A very Big Problem

As someone who works within the mind sciences and keeps up with the latest research in neuropsychology, behavioral psychology, interpersonal neurobiology, and phenomenology, I've begun to think that the biggest problems facing our civilizations can be boiled down to the way people interpret and process the affective feelings they have before they "land upon" a particular linguistic interpretation. It is quite scary to be living in world - where the mind-brain you have is itself a function of the relationships you have with others, and, in this extraordinarily dissociative day and age, too many people have mind brains specialized in video game playing, internet surfing, or manual labor - all forms of interpreting information that relies upon right-brain reactivity - quick responses, without much left-brain "containment" i.e. conscious reflection upon the meaning of what is related with.

Brain science has shown that affects are generated largely via the brainstem/right-brain network - and this is backed up by actual anatomical connectivity. The left hemisphere has a very different neurochemistry from the right, with more dopamine connections and less norepinephrine connections - the right brain is very much about "threat", whereas the left allows us to see more clearly, and understand when the detection of threat is a mistake - an error - that arises because of a past traumatic experience (for example). Every right handed person is structured in this way as well as 80% of left handers. In about 20% of left handers, this organization is reversed.

My question is: how do people understand how their minds work? Modern mind sciences are very clear: in the flow of consciousness, the right brain presents our feeling relations to a particular interfaced with reality. Those things which have no meaning for us pass through our minds without notice, whereas things which have meaning for (ALWAYS based upon past experiences) enter as a positive feeling relation, or a negative feeling relation.

Yet - we live in a world and culture that fills peoples mind-brains with false interpretations for the feelings they have - which adds a "recursive" delusion: the negative feeling, then the justification for the expression of the negative feeling. An example: most of us have been flooded since childhood with this particular stereotypical way of making sense of ourselves when confronted by the standards of others: "thats you, not me". In my own life as a therapist, whenever a client fails to act in a coherent, reasonable, fair or decent way in their life, they often respond with just this excuse - they say "that's not me" - for instance, when talking about being mean, or standoffish, or enjoying something that someone shouldn't take pleasure in.

Don't get me wrong, this excuse is a meaningful way - because it emerged naturally within the flow of their development as a person - of making sense of painful feelings, but the problem is, there really is a true and a false way of understanding feelings. And furthermore - and as emotionally balanced people can see, the dissociation peddled by modern culture has serious consequences: standards for truth and coherency become dangerously low, and in becoming that way, the probability of suffering increases.

At such moments, If I gently try to say "those feelings you have at those moments, don't you think they have a source in being raised by a person who never acknowledged or related softly and gently when you felt like you needed another person to listen" - a negative and dissociative reaction will follow. They will disown all awareness of 'feeling bad' i.e. shame, and pretend - as they've pretended their whole life up until the present interaction - that anger "just is", as opposed to being, as every ethologist knows, a defensive behavior that follows the perception of threat.

So even as we live in a culture that touts evolution and science, paradoxically, we couldn't be living in a more unscientific - and unempirical time period in human history.

This thread simply seeks to increase awareness for anyone interested in learning more about themselves. When you have a negative feeling, were talking about what may be termed "non-conceptual knowing". You're knowledge - or awareness - reflexively turns to a particular feeling. Usually, in those of who weren't raised by mindful and spiritually balanced people, we already respond and "entrap" ourselves in a narrative before we even give the time to know what the meaning of a particular feeling is.

For example: if you were bullied by your parents, you'd experience any interaction in which one person assumes a particular capacity - lets say, they sound intelligent and are good with words - as if the words they spoke were for the purpose of "showing off". This folk-interpretation would itself derive from your parents, who likely thought and experienced such communication in just that way. But more importantly, this tells us that information is communicated at the sub-verbal level by the SITUATION we experience ourselves in. This is an ecological level of interpretation where positions - speaker, listener, or a person seeming intelligent and educated, and the "I", not very educated - structures the flow of information processing through the brain. What the person hates most of all is feeling weak - and weakness is not just a physical state, but an emotional and relation state: we are always comparing ourselves against the capacities of others - and if we appear, or, if our unconscious experiences our capacities in relation to the other as "inferior", already, the amygdala will trigger a dissociative interpretation that seeks to "preserve" the short-term self-esteem of the person, even if this mode of interpretation is sub-optimal and tends to lead to dysfunction in human relationships, and with that, the generation of larger scale human conflicts.

We need to be honest about how we work - and not pretend that a virtual reality is more real than our functional self-organization as a person is. Non-conceptual processes - our knowing what we feel (a process called interoception by cognitive scientists) is the internal analogue of right brain - left brain information processing. If the brain is not connected on the inside - if the corpus collosum is not densely integrated - the mind will not be able to function and know in ways that help support robust and long-lasting external relationships - relationships that build strength, vitality and a sense of enlivenment.

We are an internal 'model' of what happens out there - and what's out there, from nihilistic media, to an insouscient news media, to an increasingly vicious video game media - seems to be creating creatures out of Aldous Huxelys Brave New World.

Anyone who doubts me can simply type in to google: violent video games and left brain processing, and they will discover - hopefully to their horror - that millions of people are being created who have poor left-hemispheric development and functioning - development aided by rational inquiry, reading, mathematics, and self-awareness. In social-emotional problem solving situations, such people succumb to their anxiety and frustration much more quickly than people who do not indulge in violent video games, which tells us that "arousal" is largely localized to the right hemisphere, where images and affects become embodied, whereas the left hemisphere "inhibits" to get a second-take.

a reply to: Astrocyte

I understand how the mind works, it's all based in psychological psychobabble. No offence. But everything you see, everything you experience and everything you feel is based in non reality. It's illusive to say the very least. When you over analyze it you bring these things to life, things that aren't actually real.

Einstein, the Genius said, "Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one."

I agree with your primary point, that our reaction and interpretation of things that happen to us is based on past experiences and it is hard to rise above those latent feelings to simply observe the world without judgement based on hat past history. This is the essence of many world religions, being able to observe and reflect without emotional baggage.

Where I disagree with you is in the belief that the "mind-brain" is what controls our actions and reactions. My belief is that the brain is simply hardware that gives us access to our soul. We can take a smart phone and watch its activity/heat as it performs certain functions and determine that the internal number crunching (thought) happens in the processor chip or that the wifi chip seems to be the active part of the smartphone 'responsible' for information gathering (the senses). When in fact the wifi chip is simply a window to the internet and the processor doesn't think, just carries out instructions that were written outside of the phone.

The difference of course is that the brain has shown a great ability to rearrange its 'hardware' in cases where portions of the brain have been damaged and our technology is a long way away from anything like that.

Both of our positions are simply beliefs and I have no problem with those who believe we are nothing more than our physical cells. We each need to find our own path and follow what feels right to us.

You bring up many good points which are independant of where our existence lives.

Let's cut through the technical jargon and get to the root of the problem, which both you and I are aware of. Humans are gregarious animals by nature, evolutionary we exist for the well-being of our community, the lesser (familial/tribal) and greater (polity/species).

By some (unintended or otherwise) consequence of the technological era, we are physically and mentally isolated from our community and relate to it ever more abstractly and indirectly, i.e. via digital communication, polite talk (it's only function is economic convention) and pop-cultural patois which comprises the great majority of our everyday communication.

Remove this more intimate, direct, physical connection which humans have shared for millennia, and the result is some kind of mass solipsism in which everyone imagines they are different but are ultimately parrots of the same vacuous and unfulfilling cultural memes. The memes are suited only for mass consumption and function as such, homogenizing people and dumbing them down to the lowest common denominator.

It's a Tower of Babel nightmare scenario. Even when we all speak the same language, we can't understand each other. Its not that everyone speaks a different tongue. It's that our emotional language has become so debased, generalized, and non-contextualized that we may as well be speaking gibberish.

*enters room*

This was a fantastic OP. S/F.

*takes a seat at the back*

a reply to: Astrocyte

When I was in college I had an interest in artificial intelligence. Then there came a point where I became convinced I was not qualified to talk about the meaning of the word intelligence.

However, during my efforts I wanted to map out how the mind worked. I started reading a number psychology books. I became very interested Jungian psychology in trying to understand how the brain attributes "'meaning" to experiences. I also became interested in psychology of "types". I found this book as one the best maps for the human mind:

www.amazon.com...=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1480448044&sr=1-1&keywords=king+magician +warrior+lover

It has a very interesting map of the human mind in terms of mind, body, and spirit. It also talks about the bipolar nature of human behavior with regards to each psychological type. It's a very good map but for the most part just a starting point.

I also started to study power, corruption, and human nature. I came across a really interesting book on this subject:

www.amazon.com...=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1480448170&sr=1-1&keywords=Power+and+technology+kipn is

This book has haunted me for 30 years. As a technologist, my goal has been to create technology so people live a better life. But as the book points out, technology is not always what it seems. As the books states, and I paraphrase, the goal of technology it to provide a material world of plenty so people have enough leisure time to study the mind of God. However, technology has a darker side where power is concentrated into fewer and fewer hands at the expense of the users.

The book also talks about a "metamorphic effect" of having power where the people who have the power develop a contempt for the people they have power over. At some point, the powerholder sees the people they have power over as sub-human ants not worthy of any human respect. The powerholder then doesn't believe there is any moral consequence to squashing the ants as they see fit.

The metamorphic effect stuff was interesting but the promise of technology bit has always haunted me. I would like to see myself as someone who is positively helping people with the technology I develop. But it's probably not the case. The question does the machine serve man or does man serve the machine has always haunted me.

If you want to fight the "biggest problems facing our civilizations" then you have to map out what is actually going on in the structure of society.

Anger results in the human brain ceasing to apply higher brain functions and applying lower brain functions to the stressor.

Disassociation from the behavior is actually very common due the differences in the parts of the brain that are being applied.

The person so engrossed, commonly do not consider themselves capable of acting that way but in fact it is apparent that is not a realistic assessment.

Prior to modern methods of entertainment and in relation to the resulting Catharsis people would kill each other over things that today are considered trivial like snoring.

a reply to: Astrocyte

The cerebral cortex (cortex) is the thinking part of the brain where logic and judgment reside. It is the outer portion of the brain and is divided into lobes. Think of the cortex as the strategy center of the brain.

The emotional center of the brain is the limbic system.  It is located lower in the brain and is considered to be more primitive than the cortex.

When someone is experiencing and expressing anger, he or she is not using the thinking (cortex) part of the brain, but primarily, the limbic center of the brain.

To be clear this is really basic stuff when it comes to understanding the field the OP claims to understand.

a reply to: Kashai

To be clear this is really basic stuff when it comes to understanding the field the OP claims to understand.

So? The OP is understanding some things, and making an effort to explain them to lay-persons. Do you want to shut that down? I don't.


It's great that such a thing is happening. We need more of this type of analysis of the human condition.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs


I am just pointing out some obvious facts and also offering that the OP may be trying to politicize an issue in Psychology.

How anger results is something I learned about during my 3rd year towards my Bachelors in Science in relation to Psychology.

Anger management issues are a very real problem in our society but to politicize them and then claim that in the past things were better?

Well I had two minors one in International Relations, which places an considerable emphasis upon World History and the other in Religion from the context of the Earth in general.

Conditioning in relation to the state of the art for the most part motivates people to go to work then use the earned proceeds to survive.

a reply to: Astrocyte

Thanks for the thread.

I'm curious, what are the characteristics of someone who is ambidextrous?
Do the left and right exchange better as a result, or what?

thanks.

a reply to: Kashai

Okay. I actually completed a master's level degree in Social Welfare, with a specialty in Children and Families....

and also became expert in the "Substance Abuse Counseling" of the time. Later I worked as a new-parent educator (helping brand new first-time parents) with infant development, brain-training, and so on and so forth.

I have a very well-rounded background and experience of the "family system" and "group theory" realities of social sciences and also about brain development, neuroscience, best-practice parenting.......

we are all "products" or our intimate and immediate family group....and by extension of our schooling experience.

Anyway - Astrocyte has a lot of very astute things to say. I hope that Astrocyte has success here in sharing actual

a reply to: Talorc

My God that's all true. Now what do we do about it? It's a nightmare.

originally posted by: kosmicjack
a reply to: Talorc

My God that's all true. Now what do we do about it? It's a nightmare.

I believe in talk therapy myself...I think if we spent our resources on mental health professionals and facilities to treat primarily out-patient care to those of us who otherwise go to jail for being stupid because our feelings got hurt somehow.

The majority of crime is done by those of us who get hurt somehow...?
There's two things happening to us that we can change if we wanted to...

Lashing out, and taking lashes.

I stopped taking lashes---> Now I have to learn how not to lash out.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

How the brain reacts to anger is essentially inherent like adding butter to a turkey will make the meat less dry than otherwise.

I was Principal of a School that worked with male adolescents who has anywhere between 1 to 12 charges of murder but with no convictions.

The real deal when it comes to street gangs and there activity.

I also worked at the primary County Psychiatric Emergency room in the City of Miami.

I actually get a pension in relation to the time I worked their due to a disability.

as well as for Children and Families [known as Heath and Rehabilitative Services), where I worked directly with the Divisional Director for the region (there are only four such positions in the State of Florida).

In this case he managed everything related from Tampa to West Palm Beach down to Key West.

Despite you positive feelings towards the OP what he is saying is contrary to common as well as basic knowledge in relation to the field.

a reply to: Kashai

He is adding his perspective that I find quite interesting. I'm trying to figure out why you felt compelled to write your resume. You have a good day.

a reply to: angeldoll



You wake up in the morning and notice a birds next on a tree within your personal property. You decide to climb up the tree to set up a camera so you can record and share the birth process to others. As far as setting your equipment up at the time the mother shows up and as a result of the interaction you end up in a hospital, having fallen from where you were setting up the equipment.

Of course what happened is that she did not understand that you meant no harm.


During moments of anger people are not very much different.


I am reciprocating and in consideration presenting that in so far the OP lacks basic comprehension of the field in question.

Lets keep in mind that the OP sites the member is a "therapist", has clients.

a reply to: Kashai

I'm sorry you feel the OP has nothing to offer you. It's okay, you've had your say.

a reply to: Kashai

Hey you. Hi.

So like what do you think about what I said about treating symptoms rather than exacerbate them?

I thought this thread was about addressing issues we have that are a big problem in our society?

I wouldn't persist normally- my time on the web is closing soon this evening...

Thanks.