Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘psychology’ Category

IMG_3721

I took a walk yesterday up to the viewpoint and used my iPhone to take this panorama shot.

The viewpoint is at the top of the hill just above the village where I’ve lived for exactly a year now.

In my monthly themes I think of November as being a month for reflection. And one of the ways I like to reflect is to take what’s referred to by French philosophers as the “view from on high” or “view from above“.

It’s a way of reflecting which involves pausing, standing back, and taking an overview. It’s not about analysing or considering the details.

So I took a little pause, standing there at the viewpoint, and gazed slowly in all directions, drinking in the fields of gold, and then I took a deep, slow breath or two and asked myself “how does this feel?”

It feels good.

What I feel is contentment.

I’ve been in touch with that pretty frequently recently, and when I first had that word, contentment, pop into my head I wanted to reject it. I mean it feels such a weak word, doesn’t it? A mediocre word. Couldn’t I come up with something a bit stronger than that?

So, I looked it up on my blog and found this from five years ago

Positive affect is defined as the experience of pleasurable emotions such as joy, happiness, excitement, enthusiasm and contentment. These feelings can be transient, but they are usually stable and trait-like, particularly in adulthood. Positive affect is largely independent of negative affect, so that someone who is generally a happy, contented person can also be occasionally anxious, angry or depressed.

Here’s what they found [I’m referring to a study here]

After taking account of age, sex, cardiovascular risk factors and negative emotions, the researchers found that, over the ten-year period, increased positive affect predicted less risk of heart disease by 22% per point on a five-point scale measuring levels of positive affect expression (ranging from “none” to “extreme”).

So, weak or strong, turns out contentment might well turn out to have a health benefit.

But there’s more – I’ve just finished reading Robert Brady’s “The Big Elsewhere”, which I highly recommend, and in there this week I found a passage he’d written “on contentment”. He refers to the Tao Te Ching where Lao Tzu says “There is no disaster greater than not being content” –

What does contentment have to do with disaster? Lao Tzu knew, and cryptically passes along the intimation, that contentment is the beginning of all that is worthy, that contentment is the seed and germ of every happiness, its absence accordingly the tiny breach that ruptures into every disaster, the pinhole in the dam, the lost horseshoe nail. Contentment is all the rest: pride in the way of one’s life and the fruit of it, whether one is a shepherd or chieftain, a fact that hasn’t changed since back in the tribal days when miracles were everywhere and museums were not yet needed to remind us of what is gone.

Contentment is the core of all that truly matters, it is the root of passion, the height of honesty, the beating heart of every joy, the embrace of a family; for there is no self in contentment; it is other-centred. The self-centred, in contrast, is perturbed, discordant, writhes with discontent and seeks release (insert the ‘seven cardinal sins’ here for starters).

What do you think? Is contentment something you recognise? Is it something you feel? Today?

It seems to me it’s not such a weak or mediocre feeling after all!

 

Read Full Post »

DSCN4485

One of my favourite podcasts is “onbeing with Krista Tippett”. Recently she interviewed Ellen Langer on the Science of Mindfulness.

Ellen Langer has carried out some really interest research, some of which she mentions in the interview, but I first encountered her work when studying Dan Seigel’s Interpersonal Neurobiology course. Her take on mindfulness is different from that of the more dominant meditation based one.

She says that meditation can be a good form or mindfulness practice but, it’s not necessary.

She says we can go through life either mindfully, or mindlessly.

Doesn’t that seem crystal clear?

I like it, because, for me, it maps directly onto my heroes not zombies. I do think we tend to slip into autopilot, or “zombie mode”. But if we wake up and become aware we can become the conscious authors of our own stories (the ones where we are the main protagonist, the hero)

How do we do that?

How do we wake ourselves up? Jolt ourselves out of autopilot/zombie/mindless mode?

She says – search for the new.

It’s novelty and the search for novelty which creates the mindful state.

And I think she’s right, because to search for the new involves intention and attention. We wake ourselves up first of all by deciding to do so. We live consciously by choosing to live consciously. Then when we are looking and listening out for what is new, different, or changed, then we not only paying attention, but we are paying attention to reality. (Instead of painting over reality with habit)

Try it for yourself.

She says see if you kind find out something new about the next person you speak to.

But what about right now?

Right now, wherever you are. Once you stop reading this, look around you and see if anything is new, if anything has changed since yesterday. Look for what’s new, different or changed.

 

Read Full Post »

IMG_3200

(me, aged 8, on a boat to Orkney, taking photos with my box camera)

If in every field the triumph of life is creation, must we not suppose that human life has its goal in a creation which, unlike that of the artist and philosopher, may be pursued always by all – the creation of self by self, the developing of the personality by an effort which draws much from little, something from nothing, and adds unceasingly to whatever wealth the world contains? (L’Énergie spirituelle. Henri Bergson. 1919)

I talk a lot about creativity. I think it is one of the defining characteristics of human beings. We constantly make and re-make our world.

It’s quite common for people to think that creativity is what artists have and if you aren’t an artist you aren’t creative. I think that’s a way too limited understanding of what creativity is.

We are creative when solve daily problems. We are creative when we make food. We are creative when we tell stories (which do all the time). We are creative when make plans. We are creative when we sing, play an instrument, make something, express ourselves.

We are creative all the time as we make our selves – we are constantly engaged with the process of self-making, and we never stop developing, evolving and growing – all of which are creative acts.

Own your creativity.

I think it’s one of the three basic characteristics of human life.

Read Full Post »

DSCN2160

When our destiny is attained Nature alerts us by a clear sign. And that sign is joy. I mean joy, not pleasure. Pleasure is only a contrivance devised by nature to preserve life, and does not indicate the thrust and direction of life. But joy always announces that life has succeeded, gained ground, conquered. All great joy has a triumphant note…….wherever there is joy, there is creation; the richer the creation, the deeper the joy (L’Énergie spirituelle, Bergson. 1919)
Joy.
What a great way to know we’re on course.
I like the way Henri Bergson teases out the differences between pleasure and joy. He says that joy includes pleasure but not all pleasure brings us joy.
There’s something heart-filling and truly life enhancing about the emotion of joy.
Psychologists talk about the six basic emotions – fear, sadness, anger, disgust, surprise and JOY. Doesn’t joy really stand out in that group? All the others carry some negative quality about them. Sure they are probably there to protect us and to help us survive but what about flourishing? What about creative growth and development? Do we achieve those things through fear, sadness, anger, surprise or disgust? Not so much….
But do we achieve them by honing our choices to be in tune with joy? We sure do.
As Bergson says “wherever there is joy, there is creation; the richer the creation, the deeper the joy.
This focus on joy reminds me of Csikszentmihalyi’s work on “flow” – great video here. He researched what he referred to as peak experiences. You know those times where you are in the zone, where you lose track of time and where you feel at one with the universe. He showed that we experience flow most commonly while we are in the process of achieving something we’ve strived for. Like climbing a mountain, just as we get to the top and we see over that last shoulder and the land stretches out before us as far as we can see.
It also reminds me of Seligman’s work on positive psychology, and some of the happiness research. It does seem that we’ve paid most attention to what is negative or problematic and maybe we need to redress the balance somewhat and consider the positive emotions we experience.
Another thing it makes me think about is Joseph Campbell’s advice to “follow your bliss“.
Finally, it also makes me think about the Heartmath technique where the deliberate re-creation of joy is one of the fundamental steps in that method.
So, there’s something to explore this week – when do you experience joy? And how can you do more to have more joy in your life?

Read Full Post »

IMG_3197

William James wrote –

Practically everyone knows in his own person the difference between the days when the tide of this energy is high in him and those when it is low, though no one knows exactly what reality the term energy covers when used here, or what its tides, tensions and levels are in themselves . . . To have its level raised is the most important thing that can happen to a man, yet in all my reading I know of no single page or paragraph of a scientific psychology book in which it receives mention. (The Energies of Men, 1907)

What is this energy he is talking about? I’ve often wondered about that. When I gave talks to young medics I would often start by saying “Let’s make a scale for energy. Let’s say 0 is the lowest energy you can imagine experiencing, and 10 is the greatest. Where would you put yourself on that scale right now?” Then I’d go round the room getting everyone to say what level of energy they were experiencing. Everybody answered. Everybody instantly offered a number on the scale. Then I’d ask “How did you do that?” “What did you check to arrive at the number you gave?” Nobody knew.

Dan Seigel and his group who developed “Interpersonal Neurobiology” (IPNB) came up with this definition of “mind” (see if you can find other definitions of “mind”) –

A embodied, interpersonal process of regulation of energy and information flow

Pretty useful, isn’t it? But what is the “energy” which is being regulated?

Having read the IPNB definition it struck me that as complex adaptive systems, living organisms are constantly exchanging energy, molecules and information with their environments.

But again, just what is this “energy”?

What do you think? (And where are you right now on the energy scale of 0 to 10?)

Read Full Post »

DSCN4446

There are many theories about memory, and as far as I can see, nobody has really got it figured out yet. Probably one of our most common models is a filing cabinet. We have the idea that everything that happens and everything we ever learn is stored away in some drawer inside our brain. When we want to remember it, we just need to go to the right drawer and take it out.

The trouble is, we haven’t been able to find anything remotely like this filing cabinet in the brain. At the neurological level there seem to be many regions of the brain involved in the processes of memory, not just the hippocampus, although that does seem to be very important.

Rupert Sheldrake, in his Science Delusion, proposed an interestingly different model – one of resonance. Briefly, he suggests that memory is stored outside the person and in the universe, so recalling something is more like tuning in to a radio station. Once you hit the right wavelength you have access to the memory.

Henri Bergson had a different theory –

His intriguing theory was that all memory is like the muscle memory that enables the body to recall how to ride a bicycle or to swim. These muscle memories are not stored as representations and, similarly, the mind does not store recollections but in perceiving a situation instantly brings into play the appropriate previous mental responses, just like the body discovering itself on a bike or in the sea. So memory does not wait patiently in some dusty archive but is constantly and urgently pressing forward into perception, to the extent that the characteristic movement of memory is not from present into past but from past into present

In some ways, this is close to the neurological teaching of “what fires together wires together”. Memory, in other words, isn’t like a photographic image, a book, or a film archive. It’s a constantly active process of engaging with the world. It’s not about a file waiting to be found with the help of the right card index. It’s more like the way we learn to use our bodies – to walk, ride a bike or swim. When we do those actions we don’t have to go back into our brain stores and find the manuals!

The memory functions involved in these skills are embodied.

This is a surprisingly holistic model to develop years before we began to uncover the ways in which all of our mental processes are embodied.

One of the enticing aspects of this theory is that all that we have ever done, experienced or learned, is actually ever present, ever “urgently pressing forward into perception” in ways which deeply influence what we perceive, and also, what we do, now.

Of course, I bet some of you are thinking “memory is constantly and urgently pressing forward into perception”? So, why can’t I remember somebody’s name when I think about them? Why do I come back from the shop without some of the things I went to buy?

I don’t think a dynamic, active model of memory means that we have 100% recall. In fact, clearly, that isn’t the case for any of us, and however memory works, it sure doesn’t include the ability to remember every experience and piece of knowledge we have ever encountered. That’s probably for a very good reason.

I suspect it would be impossible to get through life if we didn’t manage to forget, as well as being able to remember……but then, that’s probably the subject of another post!

Read Full Post »

DSCN4404

In Life Lessons from Bergson, Michael Foley writes –

What happens when we fail to live in duration, no longer hear the inner melody and lose touch with the intuitive self? We become frozen, petrified – automatons, slaves of habit or convention or both. 
“Living in duration” is living in the experience of life, being fully present, attentive and aware. The opposite is to live in our inner worlds of representations and labels. Iain McGilchrist describes this brilliantly in his The Emperor and His Emissary, showing how the right hemisphere of our cerebral cortex processes the raw information as we pick it up from the world, then hands off some of it to be re-presented and analysed in the left hemisphere. What should happen next is that the analyses and representations are fed back to the right side to be re-contextualised. McGilchrist makes the point that, sadly, we’ve created a world where we forget the importance of the activities of our right hemispheres, and give primacy to those of the left.
“Hearing our inner melody” is a beautiful phrase. When we experience music we don’t experience it as separate notes and pauses. We experience it as rhythm and melody.
And our “intuitive self”? That deep, natural, heart-focused knowing….
What happens when we lose touch with those things? We get rigid and stuck.
There is no doubt that the pressures to conform in our society are enormous. It seems to me we are becoming less and less tolerant of difference, fearing “others” and suppressing diversity.
Every day we need to freely choose what to do, what to say, and what to think. As Michael Foley says –
Our freedom, in the very movements that affirm it, creates the developing habits that will stifle if it fails to be renewed by constant effort: it is dogged by automatism.
This is the fundamental theme of this blog – we all tend to default into autopilot and in so doing we live in a more limited, and less fully human way – like zombies – with habits and routines and “norms” on loops. Our alternative is to wake up, become aware and consciously choose to become the author of the one unique story in which we are the hero, the protagonist, the main character.
William James, who shared many of the same views as Bergson said
Could the young but realize how soon they will become mere walking bundles of habits, they would give more heed to their conduct while in the plastic state. (Psychology: The Briefer Course, 1892)
My only issue with that statement is I don’t accept we completely lose our “plastic state” – what he means by “plastic” is dynamic, malleable, capable of being changed. Sure, as we become constrained by our habits and automatisms, it becomes harder to change.
But with awareness and will, change is possible!

Read Full Post »

DSCN4411

In Michaei Foley’s Life Lessons from Bergson he describes the philosopher’s ideas about the “self”
Bergson constantly distinguished between two selves, meaning two levels of process – a superficial self whose reactions are socially conditioned and a deep, intuitive self capable of empathy and free will…..This deep self is always in danger of being misrepresented by the categorizing self, dismissed as irrelevant by the utilitarian self and snuffed out as a threat to popularity by the social self
It’s interesting that nobody has ever found “the self”.
We talk about the benefits of “self-confidence” but what is this “self” we have confidence in?
We talk about the benefits of having “self-awareness” but who, exactly, is aware of this “self”?
Whatever you think about the concept of the “self”, I think it’s pretty clear there is no fixed entity called the “self”….no unchanging thing.
I often found the concept of a “community of selves” to be a more useful model when working with patients. People often identify much more closely with one aspect of their personality, or with one role in life, than they do with their other ones. For example, I fully identified with my doctor self while I was at work, and yet in other times and places my dad-self, or husband-self, or my teacher-self would feel much more prominent.
So, I’m quite taken with Bergson’s two selves – the superficial and the deep.
I especially like his description of the deep, intuitive self as being capable of empathy and free will, whilst the superficial self is more reactive, more subject to the pressures and influences of others.
Read the last sentence of that passage from Foley’s book a second time….
Our deep, intuitive self is constantly interacting with our superficial self, but look at the potential “misrepresentation” of the deep self – by the “categorising self” (…our left hemisphere?), by our “utilitarian self” (….makes me think of evolutionary biology) and by our “social self” (…with all that pressure to conform and fit in)

Read Full Post »

image

Reality no longer appears essentially static, but affirms itself dynamically, as continuity and variation. What was immobile and frozen in our perception is warmed and set in motion.

Those are the words of Henri Bergson, quoted in Michael Foley’s excellent “Life lessons from Bergson”.

I love that. The experience of life as dynamic, “warmed and set in motion”.

Life isn’t “frozen and immobile” to me, and that’s why I am wary of categories and labels. I’ve always resisted being put into a box, defined by one or two of my characteristics. When I think of that I recall the adage of the General Semanticists – “judgement stops thought”. So often fixing someone or something into a category or type stops us from really seeing, really understanding.

Reducing an individual to a type diminishes them in all senses of the word.

Every patient I ever encountered was unique, presenting experiences and stories unique to them. To reduce them to diagnostic categories, or to types of any sort, blocked my understanding of them. Everyone always has more to reveal, more to share, more to experience and be understood.

Michael Foley says he came back to Bergson’s work after dismissing it decades earlier. His way back is interesting. It’s not the same as mine. My first encounter with Bergson came when I was reading Deleuze but I didn’t find him easy. I later stumbled into complexity theory and, in particular, the idea of complex adaptive systems. At that point I remembered some of Bergson’s ideas and went back to explore his writings further. Michael Foley’s path was through his encounter with “process philosophy” and with particle physics –

I learned from twentieth century philosophy of mind that memory and the self are processes rather than fixed entities – and suddenly this connected with the theories of particle physics, which claim that at the heart of matter there are in fact no particles but only processes…….everything is process…and everything is connected to everything else.

In the process view nothing is fixed, nothing is final and no circumstances ever repeat in the same way.

This strikes me as very true. Dan Seigel, one of the founders of Interpersonal Neurobiology, worked with colleagues to come up with a definition of the mind. What they concluded was that ” the mind is a process of regulation of energy and information flow. ”

The mind is not an entity or a thing, it’s a process.

The body is not a fixed entity or thing either – it’s a dynamic ever changing network or community of cells.

Disease is not a thing either. That really startled me when I read that once I was a practising doctor. As a medical student I picked up the view that disease was pathology and pathology was the changed organs or cells. Once I became a GP I encountered dynamic, hard to pin down illnesses that certainly couldn’t be reduced to pathological entities. Hearing that disease was a process not an entity was liberating for me.

I will return to some of the issues raised by this thinking in other posts but let me finish this one by returning to the title, because once we gain the insight which shifts our attention from entities to processes we discover diversity – we find out that variation is a key characteristic of Nature and of Life. But I think we find out something else too – that the universe, the world, and our lives are not completely random, chance, accidental phenomena. Instead there is continuity. We are in a process of continuous creation and emergence. We are who we are in our networks of family, nature, society and the world. We emerge from the past, as the past encounters and interacts with the present. Our future doesn’t contain just anything you could ever imagine. It emerges from here and now, from that flowing river of life and connections.

Continuity and variation. Just like the flow of a river. Just like the natural history of a plant, an animal, or any other living organism.

Read Full Post »

Bench with tree or tree with bench

When did you last just sit? And where was that?

Do you have a favourite place to sit? And what do you do while you are sitting?

When I was a busy GP in Edinburgh I’d often drive through Holyrood Park on the way from one house call to another, or one clinic to another, and if I saw someone sitting on one of the park benches….just sitting….I’d get a sudden longing. I’d think “How great to be able to just sit”.

In our busy lives, we’re always doing. In the midst of that we are encouraged to “live in the present moment”, to learn to be “mindful”, learn how to meditate, learn to “soyez zen” (as I’ve heard it said so often in this part of France).

I know it’s important to be active but I also know it’s important to slow down sometimes (I have a whole series of posts on verbs…. Here’s one on slowing down) . Yes, maybe to meditate. Maybe to focus on my breathing. Maybe to day dream even.

Sometimes I go outside and sit down under the mulberry tree, listen to the birdsongs around me, look at the blues and greens and other colours in the world around me, breathe deeply and fill my lungs with the clear air, close my eyes and feel the warmth of the sun on my skin.

Sometimes I practice some form of meditation, sometimes Heartmath, sometimes I just let my consciousness flow, drifting from a sensation to a feeling to a thought.

I find some of my best ideas arise in those moments and I’m reminded of David Lynch talking about TM and diving for the big fish….

ideas are like fish. If you want to catch little fish, you can stay in the shallow water. But if you want to catch the big fish, you’ve got to go deeper. Down deep, the fish are more powerful and more pure. They’re huge and abstract. And they’re beautiful. Everything, anything that is a thing, comes up from the deepest level. Modern physics calls that level the Unified Field. The more your consciousness – your awareness – is expanded, the deeper you go toward this source, and the bigger fish you can catch.

(from David Lynch’s “Catching the Big Fish: Meditation, Consciousness and Creativity”)

Seriously, if you are busy doing all the time, you aren’t going to catch the big fish! Pull up a chair, sit on that bench, and “take a moment”. Who’d have thought it? Moments are there for the taking!

 

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »