Thinking and Emotion

Add a Comment

Comment by Charlotte Fairchild on March 21, 2012 at 14:12

Kling, the author of The Dog says How, said that when he was dealing with PTSD, his therapist told him to retell the story with a different outcome. Instead of being in an accident and suffering loss, tell it differently. The accident had a different outcome. This is not shifting from reality. It is opening the door to possibility.

Comment by Desmond Sherlock on June 28, 2011 at 15:16

You know I had a thought the other day that most of my knowledge and understanding was laid down under a fear that I have. A fear that someone can lose it and I cannot do anything about it only lose it too or withdraw myself.

But now that I have found that I do not have to accept someone losig it and I do not have to withdraw myself either. I simply state or pose my agreement I wish to get with that person "from now on..." ie "From now on can we agree that we treat each other this way....." Failure to get that agreement then I can simply try another time with a better proposal or wait till they coem back to me with their proposal for an agreement.

Knowing this I can rethink my whole life and break down all my understanding and knowledge that was laid down during my participation in this fear state. Fear of aggression.

As this realisation has only occured to me recently it means I now have a life time of conversation and rediscovery of a lot of sh#t information that was absorbed by me, more through coercion than comprehenions.

This is starting to become a very liberating thought process for me and it is sort of a combination of the "logic and emotion" that you might be talking about you Jim.

If not thanks for the opportunity to express it here, anyway.

Comment by Charlotte Fairchild on June 26, 2011 at 14:50

On Car Talk radio show with Click and Clack on NPR radio last Saturday, a woman wanted to sell her car as a de-stress object to hit with hammers and rocks for $1.00 a swipe.

Releasing this tide of emotion strengthens it. It is cathartic and has a short term benefit that begs for more of the same. The people who go to sports where they yell pay money to yell, not as much to see skill and sportsmanship. We are all looking for the gladiator, the demolition derby.

Comment by Franis on June 23, 2011 at 11:29

A friend of mine once made a short movie. It was inspired by the collection of many junk cars that were going to be crushed. In the movie, ny friend became the purveyor who was providing relief to customers who came to "his car lot." The customers were provided with sledge hammers to destroy the cars - in order to relieve aggression. It was a hilarious movie.

I don't believe it's got a label, actually - it's such an early human fulfillment.

If you've ever watched toddlers, their only possible option is destruction. They cannot participate in any other way yet, so they destroy it. They can't build the sand castle, they can only destroy to play with it. So destruction is pretty much the only pleasure they really have at that age.

It feels sort of infantile to destroy things wantonly, but it's sorta fun too.

Comment by Jim on June 1, 2011 at 11:41

"The reason I feed back stuff I'm putting together to make sense of what someone means is because I'd like to make sure what I'm coming up with something that matches what they intend." I think there is an easier way to do this Franis. I just say, "I've heard you say" and basically repeat what they siad. It seems to work well.

Comment by Franis on June 1, 2011 at 10:18

Sorry, obviously I used the word "hard" when I should have used a more neutral word such as "concerned with." It's not actually a direct quote, but it came from me putting together these two parts of your reply to me:
I don't in any way disregard the need for cognitive processes, thinking. I do it all day every day. :D To much I am often told.
and this one:
By "understanding" I mean knowing how I feel. I think it is both comprehension, and self-support.

So - what would have been more appropriate would have been for me to say, "You want to be more involved with recognizing and supporting emotions...for yourself as well as others?"

Another reason I ask such questions is to encourage someone who might be willing to talk about themselves and their own ideas - which you seem to be articulate enough to do.

The reason I feed back stuff I'm putting together to make sense of what someone means is because I'd like to make sure what I'm coming up with something that matches what they intend.

Comment by Jim on May 31, 2011 at 21:03

@ Franis "You say that the hard thing for you is to recognize and support emotions." Did I say that?

Woops, I'm out of time. Got to get to work. Be back asap.

Comment by Franis on May 31, 2011 at 8:36

Jim, thanks for replying to my questions directly. This is such an interesting topic.

You say that the hard thing for you is to recognize and support emotions. Wonder if that's a self-selecting feature of intellectuals who like to write who buy into the prevailing cultural assumptions?

I don't seem to have much of that problem. It's not a feature of mine, and I believe that this is one of the services of learning de Bono thinking tools at a young age.

There's a deliberate skill I have cultivated that is why that it does not work that way for me. What I have done is to create a space between my knee-jerk emotional assumptions and its reaction. I have learned to insert a reflective thought, a pause, between my emotion and my decision to act. One of the disciplines that helped me with doing this has been Alexander Technique, as well as de Bono's ideas.

One of my cultural pet peeves are people who set certain character traits apart from others by some codified ideals. For instance, in Jungian psychology (Meyers-Briggs) you must choose between being a "Feeling" person or being a "Thinking" person.

It's pretty much apparent to anyone who meets me that I can think. Because of this cultural bias (that someone who thinks is not in touch with their feelings) they immediately make the mistaken assumption that thinking has precluded my ability to feel. They see I am a thinker, and assume I am not an emotional being.

My writer's group has told me that my writing has changed to be much more emotional. This is such cultural nonsense! It is only that I have chosen not to reveal my capacity for emotional impact in the sort of writing that I've previously presented to them.

Comment by Jim on May 31, 2011 at 7:39

Thank you Kim. I understand that "In reality (whatever that is) you have electro-chemical impulses striking various synapses in the brain which your mind interprets as emotions and feelings." To someone who is suffering, this information us useless.
I think the scientific analysis of emotions and their electro-chemical causes in the brain are interesting, but that information does not actually have any affect on how people feel. No matter how much I know about the brain, it does not stop me from feeling sad, happy, angry or afraid. Nothing does. But knowing that I feel that way, gives me the opportunity to address the feeling, and I find that acknowledging the anger, dissipates it. Trying to work out what is making me angry, does very little.
Franis, "When you say - understanding - what do you recommend someone do to perform this action of understanding?" Great question thank you. By "understanding" I mean knowing how I feel. I think it is both comprehension, and self-support. A lot of people seem to have no idea how they feel, let alone how anyone around them feels. I think emotional understanding (emotional intelligence) is yet to be given the credit it is due.
"Being able to comprehend one's feelings allows the ability to take feelings into account in one's decision-making process." Definitely. I don't in any way disregard the need for cognitive processes, thinking. I do it all day every day. :D To much I am often told. But I have found that most people seem to be able to do that, it is getting down under the thinking to the emotions that seems to be hardest and yet most valuable to people and relationships.

Comment by Franis on May 31, 2011 at 4:30

When you say - understanding - what do you recommend someone do to perform this action of understanding? The reason I ask is because there are levels of what understanding means. ...to know about, as in plain comprehension; to be forgiving & tolerant; to "stand under" as in to support.

A person can know about and still not be able to forgive or even influence their own feelings. (Such as jealousy or grief.) Guess denial does work to a certain extent.

Being able to comprehend one's feelings allows the ability to take feelings into account in one's decision-making process. Of course, if you don't know what those are - then it's a little tricky to figure out what you want to have as a criteria for success and why you are doing anything.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page