HDT material has been moved to that thread, starting with Pierre's reply to Keyhole's post, here: https://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,45330.msg751280.html#msg751280
Raine, Samenow, Fallon: Neuropsychology & The Work
- Thread starter Altair
- Start date
Finished reading Samenow a few weeks ago and it was one of the most difficult books I've ever read. I've often hid behind my intellect and complex narratives to skirt around and justify myself, but reading his work was almost like walking through fire. For as long as I can remember, I've gone through constant phases of manic depression, where I'd make progress, only to fall back into old patterns, and could never understand why I would sabotage myself like that. I've caught glimpses as to some of the narratives and thinking patterns that would normally bring about inevitable depression, but reading Samenow was like a full-on mirror.
I found ItCM at a bookstore and decided to buy a tea, read it there and ended up going through the first 100 pages in less than 2 hours, and it was like a revelation - with a bit of mania. Entire portions of my life, from childhood to my teenage years and even recently flashed before my eyes as I read on. I couldn't believe how similar his stories of the way criminals operate reflected back to my general attitude towards life and I found myself wanting to apologize to everyone I've treated wrongly or taken advantage of. Realizing how ungrateful and unappreciative I've been and not counting the many blessings right in front of me.
That I had internalized a belief that I was owed something in Life, and somehow deserving of great things, even though I hadn't put in the constant hard work or effort necessary to justify that belief. That I was better than other people because I was smarter and had all this 'esoteric knowledge' which most people don't approach, and that this somehow separated me from the rest of the crowd. But as my life 'flashed' before my eyes, these beliefs didn't match up with what I was seeing.
Samenow was put down that night and I continued along reading Collingwood. When I finally came back to it a few weeks later, the temporary mania that followed the revelations had passed, and what was left was a sense of despair in picking the book up again.
Just like Keyhole mentioned in his post, every page was not only cringe-worthy, but devastating to my ego. A few times I became so angry reading it that I wanted to throw the book out. It was a hard pill to swallow how closely the way my mind works resembled these hardened criminals, and every chapter only brought more of this to light. I was in a constant swoon and depression for weeks. Is this all there is to me? Am I no different than a criminal? Is it even possible to change? Self-pity and despair started to reach a critical point. My head hurt constantly and I could barely think.
Then one day I was driving home from work, and an excerpt from Jordan Peterson's new book came to mind where he said that most of the time when people believe they're thinking, they aren't actually thinking at all. Most of what passes for thought consists of complaining, ruminating, or justifications - but actual thought takes place when we actually start listening and paying attention to what crosses our minds and holding it up to scrutiny, criticizing it, and putting those thoughts to the test. Something I hadn't been doing.
It's hard to explain, but that clicked and a Socratic debate started taking place with the thoughts fueling self-pity and despair. Before, I always used to force myself out of depression while never resolving the thoughts that went along with it, this time, it was like meeting 'it' face-to-face, and not backing down in order to resolve getting to the truth. And after a short period of going through this, it was like the depression I had been experiencing popped like a bubble and disappeared. Was the strangest thing. I woke up the next day and my left temple was throbbing but in a way quite unlike a headache, and my body seemed to hurt all over.
Interestingly enough, after integrating all of this new information, I felt more 'balanced' as a whole, in that both the mania and depression didn't seem to be a major factor at all. That at least part of what fuels both is an inflated ego that doesn't get what 'it' wants. I saw a periodic comeback of the 'criminal mind' after I allowed anger to get the better of me, in combination with not paying attention to my diet afterwards, but finally writing this post has sort of had the effect of 'realigning' myself internally, if that makes sense.
But overall, I'm actually very grateful for reading Samenow and think ItCM is a gem.
I found ItCM at a bookstore and decided to buy a tea, read it there and ended up going through the first 100 pages in less than 2 hours, and it was like a revelation - with a bit of mania. Entire portions of my life, from childhood to my teenage years and even recently flashed before my eyes as I read on. I couldn't believe how similar his stories of the way criminals operate reflected back to my general attitude towards life and I found myself wanting to apologize to everyone I've treated wrongly or taken advantage of. Realizing how ungrateful and unappreciative I've been and not counting the many blessings right in front of me.
That I had internalized a belief that I was owed something in Life, and somehow deserving of great things, even though I hadn't put in the constant hard work or effort necessary to justify that belief. That I was better than other people because I was smarter and had all this 'esoteric knowledge' which most people don't approach, and that this somehow separated me from the rest of the crowd. But as my life 'flashed' before my eyes, these beliefs didn't match up with what I was seeing.
Samenow was put down that night and I continued along reading Collingwood. When I finally came back to it a few weeks later, the temporary mania that followed the revelations had passed, and what was left was a sense of despair in picking the book up again.
Just like Keyhole mentioned in his post, every page was not only cringe-worthy, but devastating to my ego. A few times I became so angry reading it that I wanted to throw the book out. It was a hard pill to swallow how closely the way my mind works resembled these hardened criminals, and every chapter only brought more of this to light. I was in a constant swoon and depression for weeks. Is this all there is to me? Am I no different than a criminal? Is it even possible to change? Self-pity and despair started to reach a critical point. My head hurt constantly and I could barely think.
Then one day I was driving home from work, and an excerpt from Jordan Peterson's new book came to mind where he said that most of the time when people believe they're thinking, they aren't actually thinking at all. Most of what passes for thought consists of complaining, ruminating, or justifications - but actual thought takes place when we actually start listening and paying attention to what crosses our minds and holding it up to scrutiny, criticizing it, and putting those thoughts to the test. Something I hadn't been doing.
It's hard to explain, but that clicked and a Socratic debate started taking place with the thoughts fueling self-pity and despair. Before, I always used to force myself out of depression while never resolving the thoughts that went along with it, this time, it was like meeting 'it' face-to-face, and not backing down in order to resolve getting to the truth. And after a short period of going through this, it was like the depression I had been experiencing popped like a bubble and disappeared. Was the strangest thing. I woke up the next day and my left temple was throbbing but in a way quite unlike a headache, and my body seemed to hurt all over.
Interestingly enough, after integrating all of this new information, I felt more 'balanced' as a whole, in that both the mania and depression didn't seem to be a major factor at all. That at least part of what fuels both is an inflated ego that doesn't get what 'it' wants. I saw a periodic comeback of the 'criminal mind' after I allowed anger to get the better of me, in combination with not paying attention to my diet afterwards, but finally writing this post has sort of had the effect of 'realigning' myself internally, if that makes sense.
But overall, I'm actually very grateful for reading Samenow and think ItCM is a gem.
Nice summary Turgon. I do know what you're saying, I went through a similar process even before reading Samenow. Personally I think that's what shadow work is really about. Acknowledge it, own it, integrate and restructure. One must know who they are in order to make the choice to stand for something and understand what that actually means. Why one is making a stand, so to speak.
seek10 said:
That is an interesting thought about whether he was given the task to write such a book so as to counter the view of psychopaths about that time or whether others above made sure to give him so much publicity so as to blur the image of psychopaths and make them more likeable.
Somewhere in the book he mentions a talk he gave baring himself so to speak and to which the people afterwards said that his talk was a big Protestant confession. Fallon writes that he still doesn't know what they meant, which is kind of funny and the whole book could be seen as an extended version of a Protestant confession. The book has a lot to do with image management and many times, I felt, he was making generalisations about life, which seemed to be missing the point and actually not very accurate. My copy of the book has so many questionmarks in the margin and I felt as if someone was trying to say that black was white or at least not quite black.
In the last chapter where he talks about the wonders and necessity of psychopaths there is this:
The reason that history is marred by mayhem, war, cruelty etc. is most likely due to psychopaths and their very destructive behaviour once the accrue power and lead nations. Fallon then promotes the view of the selfish gene as it suits his own make-up of pursuing sex and resources at the expense of others.
There is no doubt that Fallon is a smart guy but I find it highly likely that he is a psychopath. He misses the point, I think, that only failed psychopaths end up in prison. Those who are successful, put on a tie and suit and climb to the top of corporations. And just like them, he just doesn't care, but enjoys the game of fooling others who happen to have feelings and empathy.
Jeffrey of Troy
Padawan Learner
Aeneas said:
I wonder if this view of the psychopaths - that they don't feel "human" emotions - has us underestimating their numbers, or failing to identify some individuals who are?
The defining characteristic of psychopaths is, they can't feel they've done anything wrong. This doesn't necessarily preclude empathy / compassion / love. What I mean is, I think a psychopath could genuinely love a child or pet (as you or I would) even while abusing them (as you or I wouldn't). For them, there is no such conflict.
For example, a psychopath runs a charity for dogs, then turns out to have been abusing dogs. Or, he / she campaigns to help the poor. The "they don't feel emotions" belief would have us concluding the psychopath was merely pretending to care. The danger is if we find evidence, especially not for a public figure but someone in your personal life, that he / she really cares about another person or animal. Then we conclude "Well, must not be a psychopath. Maybe what made me think he / she was is because the person was damaged somehow, and I should offer help." But if they can feel genuine caring, then in some such cases, it might still be a psychopath.
I don't think that it is genuine love as you say that a psychopath is experiencing, but a feeling linked to their owning or controlling some other being whether human og child. It is not a sign of love, compassion or empathy to abuse, torture, injure or kill someone or something.Jeffrey of Troy said:
I agree however that it is not so easy to determine if someone is a psychopath. It takes long and careful observations of their words and deeds and not quick black and white judgement based on a single event in time.
Turgon said:
I'm finishing both of his books and have had the same revelations. It's shocking to see my view of life and myself in the minds and lives of criminals. My sense of entitlement and being owed something. If I wanted something, I'd just take it, but wouldn't call it what it was: stealing. So many things I did that I forgot about keep surfacing as I read them. I stole from my parents, siblings, neighbors and other people; money, jewelry, books, music, cigarettes, liquor, even food from my first employer and I was fired for it.
In a sense, I think I stole other people's time as well. Needing to be the center of attention, the smartest kid in class or the funniest or a troublemaker had to be really draining for my family, friends and teachers. Vandalizing houses or cars. It didn't occur to me at all at the time that the people would have to deal with that - clean it up or fix it. I just did what I wanted without consideration of how what I did might affect other people.
I agree that the books are gems. I appreciate being able to see those aspects of myself and to make efforts to act and think differently than my criminal mind.
I stumbled upon an interesting TED talk by Daniel Amen about the importance of neural imaging in psychiatry, and the connection between brain damage and violence, among other things. There is also a message of hope, as he talks about the real possibility of reversing brain damage. Guess that in some cases it can be helpful.
https://youtu.be/esPRsT-lmw8
https://youtu.be/esPRsT-lmw8
Divide by Zero
The Living Force
Keit said:
I saw a few of his TED talks and decided to look more into it. I found some serious doubts about his claims.
Daniel Amen has a huge incentive to push the idea that his SPECT scans help him diagnose and treat the illnesses. But there is a lot of controversy and disagreement about it. There's no real system to determine these things from the scans, but he claims to be able to.
Here's a good article that points out issues in his method and how it is a sort of cold reading, since his patients come to him with problems that they explain to him already.
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/dr-amens-love-affair-with-spect-scans/
Divide By Zero said:
Very interesting article. Thanks for sharing, Divide By Zero! It looks like Daniel Amen found a way to monetize a tool for researchers, not unlike the famous Dr. Merkola, who is probably grossing millions with his supplements business.
But I also have doubts regarding the "science based medicine" website. It is very possible that I am simply biased, because by now I have a sort of "allergic reaction" to any mention of "science based medicine". ;) Simply put, they are the SJWs of the medical and veterinary world, who treat integrative and alternative practitioners with disdain and poorly masked viciousness.
Just take a look at the cited sources (The Skeptic’s Dictionary, Quackwatch, etc.). It doesn't mean that Daniel Amen's work is really legit, it just that I would avoid believing anything that comes from the "Snopes" of the medical world.
But perhaps you found other people doubting him too?
Divide by Zero
The Living Force
Keit,
I agree that the sources are not the best to follow.
Despite that, the information and doubts are still valid.
I just got a weird feeling from Dr. Amen after seeing a few videos. I have an aversion to salesmen and PR type speech. It set off my curiosity when he spoke about his nephew as the claim was a bit too "convinient" and easily claimed.
He could very well have discovered something special, but the "black box" hidden explanation for his diagnostics makes me weary. Mercola, on the other hand, shares his information- the why's and how's of things working. I'm not against the sale of good and services. I'm just sensing that Amen is more of a salesman than someone who wants to find the truth.
I agree that the sources are not the best to follow.
Despite that, the information and doubts are still valid.
I just got a weird feeling from Dr. Amen after seeing a few videos. I have an aversion to salesmen and PR type speech. It set off my curiosity when he spoke about his nephew as the claim was a bit too "convinient" and easily claimed.
He could very well have discovered something special, but the "black box" hidden explanation for his diagnostics makes me weary. Mercola, on the other hand, shares his information- the why's and how's of things working. I'm not against the sale of good and services. I'm just sensing that Amen is more of a salesman than someone who wants to find the truth.
Divide By Zero said:
Yes, the way he speaks is indeed somewhat off putting, and the way his voice cracks when he speaks about his nephew is also a bit strange. It's understandable that he would be a bit emotional when he would talk about it the first or even second time, but I watched two of his recordings that he mentioned the same story, and every-time it looked a bit exaggerated. When will have more time, will look into his claims a bit more closely. Thanks!
Replying to Turgon here, even though some time has gone by since his post: Thanks for what you shared. I can relate quite a bit, and think that you touched on aspects that may make your mania and depression waaaaay more controllable, if not something from the past. That, combined with Neurofeedback, you may be starting a life changing process, little by little.
For me, Samenow didn't say anything new, in a sense. But it was the way it was said, combined with the fact that he is talking about criminals, that made me go:
It's like Victor Frankl said: It's not your life circumstances that determine who you are, but your attitude towards them. If there is anything you don't like in your life, then you alone can change it, or at least parts of it. It is your responsibility, as is doing it without expecting anything in return, without a sense of entitlement. Simply being aware of what motivates our actions (instead of narratives and self-pity) is an excellent alarm clock, I think. It trains you to doubt even the feelings you may have experienced throughout all your life, thinking they were real. Your past mistakes and your guilt will probably always be there, but it is what you do about it that can determine the course of your life and what you give to the Universe.
For me, even though some of the realizations have been very painful, after a few months there is a bit more faith in the process of doing each day what is in front of me, and more, and then "wait and see", always looking for ways to turn what was ignorant and stupid mistakes and thinking errors, into something that a) I won't do again, b) somebody may not have to go through if we continue to gather, apply and share this kind of knowledge.
It's also about forming new habits, IMO: They say it takes a few weeks (or months, depending) for one to build a new good habit, or destroy a bad one. Well, I reckon the same applies to thinking errors, provided that we stick to a routine for spotting them, being as aware and objective as possible, and really wanting to change them. At first, the new habit is remembering to remember oneself and not acting on thinking errors. Then, it's about changing those thinking errors. The "reward" isn't what the false parts of ourselves always demanded. Instead, it is living life more in the present, and actually discovering who we really are, to be able to give more sincerely to others.
In the process, you discover ways in which you would never want to act or compromise on again (hurting others in the process) just to preserve the thinking errors. It's like finally having a bit more space to really view life as a whole, take it seriously, and decide every day what the priorities really are. We may be wrong, still, but at least it's trying new things based on better understanding and more information, rather than completely mechanically, based on childhood trauma/fears, etc.
A big FWIW.
For me, Samenow didn't say anything new, in a sense. But it was the way it was said, combined with the fact that he is talking about criminals, that made me go:
It's like Victor Frankl said: It's not your life circumstances that determine who you are, but your attitude towards them. If there is anything you don't like in your life, then you alone can change it, or at least parts of it. It is your responsibility, as is doing it without expecting anything in return, without a sense of entitlement. Simply being aware of what motivates our actions (instead of narratives and self-pity) is an excellent alarm clock, I think. It trains you to doubt even the feelings you may have experienced throughout all your life, thinking they were real. Your past mistakes and your guilt will probably always be there, but it is what you do about it that can determine the course of your life and what you give to the Universe. For me, even though some of the realizations have been very painful, after a few months there is a bit more faith in the process of doing each day what is in front of me, and more, and then "wait and see", always looking for ways to turn what was ignorant and stupid mistakes and thinking errors, into something that a) I won't do again, b) somebody may not have to go through if we continue to gather, apply and share this kind of knowledge.
It's also about forming new habits, IMO: They say it takes a few weeks (or months, depending) for one to build a new good habit, or destroy a bad one. Well, I reckon the same applies to thinking errors, provided that we stick to a routine for spotting them, being as aware and objective as possible, and really wanting to change them. At first, the new habit is remembering to remember oneself and not acting on thinking errors. Then, it's about changing those thinking errors. The "reward" isn't what the false parts of ourselves always demanded. Instead, it is living life more in the present, and actually discovering who we really are, to be able to give more sincerely to others.
In the process, you discover ways in which you would never want to act or compromise on again (hurting others in the process) just to preserve the thinking errors. It's like finally having a bit more space to really view life as a whole, take it seriously, and decide every day what the priorities really are. We may be wrong, still, but at least it's trying new things based on better understanding and more information, rather than completely mechanically, based on childhood trauma/fears, etc.
A big FWIW.
Thanks Chu,
A lot of doubts. Also a sense of terror as to how easily we can lie to ourselves, and that if you are even remotely intelligent, the lies can be that much more complex. And it's like being used to being a certain way and feeling almost lost without it - becoming attached to the suffering. But training to 'feel' differently about things rings true. How much of that can we really trust as being accurate, and how much is a product of the past imposing itself on the present. I find that it's sometimes difficult to discern, but we have to keep at it, step-by-step.
And it's a difficult process because I can tell if I allow thinking errors in, which usually happens by not paying attention, they like to stay, and then I need to go through the process of weeding them out again. What seems to work is being open and honest about the errors being there (a tell-tale sign seems to be some level of dishevelment or 'fuzzy' thinking and high emotional reactivity - although that could be caused from eating something you shouldn't have - which was also probably due to a thinking error or laziness!
) acceptance and acknowledgment of the thought errors without judgement of them, but definitely challenging them. That Socratic debate seems important. Almost like giving the thought errors their due, but letting them know they aren't in charge without being forceful about it. Forcing errors in thinking out doesn't seem to work very well for some reason - and only reinforces it. It really is like having someone else in your home and negotiating with them to willingly leave or give up control, or at least get along and be a helpful member of the household, which I guess adds to the detachment from them so you can form thoughts and ideas that are based on what's real and what we want to see from ourselves.
Yeah! I don't know how to respond to that other than it seems so true. Kinda like in the Prayer of the Soul "May we know and love the holiness of true existence." So thank you for that. :)
Chu said:
A lot of doubts. Also a sense of terror as to how easily we can lie to ourselves, and that if you are even remotely intelligent, the lies can be that much more complex. And it's like being used to being a certain way and feeling almost lost without it - becoming attached to the suffering. But training to 'feel' differently about things rings true. How much of that can we really trust as being accurate, and how much is a product of the past imposing itself on the present. I find that it's sometimes difficult to discern, but we have to keep at it, step-by-step.
And it's a difficult process because I can tell if I allow thinking errors in, which usually happens by not paying attention, they like to stay, and then I need to go through the process of weeding them out again. What seems to work is being open and honest about the errors being there (a tell-tale sign seems to be some level of dishevelment or 'fuzzy' thinking and high emotional reactivity - although that could be caused from eating something you shouldn't have - which was also probably due to a thinking error or laziness!
) acceptance and acknowledgment of the thought errors without judgement of them, but definitely challenging them. That Socratic debate seems important. Almost like giving the thought errors their due, but letting them know they aren't in charge without being forceful about it. Forcing errors in thinking out doesn't seem to work very well for some reason - and only reinforces it. It really is like having someone else in your home and negotiating with them to willingly leave or give up control, or at least get along and be a helpful member of the household, which I guess adds to the detachment from them so you can form thoughts and ideas that are based on what's real and what we want to see from ourselves. Yeah! I don't know how to respond to that other than it seems so true. Kinda like in the Prayer of the Soul "May we know and love the holiness of true existence." So thank you for that. :)