Friday, March 4, 2011
Why Hello
Just dropping in to say hi. Haven't blogged in forever :)I nevertheless find value in some of my older comprehensive posts and don't want to see them go. Hope to add to them this month.
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
My personal statement
"So we begin with what we know: The brain is an organ of adaptation that builds its structures through interactions with others...We must begin our guidebook with the thought: There are no single brains." These words, found in Lou Cozolino's, The Neuroscience of Human Relationships, resonated with me while reading them my freshman year in college. At the age of 23, I had just resumed a career in academics, unproven and uncertain of but one thing, that I was sure I wanted to provide a better life for myself and for those around me. Having worked many a blue collar job, I had seen first hand the physical and emotional traumas endured by acquaintances who hadn't much choice but to endure, many of whom were not given or unable to develop the flexible neuropsychological ability necessary to strive beyond the unforgiving realm of manual labor. Many friends of mine had gotten into drugs, to distract themselves from what had become their lives, or in many cases because of a biologically inherited drive for an immediate reward, a drive that short-circuited their ability to map out and follow through on any of their long-term goals. At 23, I craved a healthier world, a more understanding and empathic world, and thus enrolled at UW-Rock with the intention of becoming a physician assistant.
It is the result of ongoing investigations into the human condition that have led me to the acceptance that many of our earliest interpersonal experiences establish a trajectory for the rest of our lives. To Cozolino's second point, there are indeed no isolated brains in nature, we and the choices we make are experience-dependent. I recently looked at the class photo of mine from the 2nd grade, and it provoked many thoughts. Many of the faces were generic to me, forgotten over time, but several stuck out to me, examples of the consequences of neuropsychiatric illness. There was Bo, my friend and soccer teammate who as an adult later suffered from a crack addiction that nearly cost him his life, endowed with such a predilection genetically. There was Kenny, a boy from my neighborhood who was a troublemaker, and for good reason: he and his older sister were repeatedly and continuously molested by his mother's boyfriend; he had lost his father in a motorcycle accident at an early age, and he would later be charged with sexual assault. There was Liz, a demure type, who I to this day have an intense empathy for; I was not aware consciously that she was regularly beaten by an alcoholic father, evidence of which is clearly visible today, suffering from an intense anxiety and distrust of herself. And finally, there was Andy, a child who I had thought was off even at the age of 8, as he didn't seem to experience pain like the rest of us; he had two alcoholic parents, one whom he would later shoot. I have my suspicions to this day that his mother perhaps drank while pregnant with him, as she was no stranger to the bottle even when driving. It stays with me to this day that these childhood friends are some that I remember most prominently, as they never stood a chance to develop a flexible, healthy, adaptive attunement with their primary caretakers as a result of neurobiological illnesses they suffered, evident today in their own various ailments.
It stands to reason that I too was influenced greatly by my own personal experiences at a young age. In 1989 my grandmother was facing a 50% chance of death, suffering from Stage IV breast cancer. I was too young to understand the implications of such, but keen enough to understand that something was awry; her hair was falling out, and she had lost a dramatic amount of weight. I recall vividly that I made a concerted effort to entertain my grandmother and console her as best I could on nights that she would have me over to sleep. I was fortunate enough to have this strong, compassionate figure in my life for 17 more years before relapsing and finally succumbing to the cancer in 2006, the year before I enrolled in school. Those 17 years were made possible in part by tamoxifen, approved in 1990 by the FDA for preventative treatment of relapse of advanced breast cancer.
Cozolino later argues in his book that, in essence, what doesn't kill us can indeed make us weaker, that we are as a society, in many ways, only as healthy as our unhealthiest link. Health is an all-encompassing term that I define as "beneficial to the gene vessel", thus something that is not necessarily corollary to evolution. We have the potential as a society to transmit intergenerationally our traumas and illnesses, but equally present is the capacity for us live healthy lives and be healthy models for the next generation. Having proven to myself that I have the intellectual tools necessary to achieve a 4.0 in Neurobiology at UW-Madison, I have set forth in my very personal statement to explain how I became interested in medicine. Many experiences that have led me to choose this path: my grandmother's breast cancer, my mother's life-threatening brain surgery in 2004, and all those closest to me, as a child & today, who suffer from various illnesses; if I am humbled with the opportunity, I will become a promoter of health for my community, something I was primed for and have worked hard to transform myself into. Thank you.
It is the result of ongoing investigations into the human condition that have led me to the acceptance that many of our earliest interpersonal experiences establish a trajectory for the rest of our lives. To Cozolino's second point, there are indeed no isolated brains in nature, we and the choices we make are experience-dependent. I recently looked at the class photo of mine from the 2nd grade, and it provoked many thoughts. Many of the faces were generic to me, forgotten over time, but several stuck out to me, examples of the consequences of neuropsychiatric illness. There was Bo, my friend and soccer teammate who as an adult later suffered from a crack addiction that nearly cost him his life, endowed with such a predilection genetically. There was Kenny, a boy from my neighborhood who was a troublemaker, and for good reason: he and his older sister were repeatedly and continuously molested by his mother's boyfriend; he had lost his father in a motorcycle accident at an early age, and he would later be charged with sexual assault. There was Liz, a demure type, who I to this day have an intense empathy for; I was not aware consciously that she was regularly beaten by an alcoholic father, evidence of which is clearly visible today, suffering from an intense anxiety and distrust of herself. And finally, there was Andy, a child who I had thought was off even at the age of 8, as he didn't seem to experience pain like the rest of us; he had two alcoholic parents, one whom he would later shoot. I have my suspicions to this day that his mother perhaps drank while pregnant with him, as she was no stranger to the bottle even when driving. It stays with me to this day that these childhood friends are some that I remember most prominently, as they never stood a chance to develop a flexible, healthy, adaptive attunement with their primary caretakers as a result of neurobiological illnesses they suffered, evident today in their own various ailments.
It stands to reason that I too was influenced greatly by my own personal experiences at a young age. In 1989 my grandmother was facing a 50% chance of death, suffering from Stage IV breast cancer. I was too young to understand the implications of such, but keen enough to understand that something was awry; her hair was falling out, and she had lost a dramatic amount of weight. I recall vividly that I made a concerted effort to entertain my grandmother and console her as best I could on nights that she would have me over to sleep. I was fortunate enough to have this strong, compassionate figure in my life for 17 more years before relapsing and finally succumbing to the cancer in 2006, the year before I enrolled in school. Those 17 years were made possible in part by tamoxifen, approved in 1990 by the FDA for preventative treatment of relapse of advanced breast cancer.
Cozolino later argues in his book that, in essence, what doesn't kill us can indeed make us weaker, that we are as a society, in many ways, only as healthy as our unhealthiest link. Health is an all-encompassing term that I define as "beneficial to the gene vessel", thus something that is not necessarily corollary to evolution. We have the potential as a society to transmit intergenerationally our traumas and illnesses, but equally present is the capacity for us live healthy lives and be healthy models for the next generation. Having proven to myself that I have the intellectual tools necessary to achieve a 4.0 in Neurobiology at UW-Madison, I have set forth in my very personal statement to explain how I became interested in medicine. Many experiences that have led me to choose this path: my grandmother's breast cancer, my mother's life-threatening brain surgery in 2004, and all those closest to me, as a child & today, who suffer from various illnesses; if I am humbled with the opportunity, I will become a promoter of health for my community, something I was primed for and have worked hard to transform myself into. Thank you.
Monday, April 19, 2010
Exhausting
It's crazy to think what is required by medical schools today. Beyond general proficiency--dare I say mastery--in the sciences, one must show the ability to write a complete, error-free, and deep essay in a period of 30 minutes, as well as have the ability to analyze in-depth art criticism essays on the Verbal Reasoning part of the MCAT. Good times.
Beyond this, one should Shadow doctors for a semester (or longer); one should show a commitment to the community, which isn't quite as difficult or vexing a thing, but is heavily time consuming; one should have a background in undergraduate research, which is baffling to me, given that any sort of substantial research as an undergraduate seems at odds with your status of being in the process of developing the skills and knowledge base needed for such research in grad school; further, one should have letters of recommendation from Faculty members of attended schools. At the smaller UW schools this is of no real concern per se, but being at UW-Madison, even as a neurobiology major, my classes are about 150 people per class on average. How is one exactly expected to develop a rapport with faculty members at Madison?
All of this is incredibly draining which I suspect is the intent of it. It's not exactly supposed to be easy to get into med school, nor should those who act whimsically get in willy-nilly. Even still, I can't help but ponder if this is the right choice. I certainly don't have all of the above characteristics (even if I fulfill 3/4 of the above), and the entire process has left me so anxiety-ridden that I'm not so sure working with people is appropriate anymore.
One thing at a time though.
Beyond this, one should Shadow doctors for a semester (or longer); one should show a commitment to the community, which isn't quite as difficult or vexing a thing, but is heavily time consuming; one should have a background in undergraduate research, which is baffling to me, given that any sort of substantial research as an undergraduate seems at odds with your status of being in the process of developing the skills and knowledge base needed for such research in grad school; further, one should have letters of recommendation from Faculty members of attended schools. At the smaller UW schools this is of no real concern per se, but being at UW-Madison, even as a neurobiology major, my classes are about 150 people per class on average. How is one exactly expected to develop a rapport with faculty members at Madison?
All of this is incredibly draining which I suspect is the intent of it. It's not exactly supposed to be easy to get into med school, nor should those who act whimsically get in willy-nilly. Even still, I can't help but ponder if this is the right choice. I certainly don't have all of the above characteristics (even if I fulfill 3/4 of the above), and the entire process has left me so anxiety-ridden that I'm not so sure working with people is appropriate anymore.
One thing at a time though.
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Random Musings 11/23
(Note: So it occurs to me that I didn't finish the Neuroeconomics multi-part post I had intended on finishing oh a year ago. Life happens. In any event, the work of Kahneman and Tversky, and a compiled analysis of the type of topics that deal with fallacious decision-making and its economic implications can be found in Neuroeconomics by Peter Politser. And I haven't talked to Tim in aeons, not sure where he's at. Hope all is well, and given his employment at AIG, no doubt things are. A little bailout humor there. And here)
Anyway, so yeah. Nothing like some interesting folk to run into to freak you the fuck out. A Democratic (alleged staffer, but probably volunteer) agent for Kendrick Meek was attempting to recruit me for a campaign push in the summer of 2010 a while back. I dismissed it, since frankly Governor Crist is going to beat the hell out of Meek, and also, despite Florida being a nice place, I don't particularly find it an interesting place to go bust my ass 14 hours a day for no money when I have the MCAT and Med School applications to complete. So my..."relationship" or courting from this person evolves into the random musings of someone who seems on face value, even from internet correspondances, erratic at best. There's something awry, even if (because of not being in person) the cues are not altogether explicitly clear.
Cut to a few months of correspondance later: So, the guy distributes photos of himself and his love and joy child randomly one day, which is you know sort of a sentimental thing to do. Save for the part where there's a massive elegant bong right next to his child, the child looks malnourished, and the guy has a careless shit-eating grin on his face with a nice Cuban flag t-shirt (no he isn't Cuban, apparently just wants to be the epitome of a Conservative's stereotype of a liberal). Four weeks later, his wife has left him, he is held on a 5150 equivalent, forced into detox, losing custody of his child, and suddenly embracing a crazed born-again religious philosophy to try and hold everything together, all the while laying claim to owning a radio show because he pays for advertisement on it, and seemingly in absolute denial over the car wreck that is his entire life.
Moral of the story? If people seem a little odd, and your suspicions are clinically/experimentally honed in on what cues suggest mental health issues, you should trust your instincts. Holy shit do I feel bad for his child. Best of luck to the little guy.
Anyway, so yeah. Nothing like some interesting folk to run into to freak you the fuck out. A Democratic (alleged staffer, but probably volunteer) agent for Kendrick Meek was attempting to recruit me for a campaign push in the summer of 2010 a while back. I dismissed it, since frankly Governor Crist is going to beat the hell out of Meek, and also, despite Florida being a nice place, I don't particularly find it an interesting place to go bust my ass 14 hours a day for no money when I have the MCAT and Med School applications to complete. So my..."relationship" or courting from this person evolves into the random musings of someone who seems on face value, even from internet correspondances, erratic at best. There's something awry, even if (because of not being in person) the cues are not altogether explicitly clear.
Cut to a few months of correspondance later: So, the guy distributes photos of himself and his love and joy child randomly one day, which is you know sort of a sentimental thing to do. Save for the part where there's a massive elegant bong right next to his child, the child looks malnourished, and the guy has a careless shit-eating grin on his face with a nice Cuban flag t-shirt (no he isn't Cuban, apparently just wants to be the epitome of a Conservative's stereotype of a liberal). Four weeks later, his wife has left him, he is held on a 5150 equivalent, forced into detox, losing custody of his child, and suddenly embracing a crazed born-again religious philosophy to try and hold everything together, all the while laying claim to owning a radio show because he pays for advertisement on it, and seemingly in absolute denial over the car wreck that is his entire life.
Moral of the story? If people seem a little odd, and your suspicions are clinically/experimentally honed in on what cues suggest mental health issues, you should trust your instincts. Holy shit do I feel bad for his child. Best of luck to the little guy.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Personality Types Part 1: Structuralists vs. Free Spirits
Note: This is post is Part 1 in a 4 Part series on Personality Types.
personal and professional relationships.
For the past 7 years I've studied psychology and social dynamics. During this time, some of the things I've learned are more helpful than others. I'm going to share what's been the most personally helpful.
In this section I'll give some insight behind questions that seem to plague EVERY relationship; whether it's a professional relationship, a friendship, or romantic relationship.
These will sound familiar to you. The first one is...
WHY can't he JUST be on time?!
The Battle Cry Of The Structuralist Party
Structuralists are roughly 50% of th population. They are very irrational in the sense that they try to structure the outside world in a way that matches what they see in their mind. They're always on time, or slightly early...TO EVERYTHING.
You might belong to the Structuralist Party if...
-You feel more comfortable AFTER making a decision rather than BEFORE.
-You take it PERSONALLY when your boyfriend is late, and unless somebody died there is no good reason.
-You think there is a RIGHT and WRONG way to do everything.
-It is more important to follow the PLAN than accomplish the GOAL. (This is a trick question, structuralists always think the goal is to follow the plan! HA!)
Nothing pisses off a structuralist MORE than dealing with a member of the Free Spirit party, who will find themselves asking...
It's not that big of a deal! Why are you so upset?!
The Response Of The Free Spirit Party
Free Spirits are also about 50% of the population. Contrary to their Structuralist counter parts, Free Spirits are usually late. They usually procrastinate, or perfer to seek more information before making a decision. A free spirit is very comfortable saying "I'm not sure yet.".
You might belong to the Free Spirit Party if...
-You're always late
-You're most gathering information BEFORE a decision
-After making a decision, it's open for review as the situation changes.
-The phrase "Call if you know you're going to be late" makes NO SENSE to you.
Chances are, you can clearly identify with either the Structuralist Party or the Free Spirit Party.
Now that we've identified which party we belong to, it's important to know how to communicate with members of the opposing party - here are some tips.
STUCTURALISTS
1. Understand
As Stephen Covey says, "Seek First To Understand, Then To Be Understood". This is always the first step in effective communication. Doesn't this seem incredibly counter intuitive? Why should I try to understand somebody else if they're not trying to understand me?! Well grow up. You can only control you.
Understand that Free Spirits do not see the world in black and white. They're fascinated by the shade of grey that is inbetween. You may view free spirits nature to delay decision making as avoidance, and sometimes it genuinely is, but other times this delay is an effort to make the BEST decision.
2. Buffer Time
This one is simple. If you're dating a free spirit, and the movie you're planning on going to starts at 7:30, tell them it starts at 4:00.
I'm serious.
3. Be Clear
This is the easy part for the structuralist party - Be clear about deadlines and time restrictions.
FREE SPIRITS
1. Understand
Understand that structuralists see the world in black and white. Understand that when you are brainstorming outloud, or exploring possibilities, the structuralist is hearing a never ending to do list. This is very frustrating for structuralists. Be clear about the things that are "ideas" or "options".
2. Create Pseudo Wiggle Room
If your assignment at work or school is due March 30th - CONVINCE YOURSELF IT IS DUE FEBRUARY 1st. Stick to it. Do whatever you have to do to convince yourself.
3. Your Aunt Died.
Don't give a zillion reasons about why you're late. Just say your aunt died.
For all you know I have 300 aunts. You don't know.
Next week I'm going to talk about Temperaments, the unchanging building blocks of who we are.
Understanding the personality types of others has helped me tremendously in
personal and professional relationships.
For the past 7 years I've studied psychology and social dynamics. During this time, some of the things I've learned are more helpful than others. I'm going to share what's been the most personally helpful.
In this section I'll give some insight behind questions that seem to plague EVERY relationship; whether it's a professional relationship, a friendship, or romantic relationship.
These will sound familiar to you. The first one is...
WHY can't he JUST be on time?!
The Battle Cry Of The Structuralist Party
Structuralists are roughly 50% of th population. They are very irrational in the sense that they try to structure the outside world in a way that matches what they see in their mind. They're always on time, or slightly early...TO EVERYTHING.
You might belong to the Structuralist Party if...
-You feel more comfortable AFTER making a decision rather than BEFORE.
-You take it PERSONALLY when your boyfriend is late, and unless somebody died there is no good reason.
-You think there is a RIGHT and WRONG way to do everything.
-It is more important to follow the PLAN than accomplish the GOAL. (This is a trick question, structuralists always think the goal is to follow the plan! HA!)
Nothing pisses off a structuralist MORE than dealing with a member of the Free Spirit party, who will find themselves asking...
It's not that big of a deal! Why are you so upset?!
The Response Of The Free Spirit Party
Free Spirits are also about 50% of the population. Contrary to their Structuralist counter parts, Free Spirits are usually late. They usually procrastinate, or perfer to seek more information before making a decision. A free spirit is very comfortable saying "I'm not sure yet.".
You might belong to the Free Spirit Party if...
-You're always late
-You're most gathering information BEFORE a decision
-After making a decision, it's open for review as the situation changes.
-The phrase "Call if you know you're going to be late" makes NO SENSE to you.
Chances are, you can clearly identify with either the Structuralist Party or the Free Spirit Party.
Now that we've identified which party we belong to, it's important to know how to communicate with members of the opposing party - here are some tips.
STUCTURALISTS
1. Understand
As Stephen Covey says, "Seek First To Understand, Then To Be Understood". This is always the first step in effective communication. Doesn't this seem incredibly counter intuitive? Why should I try to understand somebody else if they're not trying to understand me?! Well grow up. You can only control you.
Understand that Free Spirits do not see the world in black and white. They're fascinated by the shade of grey that is inbetween. You may view free spirits nature to delay decision making as avoidance, and sometimes it genuinely is, but other times this delay is an effort to make the BEST decision.
2. Buffer Time
This one is simple. If you're dating a free spirit, and the movie you're planning on going to starts at 7:30, tell them it starts at 4:00.
I'm serious.
3. Be Clear
This is the easy part for the structuralist party - Be clear about deadlines and time restrictions.
FREE SPIRITS
1. Understand
Understand that structuralists see the world in black and white. Understand that when you are brainstorming outloud, or exploring possibilities, the structuralist is hearing a never ending to do list. This is very frustrating for structuralists. Be clear about the things that are "ideas" or "options".
2. Create Pseudo Wiggle Room
If your assignment at work or school is due March 30th - CONVINCE YOURSELF IT IS DUE FEBRUARY 1st. Stick to it. Do whatever you have to do to convince yourself.
3. Your Aunt Died.
Don't give a zillion reasons about why you're late. Just say your aunt died.
For all you know I have 300 aunts. You don't know.
Next week I'm going to talk about Temperaments, the unchanging building blocks of who we are.
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
Who We Are - Simplified.
On Monday, Phillip posted a sweet blog. Read it 2 or 3 times and let it sink in. If after 3 reads it still doesn't sink in - find something heavy and hit yourself in the head with it. This does nothing to aid your understanding of Phillip's collegiate writing, but it does make me laugh. If you could find a hamster to hit yourself with, I would laugh a little harder.
My partner in crime points out that we are not who we think we are.
I disagree. We are exactly who we think we are. The beliefs and assumptions we carry with us create our reality.
When someone believes that he is not who he thinks he is, what he means is that he is not who YOU think he is. He's living somebody elses reality. To put more simply, this is wussy behavior.
Phillip is not a wussy. But he might play one on TV. I kinda picture him as a day time soap star. He's the Doctor who tells the distraught wife-to-be that her knight in shining armor will not be riding off into the sunset with her anytime soon.
Dr. Phillip: "Miss...I'm sorry, but Mr. Wussbag didn't make it through operation."
Terrible actress: "No! NO! WHY GOD WHY?!"
Dr. Phillip: "Probably because God intended for him to have small genitalia, and by trying to enlarge his manhood on my surgical table, he's slapping God in the face. Look, I'd love to do this crying thing with you, but honestly, God hooked the good doctor up - gimme your number."
Terrible actress: "I want you."
Okay, even in that pointless faux TV script, Dr. Phillip was not a wussy.
What was I trying to say about thoughts and reality? Oh yeah, your thoughts are your reality.
However, people can build a reality that is incongruent.
If your self-image conflicts with your actions and the feedback you get from your enviornment, expect to burn the fuck out once you come to your senses.
Now you're really in a bitch of a situation because the drugs and/or people you've been using to maintain this false self (pathological narcissism) are gone.
Now you're all alone with a complete stranger - you.
Sucks. I feel for you, but not too much - cuz it's your fault.
My partner in crime points out that we are not who we think we are.
I disagree. We are exactly who we think we are. The beliefs and assumptions we carry with us create our reality.
When someone believes that he is not who he thinks he is, what he means is that he is not who YOU think he is. He's living somebody elses reality. To put more simply, this is wussy behavior.
Phillip is not a wussy. But he might play one on TV. I kinda picture him as a day time soap star. He's the Doctor who tells the distraught wife-to-be that her knight in shining armor will not be riding off into the sunset with her anytime soon.
Dr. Phillip: "Miss...I'm sorry, but Mr. Wussbag didn't make it through operation."
Terrible actress: "No! NO! WHY GOD WHY?!"
Dr. Phillip: "Probably because God intended for him to have small genitalia, and by trying to enlarge his manhood on my surgical table, he's slapping God in the face. Look, I'd love to do this crying thing with you, but honestly, God hooked the good doctor up - gimme your number."
Terrible actress: "I want you."
Okay, even in that pointless faux TV script, Dr. Phillip was not a wussy.
What was I trying to say about thoughts and reality? Oh yeah, your thoughts are your reality.
However, people can build a reality that is incongruent.
If your self-image conflicts with your actions and the feedback you get from your enviornment, expect to burn the fuck out once you come to your senses.
Now you're really in a bitch of a situation because the drugs and/or people you've been using to maintain this false self (pathological narcissism) are gone.
Now you're all alone with a complete stranger - you.
Sucks. I feel for you, but not too much - cuz it's your fault.
Monday, July 21, 2008
Adrift and at Peace.
Where is the balance of things? How do we equilibriate between a projection and transference of ourselves into and onto the world--in an attempt to shape the ever-dynamic world to reflect the one that wrought us, in order to be consonant with who we are as people--and a genuine absorption of experience that is freedom from this projective pollution?
Is this untainted primary "sensory" experience of life not precisely what is required for change? For maturation? Insofar as we rationalize and confabulate to confirm our biases and reaffirm who we are, is biased experience not simply an effort to distance us from this process of development as beings, and by extension an effort to distance ourselves from ourselves? This seems evinced in how we frame descriptions of who we are and what we are going through, as a society. "It's just a phase." "He's just a free spirit. "She's just witty and charismatic, the life of the party; everybody loves her!"
In reality, if we were willing to embrace the reality of who we are as human beings, we'd tell the truth. "I am concerned it's gone beyond phasic, and represents an ingrained feature of who you are." "He's a thrill-seeking drug addict with little to no risk aversion." "She has identity disturbances--able to be chameoleonic because she has no consistent sense of self; she is a narcissist, who ironically and sadly does not love herself enough to have a strong self image, to be comfortable with who she is and who others are."
When we unwittingly promulgate this process of obscuring & muddying reality with biases in order to feel comfortable in our own skin, in order to keep ourselves from changing, is it not a tainted assessment to think this is a volitional matter of free will, of "choice", instead being a natural consequence of neuropsychological malnourishment? A malnourishment that results in mitigating access to who we are, to our own emotional inner workings that drive us to act in particular, predisposed ways that we, as primates, actually have little volitional control over? We reify so much of nature (and if it's unclear, I will add that by reify I mean we anthropomorphize and oversimplify things into the idea of being 'intended', 'chosen', and/or a matter of cognitive will) that the idea of humans reifying the biological reality of our epigenesis--how we relate to and integrate the environment we experience--seems irrefutable at this point.
In life, there are no answers; at least not simple, 'ultimate' answers. Just realities.
The reality that, try as we might, we cannot hide from ourselves, nor hide ourselves from others. We betray who we are in how we carry ourselves, how we are conditioned by our experiences to reflect said experiences. It is evident in our rate of speech, our tone, our prosody. It is evident in what we produce, beit pain or compassion in others. The strange corollary to this reality is that we cannot force the world to be a glorified image of what we desire it to be, given that we, ourselves, cannot be the glorified self-concept we've put forth.
Conscious of the fact that we are not who we think we are, nor is the world exactly as we experience it--an understanding of these basic, fundamental inner fallibities restores balance when we accept it. If we accept it.
We are naked. Best to be comfortable in our own skin.
I am not who I think I am.
Your turn.
Is this untainted primary "sensory" experience of life not precisely what is required for change? For maturation? Insofar as we rationalize and confabulate to confirm our biases and reaffirm who we are, is biased experience not simply an effort to distance us from this process of development as beings, and by extension an effort to distance ourselves from ourselves? This seems evinced in how we frame descriptions of who we are and what we are going through, as a society. "It's just a phase." "He's just a free spirit. "She's just witty and charismatic, the life of the party; everybody loves her!"
In reality, if we were willing to embrace the reality of who we are as human beings, we'd tell the truth. "I am concerned it's gone beyond phasic, and represents an ingrained feature of who you are." "He's a thrill-seeking drug addict with little to no risk aversion." "She has identity disturbances--able to be chameoleonic because she has no consistent sense of self; she is a narcissist, who ironically and sadly does not love herself enough to have a strong self image, to be comfortable with who she is and who others are."
When we unwittingly promulgate this process of obscuring & muddying reality with biases in order to feel comfortable in our own skin, in order to keep ourselves from changing, is it not a tainted assessment to think this is a volitional matter of free will, of "choice", instead being a natural consequence of neuropsychological malnourishment? A malnourishment that results in mitigating access to who we are, to our own emotional inner workings that drive us to act in particular, predisposed ways that we, as primates, actually have little volitional control over? We reify so much of nature (and if it's unclear, I will add that by reify I mean we anthropomorphize and oversimplify things into the idea of being 'intended', 'chosen', and/or a matter of cognitive will) that the idea of humans reifying the biological reality of our epigenesis--how we relate to and integrate the environment we experience--seems irrefutable at this point.
In life, there are no answers; at least not simple, 'ultimate' answers. Just realities.
The reality that, try as we might, we cannot hide from ourselves, nor hide ourselves from others. We betray who we are in how we carry ourselves, how we are conditioned by our experiences to reflect said experiences. It is evident in our rate of speech, our tone, our prosody. It is evident in what we produce, beit pain or compassion in others. The strange corollary to this reality is that we cannot force the world to be a glorified image of what we desire it to be, given that we, ourselves, cannot be the glorified self-concept we've put forth.
Conscious of the fact that we are not who we think we are, nor is the world exactly as we experience it--an understanding of these basic, fundamental inner fallibities restores balance when we accept it. If we accept it.
We are naked. Best to be comfortable in our own skin.
I am not who I think I am.
Your turn.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
