![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 29 to 53 of 53. Go back in thread:
Posted by alexandra_k on December 1, 2005, at 5:23:05
In reply to Re:, posted by alexandra_k on December 1, 2005, at 5:11:18
i don't know...
i'm just talking really...
i think...
there is a lot more work that needs to be done on how much emotion and reason do come apart...
and on how much the two pathways do / can interact...the 'primary' / 'secondary' distinction has come into question too...
it was thought there were a number of 'primary' emotions and that 'secondary' emotions just were 'primary' emotions + cognitive distortions (though I'd prefer to replace those with 'judgements' - which aren't really a matter of logic and whose truth conditions... are rather questionable... - i guess)
but... while that might be right you can't say that anger (for example) is a primary emotion (thus not a secondary emotion) because it seems to occur as both... And same for shame, that can be primary too... So... I think how much reason and emotion interact... Is probably a matter of degree...
But sometimes... They don't seem to interact so much as work in opposition...
(Maybe interaction is deescalating of negative emotions? While opposition is escalating?)I'm just talking really...
I don't know.
Ruminating...
I guess...
It is trauma.
But I don't know what it is best for me to do to try and get past it...Seems to me like if I don't spend that time ruminating...
Then the images / feelings etc will just be more intrusive during the day...
That my ruminating defuses them
So they aren't as intrusive during the day...Is that right do people think?
Or...
Is ruminating only keeping them alive?I don't know...
Posted by alexandra_k on December 1, 2005, at 17:01:09
In reply to Re:, posted by alexandra_k on December 1, 2005, at 5:23:05
round and round and round i go...
i'm sorry.yet i persist...
i'm not sure what i'm supposed to be doing...
what it is 'good for me' to be doing...
i suppose that i have a suspicion
that it would be better for me to get involved in some doings
so that i am better able to distract myself from my thinkings
but...
that seems fairly unpalatable for some reason.
i wish i could get into my work...
properly.
when i am doing that it feels really wonderful
but it can be hard to come by.
i've spent much of the past two days...
sleeping.
and haven't been able to bring myself to do anything.
just two weeks
i just need to press on for two weeks
then it doesn't matter
i can sleep for a month
and maybe i will
i don't know.i think i might be depressed.
but i'm too reactive to be properly depressed.
so there it is.sometimes...
i just don't know how to make the nightmare stop...
maybe it is about...
tolerating it...
and i'll grow out of it
as i get older
or maybe...
that was my past dx and not this one
i don't know.
p-doc said...
that it would only make me worse to try and deal with / talk through the past.
so i guess that means...
riding it through...
riding it through...i'm not very functional sometimes...
but there is nothing to be done...
just functional enough...
just enough...on the borderline.
and i don't seem to be able to make myself well...
so i thought...
maybe i can make myself sicker...
maybe thats what you have to do to get a little help...
but that doesn't really work...
because you can't really make yourself...
in the way that seems to be required.
and if people think that is what you are trying to do
then boy oh boy do the judgements and anger come out
and then one only fears improvement...
because of termination...and i hate it
i hate this
i hate them so very muchand he couldn't even respect
DO NOT WRITE TO ME
because clearly he knows best...
he knows that it is better for him to send me a letter...
than to respect my request...well f*ck him
f*ck them all
Posted by alexandra_k on December 1, 2005, at 17:39:38
In reply to Re:, posted by alexandra_k on December 1, 2005, at 17:01:09
and anger
yeah
do i get so f*cking mad sometimes
at all the things they said to me
that hurt me so very much
and how at the start i trusted them
i trusted their intentions
i trusted the things they said to me
they said about me
because they were the experts.and what they taught me...
they taught me to not trust myself
my own responses
my own reactions
my own motivations
my own intentions
because they knew better
and my thoughts
feelings
opinions
weren't worth sh*t to them
except to be used as ammunition
to beat me over the head with
when they saw that i wasn't improving
wasn't getting better
and what i don't understand is how the f*ck
anybody is supposed to be able to get better
when clinician's just seem to undermine
your perspective
so completely
so as to bash you over the head with itand is it different sometimes?
are other peoples clinicians really any different?
maybe its just about the public service...
maybe it is...
i suppose it has to get fairly demoralising working there
over time...
but i've had new ones
and you should have seen the ego on them.and i think...
maybe clinicians tend to be a little like politicians...
anybody who wants that power...
probably shouldn't have it.
and why do they want it in the first place?
maybe 'cause they are driven to know what is wrong with them...
maybe 'cause they are driven to know what is wrong with other people they have known...
in which case...
i guess they think they are 'better than' to start with.and i don't know...
medication prescribers...
how dare they judge
how dare they undermine another human beings perspective
you think you learn that by studying medicine?
you don't learn sh*t about thatpushers for the drug companies
prescribe n amount of this medication
and win yourself a car!
its clearly most ethical to prescribe this one
we give you free samples!
and you make your decisions on the findings we consent to publishthats not science
and money makes the world go around
and some people make a killing
literally
and other people are still hurting
(hurting more)
but what does that matter
when there is money in them hills
and when one gets the satisfaction of knowing
OTHER people are f*cked up
and as for oneself...
oneself is considered such a model
that one is given the power to lock other people up
to testify to whether they get jail or a mental institution
whether they get blame or sympathy
to decide...
whether the person should beat themself up or view themself sympatheticallyand it is a farce
it isand what sickens me...
is that is the best we can do.
Posted by alexandra_k on December 1, 2005, at 17:47:21
In reply to Re:, posted by alexandra_k on December 1, 2005, at 17:39:38
and that is just how it seems to me...
sometimes.and here we are 'less moronic' than other consumers...
wow
what a compliment.
and doctors study for however many years
but how many of them appreciate the proper domain of their authority?
how many of them question the 'accepted facts' which is wise given that the 'accepted facts' have been found to change in light of being questioned. in light of being replicated with variation. in light of an alteration in the experimental design. in light of an alteration in the statistical method.how many of them think about this?
and is this their job?
and do they appreciate the limits of their domain?
'less moronic'
charming.and people are seriously going to do it...
to go and talk to such people
to bare their perspective to these people
these people who are so quick to write off other peoples experiences
people are actually going to do it
and maybe this is just bitterness...
but then i don't think it is...
i really don't think it is...
because even if i could go
i wouldn't
or i most certainly would not participate
because respect is hard to come by
from people who consider themselves the experts
the experts on other peoples experiences
the experts on whether others experiences are accepted as veridical or written off as some alleged ego defence.because... what do they care what you have to say?
and why on earth would they believe you?
because you are 'less moronic' than an average poster from another board...?
Posted by Damos on December 1, 2005, at 23:32:33
In reply to Re:, posted by alexandra_k on December 1, 2005, at 17:47:21
Hey kiddo,
Want to send your head circles on over and I'll add 'em to mine. Been following as best I can in the few minutes I can grab. The though/emotion/feeling stuff is really interesting and worthy of further discussion. I remember David Bohm have stuff to say that I thought was really interesting I'll just have to find it.
Sometimes I think the problem in not so much the thinking itself but that we can't see that in fact think through our assumptions. We don't see that our assumptions affect the way we observe things. Our assumptions gather certain stuff and put it together in certain ways. They are like an observer. But when we observe stuff we forget that. But what happens is that the observer profoundly affects what it is observing and is also affected by it. So if we are observing the emotions then the observing asssuptions are profoundly affected by the emotions and the emotions by the assumptions. It's different with a chair or something but if you are lookiing at your thoughts or emotions you have to consider the assuptions because the assumptions are looking.
Given the amount of ruminating I've been doing today I'm not sure I can help much. But I do certainly belive that a certain amount of mulling over is required (it better be cause I've done an awful lot of it in my life). I know I 've thought myself into big black holes in the past. And I think that's awalys been when I couldn't think myself to the truth or the answer/result or whatever and so frustration and angry and stuff then came to the party and round and down I'd go.
In a way I think that's why babble is so important and it comes back to stuff you said earlier in the thread. That having people feed your own stuff back to you is what helps you to reframe it in way - take a reality check on how you perceived it. It allows you to look at it in a different way.
And no I don't think that telling you that the way you think and perceive things is wrong is the least little bit helpful. I think what is helpful and we've talked about it before is trying to get inside the persons experience and seeing it the way they do. Maybe that's part of the deeper problem. We've gone from being a new born of unlimited potential and possible (genetics etc aside) and through our life experience we have been trained, conditioned whatever to act and react in a certain way. So we are infact almost a system of reflexes. And it's not until someone shows us that there is another possibility or potential way to be that we have can see the unconscious nature of our previous responses to things.
Just rambling here but it's really interesting Alex, really really interesting.
Thank you.
(((Alex)))
Posted by alexandra_k on December 1, 2005, at 23:43:09
In reply to Re: » alexandra_k, posted by Damos on December 1, 2005, at 23:32:33
hey.
thanks for that.
i have been winding myself up...
into a right state.
:-(hmm.
and the latter post...
i was hurting
and made some (probably)
unfair generalisations...
(and thats the best you will get out of me at this point)
but i guess the point...
is really that...
other people are about a million times braver than me
but thats okay.thanks for that damos.
i need to do something...
i need something to change for me...
tomorrow...
need to refocus.
i really have been crying
thinking
ruminating
remembering
sleepingfor the past few days...
i need to do this...
it is still possible
but not if i don't snap out of this real soon.need to do this
then...
it will be doneand i'll only be a little bit embarrased / ashamed
for having lost it for a couple days
so long...
as i don't mess it up bigtime...(((damos)))
damn letter
damnit
:-(
Posted by damos on December 2, 2005, at 2:30:15
In reply to Re:, posted by alexandra_k on December 1, 2005, at 23:43:09
That's one of the reasons I'm sorry for not being here. Not being able to pay the attention necessary to help you work through it before it sucks a few days in. I'm sorry Alex.
Mind you I was in a pretty right state myself today - situational too. It all got way too much this morning and I could actually feel a break coming, spillage going to happen. Haven't felt like that in a long time. Somehow held it together though. Messed up real big though, there'll be h*ll to pay next week - again.
Just know You can always reach out and I'll find a way to grab hold and help you hold on and get through.
Get up and treat yourself to Starbucks or something, take a walk while everything is fresh and then get back into it with a clear head. You can do it. I know you can.
Lots of love and hugs to help you through.
Love>Alex<Love
(((((Alex)))))
Posted by cricket on December 2, 2005, at 12:06:36
In reply to Re:, posted by alexandra_k on December 1, 2005, at 23:43:09
((((Alex))))
I hope you're feeling a bit better today.
Posted by cricket on December 2, 2005, at 12:12:25
In reply to Re: » alexandra_k, posted by damos on December 2, 2005, at 2:30:15
((((Damos)))
Sorry, you're not doing so great either.
Geez, what's going on here?
Posted by alexandra_k on December 2, 2005, at 14:33:05
In reply to Re: » alexandra_k, posted by damos on December 2, 2005, at 2:30:15
yeah... sometimes it seems a bit catchy.
yeah... i think i'm going to have a better day today :-)
sorry about my raving...
it must be a bit hard to read...
and easy to get sucked into...
feels like my head just pulls me along sometimes.but yeah
tis going to be a better day today
Posted by cricket on December 2, 2005, at 16:26:46
In reply to Re:, posted by alexandra_k on December 2, 2005, at 14:33:05
>
> but yeah
> tis going to be a better day todayAlright :-)
I already beat up all the bad guys on this side of the world.
So it's definitely going to be a good day for you over there.
Posted by alexandra_k on December 2, 2005, at 23:57:51
In reply to Re: » alexandra_k, posted by damos on December 2, 2005, at 2:30:15
> Mind you I was in a pretty right state myself today - situational too. It all got way too much this morning and I could actually feel a break coming, spillage going to happen. Haven't felt like that in a long time. Somehow held it together though. Messed up real big though, there'll be h*ll to pay next week - again.
:-(
((((((Damos)))))))
Posted by alexandra_k on December 2, 2005, at 23:58:43
In reply to Re: » alexandra_k, posted by cricket on December 2, 2005, at 16:26:46
> I already beat up all the bad guys on this side of the world.
> So it's definitely going to be a good day for you over there.:-)
Posted by Damos on December 3, 2005, at 17:37:51
In reply to Re: » damos, posted by cricket on December 2, 2005, at 12:12:25
Thanks Cricket. It's just work sh*t, and I shouldn't be letting it get to me so bad. Guess it's just been building and building and some of the pressure had to come out.
Hope you're doing okay
Posted by Damos on December 3, 2005, at 18:26:40
In reply to Re:, posted by alexandra_k on December 2, 2005, at 23:57:51
Thanks for the hugs Alex. Your news really helped brighten me up. Guess we'll just see what tomorrow brings.
(((((Alex)))))
Puppy sends sloppy kisses, tail wags and big dog cuddles too.
Posted by alexandra_k on December 4, 2005, at 16:12:17
In reply to Re:, posted by alexandra_k on December 1, 2005, at 23:43:09
> and the latter post...
> i was hurting
> and made some (probably)
> unfair generalisations...
> (and thats the best you will get out of me at this point)Ah, but now it is later and you will get more...
So... Seems that the 'cognitive errors' do come out as part of the 'winding oneself up' process... But... Does the emotion come first, or the cognitive distortion?
Maybe if I didn't endorse the cognitive error I wouldn't have felt so upset...
Crap.
I guess the trouble is that they are half right...
It is just that to emphasise the cognitive errors too much...
Invalidates the initial emotion.
Maybe not as a matter of logic...
But thats how it feels.
and sometimes...
feeling and thinking do come apartare intense emotions always illogical????
<sob>
Posted by Damos on December 5, 2005, at 18:43:05
In reply to Re:, posted by alexandra_k on December 4, 2005, at 16:12:17
> are intense emotions always illogical????
>
> <sob>Please don't cry you. I think the answer to this is no.
I really strugle with whether I'm thinking my feelings or feeling my thinking or something else entirely. I don't think that strong emotion can be simply dismissed as 'cognitive distortion' and would probably want to smack someone in the mouth if they said that to me. How totally invalidating and generally devastating to tell someone that. Yep the circles are a problem, but the initial thing is prior to conscious thought surely (please, it would make me feel better). Gosh, should feeling and emotions even be thought of as being logical or illogical, hmm, just don't think so.
Interesting, interesting, interesting.
Posted by alexandra_k on December 5, 2005, at 19:36:23
In reply to Re: » alexandra_k, posted by Damos on December 5, 2005, at 18:43:05
> > are intense emotions always illogical????
> >
> > <sob>
> Please don't cry you. I think the answer to this is no.oh. was i over-generalising ;-)
> I don't think that strong emotion can be simply dismissed as 'cognitive distortion' and would probably want to smack someone in the mouth if they said that to me. How totally invalidating and generally devastating to tell someone that.:-(
yeah, thats how i felt...
but then... is that because i'm sub-consciously endorsing yet another cognitive error???> Yep the circles are a problem,
yeah.
> but the initial thing is prior to conscious thought surely (please, it would make me feel better).
yes. at least... it definately is sometimes. they found... they can present information subliminally. i think it might be... less that 250 milliseconds. if they flash a picture at you and then it is gone you cannot verbally report what the picture was of. they flashed pictures of mushrooms, snakes, and spiders at people. they found... people who had a snake phobia had a heightened SGR (skin galvinisation response - 'affective response') to snakes but not spiders or mushrooms. people who had a spider phobia had a heightened SGR to spiders but not snakes or mushrooms. people who didn't have a phobia had baseline SGR to all three.
Thats supposed to be the evidence that you can have an emotional response to stimuli that are not accessible to conscious experience (where 'conscious experience' is defined as being able to verbally report on the stimulus features that induced the emotion).
of course... a heightened SGR isn't the best measure of emotion... I don't know whether any of the phobic people went on to have a full blown panic attack in response to the subliminal stimuli or not... If they did... Well thats not so nice for them of course... But it would lend more plausibility to the thesis that you can have full blown emotional responses (rather than SGR which seem a bit 'basic' to constitute emotional responses because people have heightened SGR in the absence of what we would typically consider to be emotion).
sigh.
Gosh, should feeling and emotions even be thought of as being logical or illogical, hmm, just don't think so.
... People are working on it... We talk about beliefs being rational or irrational (delusional for example). It is thought that emotions might be comperably rational or irrational (though we might be better to think of them as 'appropriate' or 'inappropriate'.
I have been reading a bit about emotions...
I saw a book a while back called "emotional intelligence". I thought it was a bit of pop-psychology crap but have seen a few academic references to the notion of emotional intelligence. I don't know what book I'll find with the link... And I don't know whether it was that book in particular they had in mind or whether more academic work has been done on it.
It is similar (I think) to the idea of Macheavellian emotions (and I know I did a typo...)
The thought is that we communicate via language to inform other people of our inner states (e.g. of our beliefs...
And we communicate via expression of emotion to inform other people of our inner states ( our emotions) so they know how we are likely to behave.
And thus... The function of emotions... Might be communicative.
Hmm.
> Interesting, interesting, interesting.
yeah.
Posted by alexandra_k on December 5, 2005, at 19:43:43
In reply to Re: » Damos, posted by alexandra_k on December 5, 2005, at 19:36:23
okay... i'm groaning already...
i suppose this one looks okay:http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1887943722/drbobsvirte00-20
(but i wouldn't buy it because it is a collection of articles which can probably be accessed for free or via someone with a subscription)
hmm
hrm
Posted by alexandra_k on December 5, 2005, at 20:00:43
In reply to Re: ignore the link, posted by alexandra_k on December 5, 2005, at 19:43:43
Hmm...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotional_intelligence
Yet another 'screening test' for potential employees...
:-(
The things people say...
And the uses to which it is put...
sigh.
Posted by Damos on December 6, 2005, at 16:02:18
In reply to Re: » Damos, posted by alexandra_k on December 5, 2005, at 19:36:23
> oh. was i over-generalising ;-)
You're allowed, there's nothing wrong with the occassional gross over-generalisation ;-)
> :-(
> yeah, thats how i felt...Rightly so too. Given how rigorous you are about the process and quality of your thinking, to slap you with that label ws just plain insensitive and counter-productive.
> but then... is that because i'm sub-consciously endorsing yet another cognitive error???
Ah but you see that is not the point. The point is that by saying what they did all that was achieved was to create another strong reaction in you that in fact had the effect of moving you further away from a helpful outcome. They actually increased your resistance.
>
> > Yep the circles are a problem,
>
> yeah.You know, I think what I was saying about assumptions has a big part in the circles. Because all the stuff we think about ourselves colours the thinking that goes on in the circles. And because 'we' are at the centre of the circle our 'gravitation pull' as it were keeps pulling the stuff in toward us so we can't let it go.
Yeah I've read about that SGR stuff. They've done stuff with responses to spoken words too and apparently it can take 2-3 seconds to register the response and the subjects weren't even aware they were having an 'emotional' response to what was said.
> I saw a book a while back called "emotional intelligence". I thought it was a bit of pop-psychology crap but have seen a few academic references to the notion of emotional intelligence. I don't know what book I'll find with the link... And I don't know whether it was that book in particular they had in mind or whether more academic work has been done on it.
We were severely beaten about the head with 'EQ' for about 18mths a few year ago, like we were with Myers-Briggs and any number of other things. I think there are grains that can be taken from most of them, but that on their own none of them are 'it'.
One of the few things that has really stuck with me came from Covey "The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People" by way of Victor Frankl. Basically it says that in reactive behaviour ther is no separation between stimulus and response but in proactive (I hate that term with a passion) behaviour we exercise our freedom to choose our response according to our values and that we do this through Self Awareness, Imagination, Conscience and Independent will. And I think the self awareness is the bit that really makes the difference in extreme emotional responses. The awareness that I am not my emotions or my thoughts and that I can choose to 'observe' them and respond in a 'conscious' way. Inserting the pause between the stimulus and the response is really hard at first but does get easier.
> The thought is that we communicate via language to inform other people of our inner states (e.g. of our beliefs...
>
> And we communicate via expression of emotion to inform other people of our inner states ( our emotions) so they know how we are likely to behave.
>
> And thus... The function of emotions... Might be communicative.
>
> Hmm.I think there is a lot of truth in that - especially when you think that so much of a babies communication is non-verbal and that somehow they are able to read and interpret our behaviour and in term modify theirs. Hmmm indeed.
Good thread Alex, really got me thinking about lots of things, lots of things :-)
Posted by cockeyed on December 6, 2005, at 19:26:39
In reply to Mania's a circle, you know, because it is, posted by Susan47 on November 3, 2005, at 19:40:39
Damn, my pdoc doesn't want me feeling too good.
And I think, thanks but no thanks. Rather be high than glomming around in the abysmal sloughs of depression. Okay, maybe I'm whacked out of my skull, but I don't curse every little thing that goes wrong; don't hide under the covers as much. Don't wanna run-down old lady drivers of both sexes[hey if you're scared, get a designated driver. Drunks get 'em. Why not old f*rts? As a certified old f*rt, I've been avoiding driving except when I have to but then my tape and cd player is busted so why bother.
But what the hell is so bad about feeling good? I spend less do-re-mi on co-pays and even
try working on the house and the car. Too bad I'm a klutz. I can split wood okay, but can't
touch a car without maiming it.
Lately I've been diligently working on my shoes. I'm a big foot. when I feel good I even
change my socks, almost every day. But then I go
on and on and on. So maybe there is a an upside to depression, to wit, I shut up. Cockeyed.
Posted by cricket on December 7, 2005, at 12:14:52
In reply to Re: » alexandra_k, posted by Damos on December 6, 2005, at 16:02:18
d I think the self awareness is the bit that really makes the difference in extreme emotional responses. The awareness that I am not my emotions or my thoughts and that I can choose to 'observe' them and respond in a 'conscious' way. Inserting the pause between the stimulus and the response is really hard at first but does get easier.
>That is one of the main goals in many types of meditation, I think. Being able to observe both the thoughts and emotions ebb and flow and not identify with them so much. Have you done much meditation?
Posted by Damos on December 7, 2005, at 15:15:22
In reply to Re: » Damos, posted by cricket on December 7, 2005, at 12:14:52
> That is one of the main goals in many types of meditation, I think. Being able to observe both the thoughts and emotions ebb and flow and not identify with them so much. Have you done much meditation?
Hi Cricket, it's so very nice to see you :-)
Yeah I've done quite a bit of meditation though I tend to go through phases. And oddly enough it seems that when I need it most I do it least. Hmm. I think Buddhists and others refer to crux of the issue as being "attachment". The self awareness and observing bit is being able to see and feel all that is going on but not attach to it - easier said than done though. But I continue to try. So how are you going, do you do much meditation yourself?
>
Posted by cricket on December 8, 2005, at 13:51:37
In reply to Re: Cricket, posted by Damos on December 7, 2005, at 15:15:22
>
> Yeah I've done quite a bit of meditation though I tend to go through phases. And oddly enough it seems that when I need it most I do it least. Hmm. I think Buddhists and others refer to crux of the issue as being "attachment". The self awareness and observing bit is being able to see and feel all that is going on but not attach to it - easier said than done though. But I continue to try. So how are you going, do you do much meditation yourself?
> >
Yes, I guess so. I did mindfulness meditation for about two years. Watching my breath, bringing my mind very gently back to that after it inevitably strayed. I did get a lot better at it and maybe it did help a little with intense emotions.Right now I work more with visualizations. I enjoy them a lot more and fine them more soothing and comforting than just mindfulness. Suits my pathology more I guess :-)
Many paths to the Buddha as they say.
>
>
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Writing | 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.