Friday, December 25, 2015

The self-violence of conscience

This ("Against Self-Criticism") was an interesting Adam Phillips piece in the London Review of Books about the harm that conscience often causes in the bearer due to self-judgment. Excerpts:

Lacan said that there was surely something ironic about Christ’s injunction to love thy neighbour as thyself – because actually, of course, people hate themselves. Or you could say that, given the way people treat one another, perhaps they had always loved their neighbours in the way they loved themselves: that is, with a good deal of cruelty and disregard. 
***
‘The loathing which should drive [Hamlet] on to revenge,’ Freud writes, ‘is replaced in him by self-reproaches, by scruples of conscience, which remind him that he himself is literally no better than the sinner whom he is to punish.’ Hamlet, in Freud’s view, turns the murderous aggression he feels towards Claudius against himself: conscience is the consequence of uncompleted revenge. Originally there were other people we wanted to murder but this was too dangerous, so we murder ourselves through self-reproach, and we murder ourselves to punish ourselves for having such murderous thoughts. Freud uses Hamlet to say that conscience is a form of character assassination, the character assassination of everyday life, whereby we continually, if unconsciously, mutilate and deform our own character. So unrelenting is this internal violence that we have no idea what we’d be like without it. We know almost nothing about ourselves because we judge ourselves before we have a chance to see ourselves.

Freud is showing us how conscience obscures self-knowledge, intimating indeed that this may be its primary function: when we judge the self it can’t be known; guilt hides it in the guise of exposing it. This allows us to think that it is complicitous not to stand up to the internal tyranny of what is only one part – a small but loud part – of the self. So frightened are we by the super-ego that we identify with it: we speak on its behalf to avoid antagonising it (complicity is delegated bullying). 

Like a malign parent it harms in the guise of protecting; it exploits in the guise of providing good guidance. In the name of health and safety it creates a life of terror and self-estrangement. There is a great difference between not doing something out of fear of punishment, and not doing something because one believes it is wrong. Guilt isn’t necessarily a good clue as to what one values; it is only a good clue about what (or whom) one fears. Not doing something because one will feel guilty if one does it is not necessarily a good reason not to do it. Morality born of intimidation is immoral. 
***
Just as the overprotected child believes that the world must be very dangerous and he must be very weak if he requires so much protection (and the parents must be very strong if they are able to protect him from all this), so we have been terrorised by all this censorship and judgment into believing that we are radically dangerous to ourselves and others.
***
The first quarto of Hamlet has, ‘Thus conscience does make cowards of us all,’ while the second quarto has, ‘Thus conscience does make cowards.’ If conscience makes cowards of us all, then we’re all in the same boat; this is just the way it is. If conscience makes cowards we can more easily wonder what else it might be able to make. Either way, and they’re clearly different, conscience makes something of us: it is a maker, if not of selves, then of something about selves; it is an internal artist, of a kind. Freud says that the super-ego is something we make; it in turn makes something of us, turns us into a certain kind of person (just as, say, Frankenstein’s monster turns Frankenstein into something that he wasn’t before he made the monster). The super-ego casts us as certain kinds of character; it, as it were, tells us who we really are; it is an essentialist; it claims to know us in a way that no one else, including ourselves, can ever do. And, like a mad god, it is omniscient: it behaves as if it can predict the future by claiming to know the consequences of our actions – when we know, in a more imaginative part of ourselves, that most actions are morally equivocal, and change over time in our estimation. (No apparently self-destructive act is ever only self-destructive, no good is purely and simply that.) Self-criticism is an unforbidden pleasure: we seem to relish the way it makes us suffer. Unforbidden pleasures are the pleasures we don’t particularly want to think about: we just implicitly take it for granted that each day will bring its necessary quotient of self-disappointment, that every day we will fail to be as good as we should be; but without our being given the resources, the language, to wonder who or what is setting the pace, or where these rather punishing standards come from. How can we find out what we think of all this when conscience never lets go?

I know plenty of people who have this relationship with their consciences. It's kind of sad but more disturbing.

And finally a fascinating support of different forms of expression and the interpretations thereof:

After interpreting Hamlet’s apparent procrastinations with the new-found authority of the new psychoanalyst, Freud feels the need to add something by way of qualification that is at once a loophole and a limit. ‘But just as all neurotic symptoms,’ he writes, ‘and, for that matter, dreams, are capable of being “over-interpreted”, and indeed need to be, if they are to be fully understood, so all genuinely creative writings are the product of more than a single impulse in the poet’s mind, and are open to more than a single interpretation.’ It is as though Freud’s guilt about his own aggression in asserting his interpretation of what he calls the ‘deepest layers’ in Hamlet – his claim to sovereignty over the text and the character of Hamlet – leads him to open up the play having closed it down. You can only understand anything that matters – dreams, neurotic symptoms, people, literature – by over-interpreting it; by seeing it, from different aspects, as the product of multiple impulses. Over-interpretation, here, means not settling for a single interpretation, however apparently compelling. The implication – which hints at Freud’s ongoing suspicion, i.e. ambivalence, about psychoanalysis – is that the more persuasive, the more authoritative the interpretation the less credible it is, or should be. If one interpretation explained Hamlet we wouldn’t need Hamlet anymore: Hamlet as a play would have been murdered. Over-interpretation means not being stopped in your tracks by what you are most persuaded by; to believe in a single interpretation is radically to misunderstand the object one is interpreting, and interpretation itself.

102 comments:

  1. ESTP Sociopath-"Help me, she screamed. We're trying to, said the darkness trying to smother the light of destruction." Where is that quote from?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Also, do you think "light is destruction"?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Replies
    1. It's a metaphor. I've posted my thoughts on it already in M.E.'s past post; it's a quote pulled from her twitter, like I said before. It's about how extreme homogeneous destructive beliefs, light, washes out individualism and tolerance of diversity, darkness. In the pursuit of being who you are and thus your actions for doing that, in relation to your race, religion, and even your mental health those things shouldn't be trivialized for put aside for anything. Even sociopathy. Sociopaths do what sociopaths do to get ahead in the race of life, just like everyone else. They exist because they do, just like African Americans, or Muslims, or those with Autism Spectrum Disorder.

      So when the woman screams for the darkness to stop that light of destruction, she's asking for respect for her right to individualism. That's one way I interpret that quote.

      ESTP Sociopath

      Delete
    2. ESTP Sociopath-Thank you for the clarification.:) I don't believe I saw, that past post of M.E.'s. I find it interesting that extreme homogeneous beliefs are equated with being "light" and "destructive". It is also interesting that individualism/tolerance/diversity are equated with "darkness". I believe extreme homogeneous beliefs/individualism/tolerance/diversity, can be "light" or "dark" depending on the context, and can "build " or "destroy". Your thoughts?

      Delete
    3. ESTP Sociopath-Interpretations can be so varied, can't they? When I read that quote, I thought of a woman being assaulted/robbed/raped/killed, and pleading with her attacker to spare her...

      Delete
    4. ESTP Sociopath-That is a perfect example of how interpretations, and subsequently perceptions, can vary so widely. Your thoughts? Anyone else?

      Delete
    5. Anon 3:06 Precisely! Things mean to us what they mean to us... Half the time we need to 'over-interpret' to even begin to know what they might be meaning to others.

      Delete
    6. Of course I'm cognizant of the fact that other people's unique perspectives provide their own interpretations of reality; I most certainly had that revelation when I became self aware of my sociopathy. Otherwise I'd be "blissfully ignorant" assuming everyone thought no differently than me, just a sociopath in a world of sociopaths. It was perhaps a lonely and disappointing realization, knowing I was so entirely different in my way of operating than everyone else. Of course with more self awareness of my identity meant that there could possibly be others much like myself, however rare they may be. Growing up the words "psychopath" or "sociopath" were just drifting in the back of my mind but then as I aged and my personality developed and I began to notice my particular traits... and eventually everything came together in my eyes. I'm a sociopath.

      It is an interesting burden to bear, but being what I am my mind is well equipped to use it and live the life I need to live.

      ESTP Sociopath

      Delete
    7. I had the same revelation as a non-sociopath becoming aware of others' sociopathy and what that really meant. I was "blissfully ignorant", assuming everyone thought more or less like me, or from a similar perspective as their starting point. It was a lonely realisation in a way, too - I know what you mean by that - because the implications concerned important people in my life, from whom I realised I would always be separated in this way, by this gulf of difference. At the same time I am so grateful for the discovery that I did not know them as I thought, which has enabled me to know and understand them better than I ever would have in my ignorant, fictional bliss; it has enabled me to respect and admire them in ways that were not possible before, for things and qualities that were and would always have been misunderstood and misinterpreted. It has led to my loving them differently, and more - as they are rather than as I'd imagined/ assumed they were with my inadequate 'understanding' based on only on my own experience of human life and parameters. I would not swap that realisation for the world, and M.E's blog is largely responsible for it, by schooling me in concepts and a whole language, effectively, that I'd never have arrived at 'naturally' and given me an empathy I'd never have known.

      Delete
    8. So you're a "non-sociopath" who was "given empathy" as a result of frequenting this blog? I'm confused.

      Delete
    9. "AN empathy" - an experience of and capacity for empathy I'd never have known. As a result of frequenting this blog and, as a consequence, talking with sociopathic friends - not at cross-purposes, for the first time in our lives - I've experienced empathy of a kind, and understanding of a kind, that I'd not experienced before. My scope for empathy has expanded with the revelation of new information.

      Just as it is easy to 'tolerate' what you like, it is easy and natural to empathise with what you know and understand. To start to experience empathy with someone who is very different is a new kind and experience of empathy. Over two years, this blog has made that accessible to me.

      Delete
    10. Confusion is a good start. "There are more things in heaven and earth... "

      Delete
    11. I like these thoughts. It is certainly wiser to explore the unknown then remain in fear of it. Embrace it. I think that as a society we might become more progressive that way... perhaps one day to the point of removing the social stigma of many mental health disorders such as sociopathy or at least a safer place for people to speak up about the social issues surrounding them.

      ESTP Sociopath

      Delete
    12. ESTP Sociopath-How did you become aware of your sociopathy, and at what age? Do you know other sociopaths? You mentioned that being a sociopath is an "interesting burden". Why is it a burden?

      Delete
    13. ESTP Sociopath-Also, what is "the life you need to live"? Were you not already living it? If not, why?

      Delete
    14. ESTP Sociopath-Can I call you ESTP, for short?

      Delete
    15. All Sociopaths/Psychopaths-Do you know other sociopaths/psychopaths? If so, how do you know they are sociopaths/psychopaths? Is it instinctual? Is it behavior, either immediately, or over time? If you do know others, do you choose to interact with them, or avoid them? I'm curious if it's like a "birds of a feather flock together" type of thing, or the exact opposite?

      Delete
    16. I sincerely appreciate the words of the non sociopath and their success in truly understanding a very foreign perspective. You have become part of the solution. We need more of your willingness. Thank you!!

      Delete
    17. I sincerely appreciate the words of the non sociopath and their success in truly understanding a very foreign perspective. You have become part of the solution. We need more of your willingness. Thank you!!

      Delete
    18. Anonymous 9:27 pm

      Thanks for that post. It only goes on to confirm what I've been saying: sociopathy can be cured. You're on the right track - don't let fear of the unknown (especially when the unknown is empathy) - stop you from growing. You'll realize how nightmarish sociopathy really is when you look back.

      Delete
    19. Anon 8:13-Thank you, for your kind words.:)

      Delete
    20. ESTP sociopath @ 11.20
      "I like these thoughts. It is certainly wiser to explore the unknown then remain in fear of it. Embrace it. I think that as a society we might become more progressive that way... perhaps one day to the point of removing the social stigma of many mental health disorders such as sociopathy or at least a safer place for people to speak up about the social issues surrounding them."

      Thank you for saying so. And I completely agree with everything you say - it is how I have come to think., and having realised what the situation is, can hardly believe it... This must be one of the worst-understood and most misconstrued realities of all time. The stigma is the problem; the necessity for 'hiding'; ridiculous Hollywood, and ridiculous social norms, and in between a whole world unknown and good-as-invisible to most of the human race... It's a ludicrous situation. But maybe it is finally changing, thanks to the right information, from the right perspective, being available now, if people want to understand. M.E's done a remarkable job.

      I started out fearful and cross, like your average disappointed empath. I used to read this blog and get cross, although I always found it interesting. And at some point the penny dropped. I find it remarkable that M.E has managed to bridge that understanding-gap enough to make that possible - because it is one hell of a gap - and that is what you do not get anywhere else. She has managed to understand enough of our paradigm to trigger little understandings here and there, until a tipping point comes, and you can read the stuff with another hat on - one which doesn't distort it into something else. I always wanted to understand, but it took a very different shape to my expectation. It's been very interesting. I cannot believe I lived so long without seeing any of this; having sociopathic friends all my life without twigging any of this - so easily imagining them so different, and imagining their experience so inaccurately - assuming so much, so seamlessly and automatically - I find it incredible now. Like most people, I had to run into an experience I couldn't handle to realise there was 'anything funny' going on. It's like the way your eye can fill in blind spots - we are amzingly adept at 'explaining', or glossing over, things that don't/shouldn't 'fit' in whatever way most suits us at the time, until it becomes absolutely inescapably obvious that your understanding is inadequate and your tool box is missing tools. It's extraordinary. (I've rambled much longer than I meant to!)

      Delete
    21. Anonymous @ 7:50
      "I sincerely appreciate the words of the non sociopath and their success in truly understanding a very foreign perspective. You have become part of the solution. We need more of your willingness. Thank you!!"

      Thank you, too! For wanting us to understand and for helping and encouraging us - we literally couldn't get anywhere in this without that willingness on your part - it would be (and is) the blind leading the blind otherwise, and your willingness is very appreciated by us.

      My thanks, too, to the (other) Anonymous non-sociopath for starting this string of questions and inviting people in. And to ESTP sociopath for answering - the darkness/light discussion was fascinating.

      Delete
    22. Jonaid @ 8:36
      "Thanks for that post. It only goes on to confirm what I've been saying: sociopathy can be cured. You're on the right track - don't let fear of the unknown (especially when the unknown is empathy) - stop you from growing. You'll realize how nightmarish sociopathy really is when you look back."

      Thank you, but can I just say that I think you're on the wrong track - don't let fear of the unknown (especially when the unknown is empathy) - stop you from growing. You'll realize how misunderstood sociopathy can be when you look back!

      Delete
    23. PS I think the Elephant in the Dark story fits this problem perfectly. People have hold of one leg and imagine they have the whole elephant...

      Delete
    24. Yes I know how "misunderstood" sociopathy is. We forgot what immorality is and turned it into a "condition."

      It's amazing the games psychos play here.

      Delete
    25. Sociopathy / psychopathy is better characterised as amorality.

      Unless you see this, you are simply talking about an irrelevant subject here. Or perhaps you are simply that old man in torn clothes yelling about Armageddon on a city street corner. Either way, this is not a conversation from a shared page.

      Please don't use derogatory language about posters. Instead, attempt to establish why you think morality operates from natural law and explains the physical, scientific evidence for the heritability of psychopathy and all the nuances and unresolved questions we find in Tillier's Review of Psychopathy here:

      http://www.positivedisintegration.com/psychopathy.htm#top

      Establish the credibility of your model.

      Delete
  4. Ideally conscience is an advisor or agent which can inform/ inspire us when we could do with it. When it becomes an orgy of self-reproach it's a problem. Every human faculty has a spectrum of potential.

    ReplyDelete
  5. " for there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so. "

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And since what we do relates to who we are - and both are flexible and not static! - I offer another Shakespearean quote:

      "Virtue? A fig! 'Tis in ourselves that we are thus or thus. Our bodies are our gardens, to the which our wills are gardeners. So that if we will plant nettles or sow lettuce, set hyssop and weed up thyme, supply it with one gender of herbs or distract it with many—either to have it sterile with idleness, or manured with industry—why, the power and corrigible authority of this lies in our wills"

      ~Iago, Othello

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UeU6jpmiF4I

      Delete
    2. Thanks, North - beautiful quote and spot on.

      Such an apt passage (and great clip - hadn't realised how good Brannagh was in it).

      IAGO
      O villainous! I have looked upon the world for four times seven years; and since I could distinguish betwixt a benefit and an injury, I never found man that knew how to love himself."

      RODERIGO
      What should I do? I confess it is my shame to be so
      fond; but it is not in my virtue to amend it.

      IAGO
      Virtue! a fig! 'tis in ourselves that we are thus or thus. Our bodies are our gardens, to the which our wills are gardeners...

      Brilliant

      Delete
    3. Roderigo thinks/imagines 'his virtue' is a thing, fixed.

      Delete
    4. "He who wants to keep his garden tidy does not reserve a plot for weeds”
      ― Dag Hammarskjöld

      Delete
    5. “At every moment you choose yourself. But do you choose *your* self? Body and soul contain a thousand possibilities out of which you can build many I's. But in one of them is there a congruence of the elector and the elected. Only one--which you will never find until you have excluded all those superficial and fleeting possibilities of being and doing with which you toy, out of curiosity or wonder or greed, and which hinder you from casting anchor in the experience of the mystery of life, and the consciousness of the talent entrusted to you which is your *I*.”
      ― Dag Hammarskjöld, Markings

      Delete
    6. “It is when we all play safe that we create a world of utmost insecurity”
      ― Dag Hammarskjöld

      Delete
    7. You reminded me of Hammarskjöld's analogy. Self-reproach unchecked behaves like a weed, as does cowardice (masquerading as conscience often).

      Whether there is 'only the one' true "I" (at any given moment?) there is undoubtedly the thousand 'incongruent' ones, which we often allow to choose us, forgetting we have the choice (at every moment), prefering to sleep on the job, imagining it 'fixed'.

      Delete
    8. Thankyou!

      These Hammerskjold quotes are working a kind of magic for me, because they are so full of possibility and from a slightly different angle.

      A socio friend once explained that when in a situation in which he feels trapped or thwarted in terms of quantum physics, with all potential realities coexisting until *he* makes a choice and brings a particular one to bear through his own choice. This resonated with me very powerfully because I viewed possibilities in these situations as all existing in their own possibility worlds, likely inaccessible to me. His framing triggered a change in approach for me, a realisation i had far more agency than I had thought.

      But you will see both these approaches are outcome-focused. The Hammerskjold quotes bring personal congruence into the picture, and as I've learnt through practice, following the 'path with heart' doesn't ever disappoint.

      I love the last quote about playing safe. It is far easier to stay in known situations, even known pains. It's a timely reminder for me to let the impossible - the Unknown - change me.

      Cheers

      Delete
    9. North,

      "These Hammerskjold quotes are working a kind of magic for me, because they are so full of possibility and from a slightly different angle."

      Glad you liked them! You'd love the book, Markings. They were his personal/diary writings, only published after he died. Thanks for reminding me of him, for he first time in years... One of my favourites:

      "To be governed by that which comes alive when we have ceased to live - as interested parties or as know-it-alls. To be able to see, hear and attend to that within us which *is* there in the darkness and the silence".

      "A socio friend once explained that when in a situation in which he feels trapped or thwarted in terms of quantum physics, with all potential realities coexisting until *he* makes a choice and brings a particular one to bear through his own choice. This resonated with me very powerfully because I viewed possibilities in these situations as all existing in their own possibility worlds, likely inaccessible to me. His framing triggered a change in approach for me, a realisation i had far more agency than I had thought."

      I like this view very much. Very nice. It resonates with me too.

      Delete
    10. I ordered the book - I'm looking forward to reading it.

      I'm glad you manage to retrieve something from my horrendous phone-writing ;) That particular guy is very sharp. Our discussions were instrumental in helping me frame the questions that still intrigue me.

      Delete
  6. unrelated to the post quote of the day:


    “In our society there are two paths to success: One is to be good at computers and the other is to be a sociopath.”


    www.washingtonpost.com/sf/national/2015/12/26/resistance/

    ReplyDelete
  7. This is also tangential - there's a lot in M.E.'s post and I want to digest it before responding (although I have had initial thoughts).

    On the flexibility of our concept of self... the following All In The Mind podcast spotlights some research on the flexibility of our sense of self, both physical and psychological.

    Within the space of 2 minutes, a researcher is able to trick the presenter into forming a conception of her physical body that is misplaced and that causes subsequent physiological reactions. It's not a new experiment, but well worth watching. See it here:

    http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/allinthemind/science-of-self/6991256

    The podcast also discusses the case of a man who believed he was dead after a failed suicide attempt. This speaks to the power of the human brain in constructing realities based on beliefs. It's astounding and the applications - as the skilled manipulators here must know - are absolutely endless. But think how we can change *our own* beliefs to improve our own lives. This is the path I am on, at least, and I have shared my progress.

    This stuff really excites me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The title of the podcast is The Science of Self, and it features Anil Anathaswamy, author of The man who wasn't there - investigations into the strange new science of the self. Pretty sure I'll buy that book.

      Delete
    2. Very interesting podcast - thanks

      Delete
    3. My pleasure, glad you liked it.

      Did you ever hear Tim Leary say the human brain is designed to design realities?

      The great wonder, the marvel, is how very pragmatic these created realities actually are. Our mild divergences within the discussion of this blog - think of the complexity of the ideas we are communicating. Statistics has always astounded me - how is it we've managed to create distribution models (for example) that account for natural and human phenomena in such useful ways? These questions inspire me.

      I don't think the different modes of approach that arise from neurodiversity are surprising - rather they offer richly rewarding avenues for exploration. New lenses, new colours.

      Delete
  8. "There is a great difference between not doing something out of fear of punishment, and not doing something because one believes it is wrong. Guilt isn’t necessarily a good clue as to what one values; it is only a good clue about what (or whom) one fears. Not doing something because one will feel guilty if one does it is not necessarily a good reason not to do it. Morality born of intimidation is immoral."

    I reread this several times to make sure I got it right. I agree with the first sentence but then he goes on to say that GUILT is a good clue about what one fears and NOT about doing what one knows is wrong. Really? I mean I hope I'm not the only one who noticed how frivolous and deceptive this appears to be. One does not normally feel guilty when they're coerced (what is fear of punishment if not coercion?).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What I noticed about behaving according to the rules is that one *squashes* feelings and impulses before one even gets a chance to hear the message they are sending IF one perceives the feeling or impulse to be against the moral code. In this way, "conscience" is certainly injurious to self.

      A much better path is to allow oneself to *feel* and to understand the message AND THEN choose a course.

      "Conscience" IS a mechanism of fear: it is designed to inhibit actions that one's beliefs about society / environment / God imply dangerous, and specifically dangerous to social inclusion for self or significant others. It's a very powerful and successful mechanism in our species.

      All action is contextual, which I think, based on your comments on the previous post, you might agree with.

      Delete
    2. "What I noticed about behaving according to the rules is that one *squashes* feelings and impulses before one even gets a chance to hear the message they are sending IF one perceives the feeling or impulse to be against the moral code. In this way, "conscience" is certainly injurious to self."

      Yes - and also IF one perceives the impulse or its implications to be threatening to one's ego or comfort - that is, not just when behaving according to 'the rules' but to any rules, including internal ones dictated by ego-needs. There's a tendency to *squash* any feeling that is 'inconvenient' before one gets a chance to hear its message, whether it conflicts with the external or internal forces that 'rule' us when we have bought into them.

      In this way, I think, our real consciences can be squashed both by imposed societal surrogate-consciences (conditioning) and by own own selves: the messages we squash are often our real conscience, which is innate to us and not the product of belief. Belief is one impediment to conscience, and fear is another. Often, your real conscience can tell you when you are being cowardly (for eg) and obeying the rules instead of your own conscience (because it is easier, safer and has the automatic approval of society).

      Delete
    3. "A much better path is to allow oneself to *feel* and to understand the message AND THEN choose a course."

      Absolutely! (sorry - posted in the wrong place, below)

      Delete
    4. "There is a great difference between not doing something out of fear of punishment, and not doing something because one believes it is wrong. Guilt isn’t necessarily a good clue as to what one values; it is only a good clue about what (or whom) one fears. Not doing something because one will feel guilty if one does it is not necessarily a good reason not to do it. Morality born of intimidation is immoral."

      I reread this several times to make sure I got it right. I agree with the first sentence but then he goes on to say that GUILT is a good clue about what one fears and NOT about doing what one knows is wrong. Really? I mean I hope I'm not the only one who noticed how frivolous and deceptive this appears to be. One does not normally feel guilty when they're coerced (what is fear of punishment if not coercion?)."

      I agree, because I think feelings of guilt and fear are distinct and distinguishable. Fear makes you nervous, guilt makes you feel lousy.

      But when they coexist, as they often do, it is indeed immoral - hypocritical - to confuse them, expediently, as is sometimes the temptation, although that's something that can often be more visible from the outside than the inside. Chalking up moral points for not doing something you were really/also too afraid to do is a common deception (and self-deception).

      But genuine guilt (empathy/sympathy/concern for someone else) can be the main, or sole, discouragement to doing a thing, and is not invariably accompanied by fear.

      I often wonder whether, to someone who doesn't experience guilt themselves, guilt can often look like it must be fear or timidity, and is assumed to be when scope for fear is also present.

      Delete
    5. "Chalking up moral points for not doing something you were really/also too afraid to do is a common deception (and self-deception)."

      This is true but more often the case with sociopaths as is evident in their arguments on this blog.

      Delete
    6. Surely sociopaths are the least fearful? It's true of all those that I have known, anyway.

      Delete
    7. Anon 9:12am

      Thanks, your comment is spot on and draws in a bunch of threads for me. We do seek to protect our personal constructions / ego. I suppose we have invested a lot of energy into them and defence is almost automatic. This is why Kierkegaard suggests people need to be tricked into learning... experience is the best teacher (when we are open to learning.)

      I wonder if these tendencies to protect the ego relate to confirmation bias too.

      Delete
    8. Anon 12:03:

      Yep, guilt does feel different to fear. It is retrospective but serves the same function: a prompt to action to preserve one's place in society.

      Have you ever watched a child who feels guilty? He or she is fine when the social danger passes and they are welcomed back. It's the same with adults.

      The real trauma is when one holds their own self to ransom for 'sins' or even thoughts that might be transgressions against one's own moral code. In this place, one can be brutal to oneself.

      I follow the path with heart now, having left behind externally imposed moral codes. I trust my self to guide me in social situations. Any discomfort I feel is a signal I might need to resolve a social situation. It is no longer guilt though, no longer self-imposed suffering. I trust myself more deeply each day and from here I am developing far better relationships based on respect and collaboration. As Thomas Szasz said: I am for freedom and responsibility.

      Delete
    9. North at 3:02

      "Have you ever watched a child who feels guilty? He or she is fine when the social danger passes and they are welcomed back. It's the same with adults. "

      You're dead right about that, I realised it applied to me the instant I read it. But is it all that we're feeling in such situations? I think multiple things can be/ are going on in us, in parallel. I'd also guess that children's experience is likely to be more simplistic owing to less experience and understanding/ knowledge of ourselves and other people.

      The reason I'm thinking this is that the 'guilt'-related feeling that I was thinking of as being distinguishable from fear, which I described as 'making you feel lousy' is not like the threat of exclusion/loneliness feeling either, and I think is something which might be experience/empathy derived. I think that when it's happened to me, it has been in cases where I am about to repeat some behaviour of which I have experience from the other side - something that was done to me that that I'd resented or felt contempt for. I find that I experience the same feeling that it inspired in me then; my own action /intention takes on the same subjective flavour/quality I'd felt about similar behaviour towards me. (And, in this way, it operates pre-emptively, as well as retrospectively).

      That is the only thing I've experienced that I could really call 'guilt'-related - it hasn't happened often, but very tangibly/distinctly when it has. It's not a consuming thing which has ever led to self-berating, etc - it doesn't make me feel guilty for having had the thought/intention itself. As you said elsewhere (to paraphrase) I tend to feel the message and then make a choice; it informs a decision. It's more like an echo of a feeling reminding me of something I'd forgotten.

      I completely agree about self-imposed suffering and 'guiltiness'. It is self-violence.

      I like Szasz too! Very refreshing (and funny) guy.

      Delete
    10. North at 11.19

      Yes, it's very automatic, always running invisibly in the background - and confirmation bias a big part of it, I agree. We do need to be tricked into learning, I think... caught out in the less-defended moments. It's funny that we're protecting an investment, yet on those occasions when we stop, we discover how much of a drain that investment actually is by how much energy has been freed up. Then before you know it, it's happening again, somehow.

      It's just reminded me of Robert Graves's poem 'The Legs'... a slightly similar pattern maybe... a compulsive automatic activity with its own momentum, seemingly, activated at the drop of a hat... A nice poem, anyway:

      The Legs

      There was this road,
      And it led up-hill,
      And it led down-hill,
      And round and in and out.

      And the traffic was legs,
      Legs from the knees down,
      Coming and going,
      Never pausing.

      And the gutters gurgled
      With the rain's overflow,
      And the sticks on the pavement
      Blindly tapped and tapped.

      What drew the legs along
      Was the never-stopping,
      And the senseless, frightening
      Fate of being legs.

      Legs for the road,
      The road for legs,
      Resolutely nowhere
      In both directions.

      My legs at least
      Were not in that rout:
      On grass by the roadside
      Entire I stood,

      Watching the unstoppable
      Legs go by
      With never a stumble
      Between step and step.

      Though my smile was broad
      The legs could not see,
      Though my laugh was loud
      The legs could not hear.

      My head dizzied, then:
      I wondered suddenly,
      Might I too be a walker
      From the knees down?

      Gently I touched my shins.
      The doubt unchained them:
      They had run in twenty puddles
      Before I regained them.

      ~by Robert Graves

      Delete
    11. I love it! Will respond properly this evening, I'm baked in the summer sun :)

      Delete
    12. Anon at 1:49:

      "But is it all that we're feeling in such situations? I think multiple things can be/ are going on in us, in parallel."

      Oh, this is a good point! I have rushed over the qualitative experience in my hunt for function; such is my style. Thankyou for pointing this out.

      "I think is something which might be experience/empathy derived."
      Yes, I agree. Empathy adds a depth to the experience; perhaps it is predictive, as your elaboration on the point suggests. I think with empathy, we extrapolate from our own experiences* - as they say, if triangles created a god it would have three sides. Actually, I posited to my psychologist that this same mechanism is indicated in our tendency to anthropomorphise. He didn't like that idea ;)


      "It's more like an echo of a feeling reminding me of something I'd forgotten. "

      I really like this.

      * From what I have read here, there is a way in which sociopaths extrapolate from their own experiences: specifically that they attribute motives to behaviour that they themselves would have had. Their "empathy" in this way is NOT coloured with emotions simply because theirs are shallow or fleeting.

      Delete
    13. Anon at 6:22

      I love the poem. It reminds me of two things: the first being a blue-muted picture I used to have in my house. It's a wall, with a split-level ceiling and a large round window, like a big porthole. Through the window and melancholy men walking up stairs. The roundness of the porthole suggests the walk is circular, perpetual. And the viewer of the painting has a sense of observing this patterned walk, but just as with your poet, one sometimes stops to question just where one is walking :)

      My friend once said "we are chemical robots; the pattern is determined." But we don't know the pattern until we test it. And once we test it, we know more of it, and can shape it. Or at least colour it :)

      Delete
    14. North 9:47-9:55

      "...as they say, if triangles created a god it would have three sides. Actually, I posited to my psychologist that this same mechanism is indicated in our tendency to anthropomorphise. He didn't like that idea ;)"

      It's so true! A lot of things you've said have caused something I haven't read for 5 or 10 years to flash to mind, and this is another. I have to quote this one, it's so close...

      "Immam Muhammed Baqir is said to have related this illustrative fable:
      'Finding I could speak the language of ants, I approached one and inquired, "What is God like? Does he resemble the ant?"
      'He answered, "God! No, indeed - we have only a single sting but God, He has TWO!" '

      ~Idries Shah, Thinkers of the East


      "* From what I have read here, there is a way in which sociopaths extrapolate from their own experiences: specifically that they attribute motives to behaviour that they themselves would have had. Their "empathy" in this way is NOT coloured with emotions simply because theirs are shallow or fleeting."

      Yes, it's very interesting, all of this. I've realised more and more, from reading here and talking a lot with one sociopathic friend in particular, this year, how this tendency to attribute motives very subjectively accounts for much understanding-failure, in both directions, between types.

      In a way, as you say, our mechanisms/approaches are actually not so different, but because our basic experience and perception can differ so starkly there are areas in which misinterpretation, via this mechanism, is pretty much inevitable, due to the other's experience simply not being a part of our own. We pattern-match to our nearest experience, which, while perhaps serving us pretty well a lot of the time within our own type, becomes actually counterproductive with the other, on a 'comedy of errors' scale sometimes.

      We've been friends 30 years, and I find it staggering that we've done as well as we have given the extent of understanding-failure we've been working with and staggering that it's been 'invisible' all this time - one thing looking like/passing off as another so smoothly all this time. But you don't suspect that which you don't know (to even be a possibility), and so we glide through blissfully unaware (or exasperatedly/bemusedly unaware, of course).

      Discovering this has been more 'momentous' for me, of course, being the one who's programmed for 'caring'. It's funny; the whole thing's been quite funny. It doesn't stop him being 'lethal'- the same 'recipe for disaster' is there and operates the same - but it has given me the reason for detachment I was missing, which has stopped me instinctively seeking greater emotional closeness than is possible or would work - that WILL injure me if I invest it, creating vulnerability that he doesn't understand - he knows how it WORKS, but doesn't understand it - and it is simply inapplicable in this relationship - that's the most useful thing I have learned. He can't be emotional so I have to be less so.

      That has enabled us to be intellectually much closer, or more consistently 'in tune', but set an emotional distance which has rendered it a permanently less close experience/phenomenon (in my mind - which is of course the only place it was ever otherwise). It has enabled me to care when I might otherwise have been prevented by negative emotions - but it's a different thing from the kind of closeness we automatically gravitate towards as emotional creatures. (TBC)

      Delete
    15. North (cont'd)

      It's taken 'romantic love' out of the picture for me, and that's really what's 'done the trick'. (we were a couple briefly 25 years ago and the potentiality has always hovered, as it does). The tendency towards emotional attachment (in any degree) is what was throwing the spanner in the works.

      I've gone right off on a tangent here - sorry!

      To go back to your empathy point:

      "Their "empathy" in this way is NOT coloured with emotions simply because theirs are shallow or fleeting."

      Yes, that's the only difference, essentially. It's just that emotion's such a 'big thing' - everything being coloured by emotion so much that it renders our 'user experience' very different. I sometimes think our emotion's a bit like a musical instrument, and empathy just like the resonance of strings sounding upon the same stimulus (when it's one that we know).

      at 9:34
      "I'm glad you manage to retrieve something from my horrendous phone-writing ;) That particular guy is very sharp. Our discussions were instrumental in helping me frame the questions that still intrigue me. "

      You conveyed it very well. He sounds very sharp. He reminds me of my friend, whose analytical take and originality of thought make for exhilirating exchanges.

      I read OldAndWise's long comment to you the other day and wanted to say in our defence that the other reason we're here and not on psychopathfree is that the conversation's a higher standard! Their comment applied to me too, I ended up here because I was hooked on it. (The person who caused that, incidentally - not my friend - is long gone, but I'm still hooked on the subject. It seems a pretty big one to me. The elephant in the room).

      It was also me who'd commented about impacts taking a lot of working out of the system, which you mentioned the other day. They do. But they do work out eventually - completely! It's just a long slog. 'Hope' is the big enemy. I'm with TS Eliot on this one - hope and fear are equally disruptive and manipulative. If you can lose it, you're free. I can also confirm that it's much better afterwards - the 'emptiness' vanishes - it was an illusion, along with the 'fullness' that intoxicated us. In retrospect it's all just interesting. The hyper-caring abates, and returning to your normal state is infinitely satisfying. I have lost my taste for intoxication, I think for good.

      Don't feel obliged to reply to this one - just thought I'd share those odds and ends!

      Delete
  9. "You can only understand anything that matters – dreams, neurotic symptoms, people, literature – by over-interpreting it; by seeing it, from different aspects, as the product of multiple impulses. Over-interpretation, here, means not settling for a single interpretation, however apparently compelling."

    Incredible. No no don't settle for that which is obvious and makes sense of everything. Disregard that and cloud your mind by needlessly seeking out every other explanation, however nonsensical. Who actually lives like this? No one - no one does this when it really matters.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wise people live like this. The more we open ourselves to other interpretations, the less we are at the mercy of our fixed pattern responses. It's a rewarding path for all.

      Have you ever read Seeing is Believing? It's a little paperback on the history of astronomy and is eye-opening in that it traces our discovery that our senses are very limited when it comes to perceiving the massive array of *types* of information available in the universe and about the universe.

      How can we humbly say we know anything?

      Delete
    2. Being open to other interpretations does not mean you go looking for them when there's no need. If you have the answer - an explanation which is supported by evidence and explains everything - you must have an ulterior motive to be "wise" and seek out new answers.

      Delete
    3. "A much better path is to allow oneself to *feel* and to understand the message AND THEN choose a course."

      Absolutely

      Delete
    4. "Over-interpreted" is a slightly clunky way of putting it"... But as North said, the tendency is always towards fixed pattern responses - under-interpretation is the default - and so any effort to counteract this is liable, by definition, to *feel* a bit like over-interpretation, so maybe it's not so clunky.

      It needn't be read "go looking for them when there is no need" - there is a middle-ground.

      The difficulty, surely, is knowing when you "have the answer", which is easily said... Often we have part of it, but rarely is there nothing more to know, no further elucidation to be added...

      Delete
    5. " If you have the answer - an explanation which is supported by evidence and explains everything - you must have an ulterior motive to be "wise" and seek out new answers. "

      Theoretically, perhaps... but life is much more often like this nice analogy from your own Jalaluddin Rumi:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PxMPt0LBHOo





      Delete
    6. " The eye of outward sense is as the palm of a hand,
      the whole of the object is not grasped in the palm. "

      ~Rumi, Masnavi

      Delete
    7. "Incredible. No no don't settle for that which is obvious and makes sense of everything. Disregard that and cloud your mind by needlessly seeking out every other explanation, however nonsensical."

      Incredible. Think what you are actually saying. Had Hitler clouded his mind a bit, seeking out other explanations, he'd have done us all a favour. Since when has limiting contemplation and the search for explanation, in favour of the clarity of settling for the obvious, benefitted us? The 'obvious' that you are referring to is, no doubt, the truth... But so was Hitler's, to him. An uncertain mind can be harder of achievement than a certain one, and sometimes a life-saver.

      " Who actually lives like this? No one - no one does this when it really matters. "

      No-one, when a sabre-toothed tiger is coming around the corner. But most of the time, one isn't, and we can afford to use our minds less crudely. Sometimes we can't afford not to.

      Delete
    8. Could sociopaths EVER put forth a clear, logical point? Maybe I'm missing something so please explain further what you mean by the Hitler example.

      Delete
    9. The rest of your post avoided my explanation. Here it is again:

      Being open to other interpretations does not mean you go looking for them when there's no need. If you have the answer - an explanation which is supported by evidence and explains everything - you must have an ulterior motive to be "wise" and seek out new answers.

      Delete
    10. Hitler epitomizes absolute certainty (as do all megalomanic dictators). The wisest, most intelligent (and most logical) minds tend typically to caution against it.

      The important thing is not to stop questioning.
      ~Albert Einstein

      To raise new questions, new possibilities, to regard old problems from a new angle, requires creative imagination and marks real advance in science.
      ~Albert Einstein

      Science is founded on uncertainty. Each time we learn something new and surprising, the astonishment comes with the realization that we were wrong before.
      ~Lewis Thomas

      It is in the admission of ignorance and the admission of uncertainty that there is a hope for the continuous motion of human beings in some direction that doesn't get confined, permanently blocked, as it has so many times before in various periods in the history of man.
      ~Richard P. Feynman

      Each piece, or part, of the whole of nature is always merely an approximation to the complete truth, or the complete truth so far as we know it. In fact, everything we know is only some kind of approximation because we know that we do not know all the laws as yet.
      ~Richard P. Feynman

      Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one.
      ~Albert Einstein

      Delete
    11. AWESOME QUOTES!!! Thank you, for sharing those.:)

      Delete
    12. Lovely!

      Reality is only a Rorschach ink-blot, you know ~ Alan Watts

      Delete
    13. If one seeks quotes from "authorities" or "influential" people I would think that those with the more lasting impact ought to be quoted. The open-mindedness of a scientist is a necessary prerequisite for doing empirical research. It is not always applicable when it comes to ethics.

      Delete
    14. Mulla Nasrudin went to a psychiatrist, who tested him by showing him symbols on a sheet of paper.
      First there were three dots. 'What do those stand for?', asked the doctor.
      'Three wolves', said the Mulla.
      'And these two dashes?'
      'They stand for two elephants.'
      'What do you make of these dots and dashes together?'
      'They illustrate a herd of ponies and donkeys.'
      The doctor told him:
      'I am afraid that you are obsessed by animals, and we'll have to do something about it...'
      'Do something about yourself first,' said the Mulla, for all these creatures belong to YOUR menagerie!'

      ~Idries Shah, The Commanding Self

      Delete
  10. Such as a bully. The bully tears other people down because they hate themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  11. "It would be more honorable if you lived as a sociopath but criticised it hear in anonymity instead of defending it."

    What criticism could I give which hasn't been spoken of before? Shaming is nothing more than barbaric bullying. It is even unnecessary; sociopaths, like anyone else, are capable of observing cause and effect. We're always seeking more effective and efficient ways of doing what we want to do, and by doing so we find ways to do things in which we won't have to be shamed in the first place or avoid it altogether.

    So I won't criticize sociopaths, sociopathy, or even be self critical of myself because I refuse to inflict that kind of self harm upon myself. I'm not like you, Jonaid. I don't have a guilty conscience for my identity, and never will.

    ESTP Sociopath

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes you will and the longer you wait - and indulge in this delusion - the harder it will be to bear when your time comes. Sociopathy only works in "good" times.

      Good luck.

      Delete
    2. You don't know anything about my conscience socio so don't assume.

      Delete
    3. "I won't criticize sociopaths, sociopathy, or even be self critical of myself because I refuse to inflict that kind of self harm upon myself. I'm not like you, Jonaid. I don't have a guilty conscience for my identity, and never will."

      ESTP Sociopath

      Delete
    4. Your arrogance makes me nauseous jonaid. I wonder if you are not one person posing as multiple others here, playing devil's advocate. You seem like you have a bit of cognitive empathy but nothing much else. You sound controlling by some of your comments also an air of superiority... Do you have a personality disorder? If you don't you really aren't how are you qualified to spew your judgements?

      Delete
    5. Sociopaths see arrogance wherever they see truth which reminds them of their flaws. They like people - no matter if they're swimming in hubris - so long as they seem to come across as agreeable and make them feel better. I speak only what I know to be true. I could be mistaken at times but I don't feign false humility and I don't go out of my way to be courteous to anonymous sociopaths.

      Stop whimpering now socio and train your mind to be able to distinguish between objective truth and subjective wants.

      Delete
    6. Also they project their own conceit on anyone who's - dare I say - more informed. The moment they see someone utter something that their mind has not yet encountered or understood they yell "narcissist." Look up the meanings of these terms - language doesn't bend to your will.

      Delete
    7. You fit your bill quite well. You remain blinded by your black and white thinking wrapped up in superfluous psychobabble. Your points score equal to their failing, your lack of social oil and self righteous attitude lose any validity your thoughts have. Is courtesy an objective moral?

      Delete
    8. You fit your bill quite well. You remain blinded by your black and white thinking wrapped up in superfluous psychobabble. Your points score equal to their failing, your lack of social oil and self righteous attitude lose any validity your thoughts have. Is courtesy an objective moral?

      Delete
  12. We like the look of organization. If things appear neat and orderly and presentable all must be well. I call bs. I submit there is no box. Labels become self fulfilling prophesies. It has become a nightmare for us to be ourselves.

    ReplyDelete
  13. We like the look of organization. If things appear neat and orderly and presentable all must be well. I call bs. I submit there is no box. Labels become self fulfilling prophesies. It has become a nightmare for us to be ourselves.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Are you a sociopath/psychopath? Why is it a nightmare to be yourself?

      Delete
  14. I believe myself to be a sociopath. The nightmare is me being a square peg trying to fit into a round hole. I feel like a misfit. Most of what this world offers is a bore to me. Our system(s) is broken. We don't get it. Most of us are living lives of quiet desperation with our masks on. At 50, I have recently woken up to my slight madness and I embrace it. The mask is gone. I am good enough for myself. The nightmare is no one really cares to understand.

    ReplyDelete
  15. What if you didn't try to "fit into a round hole"? What would that be? We can all feel like misfits. Are there things this world offers, that aren't boring to you? We are all broken. We all "don't get it", at some point. What would a life without a mask, and not living in quiet desperation, look like for you? It is good to know and embrace yourself. I care to understand, and there are others here who care to understand, as well...

    ReplyDelete
  16. Worst insult...? You don't get it!
    It would *feel* safe here without judgement,without criticism,without egos.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No insult intended!!! I apologize, if I'm not understanding. You should feel safe here. No judgement, criticism, or ego intended. I was trying to point out the similarities between all people...

      Delete
    2. Please just delight in me as one unique expression of all that is. Don't fear me. Don't try to fix me. Simply be and we shall enjoy each other.

      Delete
    3. Anon 7:34

      If only my ex would be open to such a thing.

      Once he said to me 'neither you nor my wife will ever understand me.' I think he was trying to make me feel uncomfortable or to create a gap between us... because he really didn't expect me to figure him out.

      I do delight in him as a unique expression of the universe; he has slayed me with his beauty and mystery. Maybe it took me 18 months to even elucidate my invitation to him; such has been my journey in rearranging the rooms of my mind... and part of me thinks I can't expect him to make the reverse shift overnight. But for a mere object of seduction - why would he bother? I know he was intrigued by my invitation- he read it many times. I sent him a link to one of my clearer philosophical posts here so he could do his 'research'. But he's run away. Again. He's over 55 years old; why would he change what has more or less worked for him.

      I know he was manipulating so he could have me anytime he wanted. You know he has women all over the world like this. On a family holiday to his home country, he managed to get an ex-girlfriend to fly from France and meet him on the beach in a bikini in front of his wife. And I totally understand why that woman would do it.

      But he doesn't want me voluntarily? What does it matter that I'm intoxicated with who he is rather than under the spell of his manipulation?

      I don't like whining, I'm extricating myself slowly. Someone commented of Jonaid that it takes a while to work the impacts out of your system - it really does.

      Delete
  17. Anon 1;07
    "AWESOME QUOTES!!! Thank you, for sharing those.:)"
    Glad you enjoyed them! Refreshing stuff, isn't it :)

    ReplyDelete
  18. North - Loved the Alan Watts quote! And thank you for your replies about conscience, guilt, etc. You've got me thinking. I don't have time/awakedness to do it any justice at this visit but I will be back and it's great food for thought. Thank you!

    ReplyDelete
  19. Indeed, yes! Kissy kissy

    ReplyDelete
  20. A label is a most convenient tool to defend against that which you fear. Seek first to understand.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yep. Convenient and also dangerous because it stops us seeing people as individuals. It regresses us. Labels are substitutes for understanding.

      Delete
  21. Marriage restoration..
    I lost my husband to another woman 2 weeks ago after 27 years of marriage . We had a lovely marriage but he started a relationship with a co worker who chased after him . He is living away near his work and her and refuses to talk to me or to come home . I am devastated and am finding it hard to cope . I wish I did not love him and that I could move on but I can't . I don't know how to stop feeling like this I wish I didn't as its eating me away and I m starting to feel ill. I have degraded myself begging him to come home all to no avail. I became very worried and needed help. As I was browsing through the internet one day, I came across a website that suggested that Dr Frank Ojo can help solve marital problems, restore broken relationships and so on. So, I felt I should give him a try. I contacted him and he did a spell for me. tow days later, my husband came to me and apologized for the wrongs he did and promise never to do it again. Ever since then, everything has returned back to normal. I and my family are living together happily again.. All thanks to Dr Frank Ojo . If you need a spell caster that can cast a spell that truly works, I suggest you contact him. He will not disappoint you. if you have any problem contact him, I give you 100% guarantee that he will help you, This is his details, E-mail: Templeofloveandprosperity@gmail.com , Web site: http://lovespell2.yolasite.com . Mobile number +2348072370762. Thank you all for reading.

    ReplyDelete

Comments on posts over 14 days are SPAM filtered and may not show up right away or at all.

Join Amazon Prime - Watch Over 40,000 Movies

.

Comments are unmoderated. Blog owner is not responsible for third party content. By leaving comments on the blog, commenters give license to the blog owner to reprint attributed comments in any form.