just do feel better. But try and motivate oneself into exercise when one is depressed... So thats not an 'easy' answer either. There are a variety of factors and so one approach / point of entry may be more suited to one person than to another person.
There most certainly is individual variation.
> I put a little : ) beside my saying "I don't feel like discussing this right now"
> Because I was too tired to say why I didn't want to discuss it, which was because I was too tired...Sorry... I just kind of keep rambelling. You don't have to read / respond. Really.
:-)((((Gabbi)))))
Thanks for your Babblemail too..
I think...
People are fragile at the moment...
Or at least...
It sounds like we are.
Take care
Posted by Gabbix2 on September 1, 2005, at 19:24:29
In reply to Re: Feelings » Gabbix2, posted by alexandra_k on August 31, 2005, at 18:17:36
>
> Yeah... I'm not sure about depression... I think it might run a little differently... Not sure... In depression you (can) get a reduction in physiological arousal. That means there can be a kind of flattening in emotional responsivity. Everything feels 'dull flat and unprofitable'. I'm not sure how much (or to what extent) people can summon up heightened levels of physiological arousal solely by the power of positive thinking. Not very well I'd say from my personal experience with that.
>
And I'd agree, it's like trying to convince yourself that doing the vacuuming and waiting in line at the bank or a movie you hate is really something you find thrilling.
You can make the best of it, but the extremes are pretty hard to reach.But try and motivate oneself into exercise when one is depressed... So thats not an 'easy' answer either. There are a variety of factors and so one approach / point of entry may be more suited to one person than to another person.
>I'm confused on the excercise issue, I'm in total agreement in theory, and that taking care of yourself physically cannot help but aid in depression, yet my first and most severe depressive crash came when I was a dedicated member of a gym, and also taking kickboxing.
Perhaps I wasn't eating properly or was overdoing it or something.. I don't know.
>>
> Sorry... I just kind of keep rambelling. You don't have to read / respond. Really.
> :-)
>
I know, but when one is feeling bad already sometimes something teeny like the comment I made, or an ignored post can feel more personal than it should, I don't mind explaining. Of course your feelings may be your own ; ) But I don't mind trying to protect them when I can.> ((((Gabbi)))))
> Thanks for your Babblemail too..Your welcome, and I hope you know that my babblemails to anyone feeling awful come with no obligation to respond, that would be only adding more stress, and that's just not nice.
Of course none of my babblemails do, but particularly ones sent at those times.
> People are fragile at the moment...
> Or at least...
> It sounds like we are.Softie - tough, that's what we are, or it's at least how I describe myself.
Posted by alexandra_k on September 2, 2005, at 5:23:03
In reply to Re: Feelings » alexandra_k, posted by Gabbix2 on September 1, 2005, at 19:24:29
> And I'd agree, it's like trying to convince yourself that doing the vacuuming and waiting in line at the bank or a movie you hate is really something you find thrilling.
Yeah. There are limits to the power of thought.
> my first and most severe depressive crash came when I was a dedicated member of a gym, and also taking kickboxing.
Hmm. When you got the crash did you suddenly stop exercising?
> I know, but when one is feeling bad already sometimes something teeny like the comment I made, or an ignored post can feel more personal than it should, I don't mind explaining. Of course your feelings may be your own ; ) But I don't mind trying to protect them when I can.
Yeah. When I'm feeling bad I tend to take things personally too... But I think (I think) I'm pretty good at noticing that I am taking it overly personal. That doesn't get rid of the feeling completely but it can help make it more manageable. And talking about it and getting some reassurance can help even more so.
> I hope you know that my babblemails to anyone feeling awful come with no obligation to respond, that would be only adding more stress, and that's just not nice. Of course none of my babblemails do, but particularly ones sent at those times.
(((((Gabbi)))))
Thank you.
I just didn't know what to say.
Except that thanks.
It is always nice to get Babblemails :-)
I just don't know what to say sometimes...
But acknowledgement is good. I hear you there.:-)
Posted by Gabbix2 on September 2, 2005, at 12:25:51
In reply to Re: Feelings » Gabbix2, posted by alexandra_k on September 2, 2005, at 5:23:03
> > my first and most severe depressive crash came when I was a dedicated member of a gym, and also taking kickboxing.
>
> Hmm. When you got the crash did you suddenly stop exercising?
>No, I hadn't done that.
> > I know, but when one is feeling bad already sometimes something teeny like the comment I made, or an ignored post can feel more personal than it should, I don't mind explaining. Of course your feelings may be your own ; ) But I don't mind trying to protect them when I can.
>
> Yeah. When I'm feeling bad I tend to take things personally too... But I think (I think) I'm pretty good at noticing that I am taking it overly personal. That doesn't get rid of the feeling completely but it can help make it more manageable. And talking about it and getting some reassurance can help even more so.
>That's it for me too, I still get the sinking feeling in my stomach but I'm a lot better at knowing when I'm being irrational.
> > I hope you know that my babblemails to anyone feeling awful come with no obligation to respond, that would be only adding more stress, and that's just not nice. Of course none of my babblemails do, but particularly ones sent at those times.
>
> (((((Gabbi)))))
> Thank you.
> I just didn't know what to say.
> Except that thanks.
> It is always nice to get Babblemails :-)
> I just don't know what to say sometimes...
> But acknowledgement is good. I hear you there.
>
Did somehow that come across as my saying that I expected you to acknowledge them?
No no no, I was saying the opposite, I wanted to make sure you knew that when someone is in a bad state I never expect a reply, or even an acknowledgment.. I don't anyway, but especially not then.Have a good day, or at least a good coffee : )
>
Posted by alexandra_k on September 2, 2005, at 15:43:18
In reply to Re: Feelings » alexandra_k, posted by Gabbix2 on September 2, 2005, at 12:25:51
> Did somehow that come across as my saying that I expected you to acknowledge them?
No, no expectation.
Its just that I appreciate that acknowledgement goes a fair way.
Sometimes it can be hard to figure what to say...
But 'thanks for the Babblemail' isn't so hard and then you don't have to worry about whether I received it or not etc etc.
> Have a good day, or at least a good coffee : )Thanks.
You to.
Now we should be careful or this thread will be redirected to social ;-)
Posted by Gabbix2 on September 2, 2005, at 16:34:36
In reply to Re: Feelings » Gabbix2, posted by alexandra_k on September 2, 2005, at 15:43:18
> > Did somehow that come across as my saying that I expected you to acknowledge them?
>
> No, no expectation.
> Its just that I appreciate that acknowledgement goes a fair way.
> Sometimes it can be hard to figure what to say...
> But 'thanks for the Babblemail' isn't so hard and then you don't have to worry about whether I received it or not etc etc.
>
> > Have a good day, or at least a good coffee : )
>
> Thanks.
> You to.
> Now we should be careful or this thread will be redirected to social ;-)Yeah, I was thinking I was pushing it with that last post
I did have a good coffee thanks :)
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Psychology | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
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.