...
There is one thing that the authors seem to fail to mention when you're new and completely out of my head in despair and ready to eliminate your map and always touches you hear that things will always better if you continue to abstain and give your body time to recover: it fails to tell you how to improve and feel better through the pain. not about the pain or even pain. This part of the leave out, and speak instead of Gratitude and liberation from the compulsion. But it feels too much pain to stay sober, and this you realize later, with time. Then when you're clean and do not wish the matter all that much and you want to cry is either to reduce someone to a pulp, the AA of Boston began to tell you that you're on the right track and would do well to remember the pain when you were a non-profit addict, now sober for at least this suffering has a purpose. They tell you that at least this pain means you are going somewhere, instead of endlessly turning wheel of the mouse as if you were addicted.
neglected to tell you that after the magical disappearance of the need to take six or eight months in a row without substance, you will begin to "come into contact" with the reason you had begun to make use of substances. When you arrive At this point, you begin to understand why you were addicted to what, after all, was but an anesthetic. Turns out "Get in touch with your feelings" is another cliche that ends horribly to mask something deep and real *. It turns out that the more insipid the cliché of Aa, the more are the sharp canines that hides the real truth.
...
epigram * A more abstract but more so that veterans of the White Flag of sobriety sometimes prefer to this is: "Do not worry get in touch with your feelings, they will contact you '."
(DF Wallace , "Infinite Jest")
Alexithymia alexithymia literally means "lack of words for emotions". The subjects are as central to alexithymic the following characteristics:
...
- difficult to discriminate the other emotion, and somatic states from emotions; ...
- difficult to communicate to others their emotions;
- presence of coercion in imaginative processes, with lack of fantasy life ...;
- presence of a cognitive style related to the stimulus, externally oriented
... ... "
(L. Solano, "Between the mind and body")
How is a relationship between these two quotes? What does a fantasy novel born with a psychological construct in the study of psychosomatic disorders? The connections they are many, and also pass through some
studies and theories of Bion (especially on "thinking without a thinker"), as well as through knowledge of the basics of what we know about emotions
. Anyway ...
... a bit like 'we all know, every day our brain has to reconcile the demands of reality in which we live (outside world) and those of our body and our mind (the internal world). An example: our body reacts to and move our attention to that beautiful curvy girl who is spending his davanti a noi per strada; la nostra mente comincia a considerare il modo migliore di approcciarla (o ignorarla magari) tenendo conto delle nostre presenti o meno esperienze pregresse; la realtà esterna si materializza sotto forma di un grande orologio digitale sul palazzo di fronte che ci ricorda il ritardo di mezz'ora con cui ci stiamo dirigendo verso il luogo del nostro prossimo appuntamento.
Cosa succede a questo punto dentro di noi? come cambierebbe la nostra reazione se per esempio la ragazza avesse affianco a sé un affascinante ragazzo? o se noi ci fossimo appena lasciati con la nostra partner? o se la ragazza fosse una perfetta sconosciuta o magari invece una nostra "vecchia fiamma" da tempo persa di vista?
Non esistono clear answers to these questions. Depending on our personality (seen in biopsychosocial perspective) within us there may be a variety of different reactions. What I would like to point out is taken as if such an external event is reflected not only in us causing a number of cognitive reactions (a succession of thoughts in the form of thoughts, or memories, or fantasies), but also a series of physiological changes (eg. a vague sense of excitement) to a deeper level than simply cortex. Emotions are always involved in these three different levels: that of events focused on external reality, that events related to the internal reality in the form of profound physiological changes, and finally that the events related to the internal reality in the form of responses to a level a bit 'more abstract, ie, cognitive, mental. Now, it is clear that any internal event of a cognitive or "mental" has some physiological correlates in the brain, one that I want to highlight here, however, the presence of a difference between a reaction-type cortical or as limited as possible to the nervous system Central, and a type of inner, not only subcortical but rather inherent in the whole body in the direction of changes in the endocrine system, musculoskeletal, vascular than at the level of immune responses, etc.. (But here I need really lighting of neuroscience to find out how this is actually based my distinction), a reaction more to this as our emotion is strong and among the "core" (eg. anger, fear, sadness or joy).
Growing up, most people learn to integrate data coming from these three different levels in a virtually automatic. Furthermore, to perform the integration of these different data develop a range of strategies that are common in relation to other individuals, but taken together present a virtually unique combination within each individual. And this attention, because while the external reality, the sensory apparatus that allows us to react to it, as did our emotional reactions to a deeper level, more body, we have a plot already largely preformed, our level of cortical input management of these two figures is the emergence in many ways a tabula rasa. The invariance between different individuals that can be found in the organization at the cortical level show us a part of our innate cognitive phylogenetically, but almost from the moment of birth if not first among all the myriad possibilities of cerebral organization is made possible a continuous selection, a order constant over time leads to cerebral organization unique to each individual, even if we left da corredi genetici identici (è il caso dei gemelli omozigoti).
Questo processo di organizzazione è comune però a qualunque essere vivente, non solo all'uomo. Cos'è che rende l'organizzazione cerebrale dell'uomo allo stesso tempo così tremendamente complicata e così efficace, tale da permettergli di realizzare tutte le incredibili meraviglie che gli sono proprie? Io sostengo (ok, non senza illustri predecessori, spero ve ne verrà in mente qualcuno), che uno degli strumenti più importanti per l'uomo sia il linguaggio verbale. L'uomo ha sviluppato però una molteplicità di linguaggi, quali ad esempio linguaggi artistici di tipo figurativo o musicale, oppure linguaggi formalizzati quale quello math, languages \u200b\u200bor multi-modal communications such as those used in mass media.
E 'instead of verbal language with which we in most cases the best way to order the chaos of information that results from a large variety of daily events to which we are subjected.
But be careful: the use of verbal language there never reveals the whole nor the outside world nor the internal world. Language is a tool, and as such also has merits as well as defects limits. You can search for insights in this regard in studies of various philosophers, or in the works of other writers, psychologists, psychoanalysts or (I quote only one, Lacan). Laplacian of a post which I very much appreciated in this regard is
here.
But what makes the man but when a little 'all languages \u200b\u200bknown to him fail, and is prey to feelings for him at least momentarily matter and are often a source of discontent? Often, trivially, knowingly or not seeking relief from the chaos or the strength of feeling in certain "distractions" at least to the most valuable outdoor shelters of various kinds: the use of psychoactive substances, or the continuous use of various forms of entertainment ( movies, games, video games, passive listening to a radio or music) or in the acquisition of food, or in sexual activity, or other gestures repeated compulsively, or already in the order of chaos preformed as political or religious beliefs or whatever, or in family-type relationships, or friendship, or love. All of these shelters
costantemento put us away from or sometimes to help us luck in finding an answer to the questions implied that our internal IT chaos brings us, or sometimes they prevent us from making the case directly to the very existence of certain questions.
How do I get instead to self-understanding?
would be very nice to know that already, but rather the road to self discovery is very personal and in part also be discovered. Let's say that certainly requires: take note of those who are our moods and our feelings about how they are manifested in our various creative acts and not verbal, artistic, or relationships, or whatever. In short, just as they suggest for ourselves in many different languages. But sometimes, before he could seek answers to the questions implicit in our chaos, we seek the right questions, we wait patiently just outside the most unthinkable shelters. Undoubtedly, our way sooner or later have to go through the chaos.
Good luck
