During my first two decades of life, I strongly held the belief that suicide was the ultimate act of failure - at least for myself. Looking back on the suicides that entered my life when I was younger, I don't remember ever feeling disdain for the victim, but I do remember feeling very confused by their acts. My views on suicide became a little less black and white when a friend of mine took a job in a toxicology lab at a local hospital. Her greatest surprise was finding out that many people who overdosed on their medicines or sleeping pills weren't actually trying to end their life. When questioned after being revived, most of them were operating on the misjudgment that if they could sleep a few days straight or just increase their dosage, their bodies and/or minds would be healed and they would be able to live productive lives again. As she put it, "These people could have killed themselves and have no idea of what they had done until they entered the hereafter."
Another loosening of my views on suicide came when I entered treatment for clinical depression. I insisted quite fervently to my psychologist that not only was I not suicidal, but I would never even considered taking my own life because "that would mean that I screwed up my life so badly that not even God could fix it." He looked at me for a moment and then asked me if I had ever had any self-destructive thoughts or acts. I burst into tears. Despite my beliefs, I had indeed had those thoughts - to the point where I could not leave sharp knives out in the open, because I would have visions of me cutting myself in ways that would have lead to my death, had I done them. It was something I guarded against diligently. Every time I used a knife, it was either washed right then and put back in the drawer, or went immediately into the dishwasher. If neither option was available at that moment, it went under a dishcloth. It had to be out of my sight. I even moved my sharp knives to a separate drawer, so I wouldn't see them while getting other utensils. This experience taught me that even people who believed strongly against suicide, could have those type of thoughts.
Sociologist Emile Durkheim studied the social factors of suicide back in the late 1800s. While we tend to think of suicide as a highly individualistic act, it occurs within a social framework that shapes those acts. His research proposed four types of suicidal acts:
Egotistic suicide - These are people who are not well-integrated into the social network around them. Without the social bonds to fall back on for support and guidance, they are left to face their problems alone. These people can be disaffected for a variety of reasons: they're part of undesirable social group; they're highly individualized people; or they have an illness or disorder that makes creating social bonds difficult.
Altruistic suicide - These are people who are overly integrated into the social network around them. This is the kamikaze pilot, the suicide bomber, and the self-martyr. These people kill themselves in the belief that it will save others.
Anomic suicide - This happens when someone loses their standing in their social network. They are no longer guided by the rules they had come to depend upon, because those rules are either no longer relevant or have completely failed them. These are the people who suddenly lost their jobs or social positions, due to things like financial downturns, divorce, or scandal. Not knowing where they now fit into society, they decide that they no longer have a place in it.
Fatalistic suicide - These people are overly controlled by society, whose only real "freedom" is killing themselves. These people include slaves, prisoners and those oppressed by a totalitarian regime.
But social networks are not the only factor in suicidal behavior. Age and level of development is also a great influence on how and why suicide is committed. While it is a difficult concept for even professionals to come to terms with, pre-adolescent children do commit suicide. It's rare, but it does happen in situations where the family bond is weak (strong families rarely tell each other they wish that other family members were dead), especially if the child knows of others who have committed suicide. Children are more likely to commit suicides that can be dismissed as accidents, such as running into traffic or falling from high places. That's not to say that every child that dies this way has committed suicide--far from it. Accidents still are a major reason for childhood deaths; however, for a child who wants to end his/her life, doing similar acts on purpose is the easiest way to achieve their goal.
Adolescents are one of the most likely groups for committing suicide. It is the second highest cause of death for those between the ages of 15 to 24. The lack of problem solving skills among adolescent suicide victims, as well as the lack of parental bonding and guidance probably explains the cut-off point around age 24, which is around the time that the frontal lobes in the brain have finished developing. So it's possible that even those who have an elevated risk will have improved judgment by then. Rick factors include: poor parental-attachment; deficient problem-solving skills; alcohol and drug use in the family; seeing themselves different than their parents; socio-ecomonic adversity; exposure to sexual abuse; high rates of neuroticism; novelty; depression; anxiety; and conduct disorder. There is also a social element involved. Adolescents are more susceptible to cluster suicides--suicides triggered by other who have committed suicide. The attention give to the first suicide victim after the fact can appear to be the type of validation the following victims hope for, though they fail to take in account that they won't actually benefit from it. For this reason, some psychologists are warning Cornell University to be careful how they memorialize the students who have recently comment suicide there.
Adults over 25 who commit suicide are another class, altogether. For one thing, they are less likely to state their suicidal intentions in direct ways. Instead they will talk about not being useful or not being able to stand their current situation anymore. While some, due to delayed development, will behave similar to the adolescent group, most suicidal people from ages 25 to 65 suffer from anomic stressors like job losses, financial and health problems, loss of a loved one, as well as drug use, depression, and hopelessness. Behavioral signs are very similar to clinical depression, with the exception of gettings one's affairs in order. They tend to withdraw from others and start having troubles with sleeping, concentrating, and eating.
Elderly people are largest group to commit suicide and that's not even including those who commit chronic or passive suicide by letting their illnesses have their way or just stop eating and drinking. The group most likely to commit overt suicide in the US are 85 year old white males. The elderly are the most successful at their attempts and the least likely to give any warning of their intentions. Unlike younger people, the elderly rarely use suicide as a threat. Their reasons are often more calculated than emotional. Lack of finances and increases in health care cost often figure prominently in their decision, though depression, isolation, and lack of activity can be major factors. They will often have everything in order to make things easier on their loved ones. During my gerontology studies, a classmate gave a presentation on senior suicides. I will never forget the story she shared of a couple in their 80s, who not only had a file near them containing all their important papers and instructions for their children, but even went as far as laying on trash bags to make the clean up easier. Even my death, dying, and bereavement textbook gives a similar example of elderly suicide.
One type of suicide risk not covered so far is one I'm not sure the mental health industry really has a proper name for - suicidal thoughts caused by medication. Granted, most of these people probably have other risk factors, but based on personal experience, this is not something to tack on just as a footnote. A few years ago, I was placed on blood pressure medication because while my blood pressure wasn't in the danger zone, it was high enough to cause concern with my other medical problems. The first medication I was put up seriously messed with my attention and memory. I stopped driving my car because twice I forgot how to drive. Luckily, both times were in parking lots, and after a few moments I could call up enough of my memory to get me back home. When it became obvious that this side effect was not going to go away, I was switched to another medication. Within a day, I started to have suicidal thoughts. As a precaution, I put my knives out of easy reach. I challenged the thoughts each time they surfaced. Two days later, I took myself off the medication because not only were the thoughts coming just minutes apart, but when I tried to supress them, I began to get suicidal images. Within sixteen hours, I was no longer having those persistant thoughts. I later brought my blood pressure down dramatically by severely limiting the time I spent with negative relatives.
If you experience something similar, it would probably be a good idea to follow the first aid guides at WebMD for suicidal thoughts and not follow my example too closely.
And a final note: Recent studies have shown that animals do commit suicide. While I expected there to be suicides along the lines as the passive suicide done by seniors, having seen a few beloved pets go through this, I had not expected the evidence of animals committing altruistic suicides to protect their population. I do appreciatiate the following statement: "The big difference is that in modern humans that calculation can go wrong. There are some acts of suicide that do save lives. But most of the millions or so human suicides each year worldwide benefit no one, [Thomas] Joiner explained. They are acts that perhaps used to serve a purpose in early human societies, he said, but have lost their function in the modern world."
Showing posts with label human development. Show all posts
Showing posts with label human development. Show all posts
Monday, March 22, 2010
Sunday, March 14, 2010
Reasons why kids are sometimes better at technology
After finishing my masters, I decided I wanted a break before going on to a doctorate program. So at the moment I'm employed doing technical troubleshooting over the phone. While in training, the truism about children being better at technology was brought up. Our trainer confirmed that children were indeed easier to troubleshoot with - because they were better at following directions and did exactly what you told them and nothing more. As a parent, this sounded rather counter to my experience; however as a technician, I've found out that she was right. More often than not, the children I've talked to (after getting the parent's permission) weren't really all that more knowledgeable than Mom and Dad. Of course, as we're often reminded, the customer who actually know what they're doing are usually the last ones to call for technical support, but still there is a pattern between the two populations.
1. Children have less preconceived ideas on how something is supposed to work. It never fails to amaze me the expectations people have of electronic equipment. Despite the fact that they have to replace light bulbs in their homes, flashlights, and cars, there are people in this day and age who still think that electronics should last forever. The fact it comes with a time-limited warantee is completely lost on them. But even more frustrating is the customer who thinks they know how a piece of equipment works and tries to jump ahead of the technician. Children don't do this. They let you tell them what the next step is - even the teenagers.
2. Children focus more on the task and less on the embarrassment. When troubleshooting with a child, there hardly ever any self-esteem problems to deal with. They feel valued just by the fact that an expert is willing to work with them.
3. Children are literal. When you ask a child what is showing on a screen, they will tell you exactly what is on there. If you ask a child if the screen says something specific, they will tell you just that and nothing more. If you ask a child what a cable looks like, they never say it's just a cable.
4. Children are open to being taught. This one is sort of a combination of the others, but I've worked with adults who showed the other traits and still failed in this one. The last thing most technicians want is a customer to keep calling back with the same problem when it is something easily fixed. Also, an educated customer is less likely to panic the next time something goes weird. Panicked customers are always difficult to troubleshoot with.
I could probably tack on that children tend to be more trusting of the technician, but that isn't necessarily why they are better at new technology. And for the record, I've dealt with senior citizens who show these traits and several of them have actually taught themselves to be technically savvy at ages that most people would not thought possible. Elderly women in particular seem good at this. I suspect it is because they don't have the preconceived idea that they have to be experts at it. So you can teach an old dog new tricks, but that can't beat old dogs who can teach themselves.
1. Children have less preconceived ideas on how something is supposed to work. It never fails to amaze me the expectations people have of electronic equipment. Despite the fact that they have to replace light bulbs in their homes, flashlights, and cars, there are people in this day and age who still think that electronics should last forever. The fact it comes with a time-limited warantee is completely lost on them. But even more frustrating is the customer who thinks they know how a piece of equipment works and tries to jump ahead of the technician. Children don't do this. They let you tell them what the next step is - even the teenagers.
2. Children focus more on the task and less on the embarrassment. When troubleshooting with a child, there hardly ever any self-esteem problems to deal with. They feel valued just by the fact that an expert is willing to work with them.
3. Children are literal. When you ask a child what is showing on a screen, they will tell you exactly what is on there. If you ask a child if the screen says something specific, they will tell you just that and nothing more. If you ask a child what a cable looks like, they never say it's just a cable.
4. Children are open to being taught. This one is sort of a combination of the others, but I've worked with adults who showed the other traits and still failed in this one. The last thing most technicians want is a customer to keep calling back with the same problem when it is something easily fixed. Also, an educated customer is less likely to panic the next time something goes weird. Panicked customers are always difficult to troubleshoot with.
I could probably tack on that children tend to be more trusting of the technician, but that isn't necessarily why they are better at new technology. And for the record, I've dealt with senior citizens who show these traits and several of them have actually taught themselves to be technically savvy at ages that most people would not thought possible. Elderly women in particular seem good at this. I suspect it is because they don't have the preconceived idea that they have to be experts at it. So you can teach an old dog new tricks, but that can't beat old dogs who can teach themselves.
Monday, March 08, 2010
Tipping Points
A couple of weeks ago, a commenter directed me to Change Therapy, a free online book about marketing "soft skills" like therapy by David P. Diana. I'm a little leary of promoting things from sources I'm not sure of, so my first action after seeing the comment was to email the link to a friend of mine who has been a practicing psychologist for over 40 years. His response was not only positive, but there was the hint that it would do me some good too.
I did enjoy reading the book. Among the gems within it, was a revisitation of Malcolm Gladwell's 10,000 hours rule. In a nutshell, 10,000 hours of practice is the tipping point of making one an expert at a skill. Diana extended the rule into an exercise program for one's career.
Yesterday, I visited Positivityratio.com, Dr. Barbara Fredrickson's site. Fredrickson found through her studies that "that experiencing positive emotions in a 3-to-1 ratio with negative ones leads people to a tipping point beyond which they naturally become more resilient to adversity and effortlessly achieve what they once could only imagine." Knowing that negativity is one of my worse inner demons, I've decided to track my positive/negative ratio on her site.
Most of my life, I've been told that it takes 21 days to create a new habit. I've have started several "habits" this way, only to have them get squashed by major life upheavals months later. The thing is I don't want new habits, I want an effective lifestyle where I take better care of myself than I do now. I can't do this by being a "habitist". That's how I developed my toolbox of immediate stress relievers. What I need to do is to become an expert - a master - of personally dealing with stress and depression.
So, how can I apply the 10,000 hour rule here? Well, to make it more manageable, I've decided that I would focus on two things - becoming an "expert" at realistic positiveness and becoming an expert at visual processing. The first is for my health; the second is for a career. If I were to assume that I could apply myself to one of these goals 16 hours a day, then it would take me 625 days or about 22 months to gain expertise. Though that is hardly a realistic expectation, especially since I have health concerns that bring the Spoon Theory into play. If I did an hour a day, it would take me a little over 357 months or close to 30 years to achieve the 10,000 hours by rough estimate. After a few more calculations and based on the fact that I tend to have 5 year cycles in my life, I've decided to make a goal of doing at least 2000 hours of effort to my mastery of these two fields, per year. This means about 5.5 hours a day or 38 hours a week. Luckily for me, I can integrate these tasks in with my other activities, and in fact, I already am to some extent. It might take me a little while to get that going strong, but I suspect that once I do, the 5.5 hour practice will naturally extend itself. And on those days when it's harder, I will remind myself that even if I have been doing it for several months, I still have to reach that 10,000 hours.
I did enjoy reading the book. Among the gems within it, was a revisitation of Malcolm Gladwell's 10,000 hours rule. In a nutshell, 10,000 hours of practice is the tipping point of making one an expert at a skill. Diana extended the rule into an exercise program for one's career.
Yesterday, I visited Positivityratio.com, Dr. Barbara Fredrickson's site. Fredrickson found through her studies that "that experiencing positive emotions in a 3-to-1 ratio with negative ones leads people to a tipping point beyond which they naturally become more resilient to adversity and effortlessly achieve what they once could only imagine." Knowing that negativity is one of my worse inner demons, I've decided to track my positive/negative ratio on her site.
Most of my life, I've been told that it takes 21 days to create a new habit. I've have started several "habits" this way, only to have them get squashed by major life upheavals months later. The thing is I don't want new habits, I want an effective lifestyle where I take better care of myself than I do now. I can't do this by being a "habitist". That's how I developed my toolbox of immediate stress relievers. What I need to do is to become an expert - a master - of personally dealing with stress and depression.
So, how can I apply the 10,000 hour rule here? Well, to make it more manageable, I've decided that I would focus on two things - becoming an "expert" at realistic positiveness and becoming an expert at visual processing. The first is for my health; the second is for a career. If I were to assume that I could apply myself to one of these goals 16 hours a day, then it would take me 625 days or about 22 months to gain expertise. Though that is hardly a realistic expectation, especially since I have health concerns that bring the Spoon Theory into play. If I did an hour a day, it would take me a little over 357 months or close to 30 years to achieve the 10,000 hours by rough estimate. After a few more calculations and based on the fact that I tend to have 5 year cycles in my life, I've decided to make a goal of doing at least 2000 hours of effort to my mastery of these two fields, per year. This means about 5.5 hours a day or 38 hours a week. Luckily for me, I can integrate these tasks in with my other activities, and in fact, I already am to some extent. It might take me a little while to get that going strong, but I suspect that once I do, the 5.5 hour practice will naturally extend itself. And on those days when it's harder, I will remind myself that even if I have been doing it for several months, I still have to reach that 10,000 hours.
Monday, March 01, 2010
How we learn to see
Pawan Sinha talks about how our brains learn to see, based on his research with blind children and adults in India. Despite what some scientists had extrapolated from animal studies about sight, human brains can learn how to see even after many years of vision deprivation, even into adulthood.
"The one thing that the visual system needs in order to begin parsing the world is dynamic information."
This makes a world of sense when you consider that visual perception is dependent on eye movement. Vision and movement are linked. To quote Wikipedia: "Humans and other animals do not look at a scene in fixed steadiness; instead, the eyes move around, locating interesting parts of the scene and building up a mental 'map' corresponding to the scene. One reason for the saccadic movement of the human eye is that the central part of the retina—known as the fovea—plays a critical role in resolving objects. By moving the eye so that small parts of a scene can be sensed with greater resolution, body resources can be used more efficiently."
Try this. Focus on the red dot in the image below. After a while, the blue circle will start to fade. This illusion is based on how your eyes move.
[If you're like me, you will find it hard to stay focus on the dot once you notice the circle starting to look different. I actually got a headache fighting the impulse to compensate for the lack of microsaccade movement, through the use of gross eye movement.]
Thursday, November 26, 2009
Art and Thinking
When I read some of the theories about how art began with humanity, I can't help but compare them to how drawing develops in children. There is such a strong connection between drawing development and cognitive development, as well as manual development, in children that it is hard to believe that "art" began as some dream state as some might claim. I'm not saying that it doesn't create an altered mental state, because it does. I'm just saying that art's beginning is entwined with the process of thought and the communication thereof. The existence of pictographs before writing also strongly points to a hand and hand relationship between art and communication. There is research that shows a connection between language and cognitative ability:
Neural correlates of Early Stone Age toolmaking: technology, language and cognition in human evolution.
Does Language Shape What We Think?
So it really shouldn't be that hard of a leap to connect drawing to the cognition process. Recently, I watched an older TED talk which showed this connection in a interesting way. I'll let Gever Tulley explain...
His observation that the act of decoration is part of the creative problem solving process, a method for letting the mind wander freely for a while, presents an possible insight into how our minds work. Tulley takes things a step further, introducing how manual development helps us mentally in this next talk.
I like the idea of his tinkering school. I like it even better that he can back his views up with anthropology and other science.
Neural correlates of Early Stone Age toolmaking: technology, language and cognition in human evolution.
Does Language Shape What We Think?
So it really shouldn't be that hard of a leap to connect drawing to the cognition process. Recently, I watched an older TED talk which showed this connection in a interesting way. I'll let Gever Tulley explain...
His observation that the act of decoration is part of the creative problem solving process, a method for letting the mind wander freely for a while, presents an possible insight into how our minds work. Tulley takes things a step further, introducing how manual development helps us mentally in this next talk.
I like the idea of his tinkering school. I like it even better that he can back his views up with anthropology and other science.
Sunday, November 01, 2009
Private and public artistic exploration
I firmly believe that art is an effective means of personal exploration. Even if we do not gain great insight or find personal significance in doing artwork, our minds gain visual and kinetic experiences that help to fine tune our mental processes. I touch on this concept briefly my last post. The following film clip shows some representational examples of artists who explored their medium.
Warning: there is profanity in this clip. You probably don't have to watch it to understand my next points, so feel free to skip it if you wish.
The way I see it, the artists did gain a lot from the creation of their art. Their personal exploration probably did help them to reach a better understanding of their world. However, I do side with the established painter cohersed into juding that art show. It was the actual process and not the finished work that created that transformation, so the art itself said nothing because the context had passed.
All art is useful, but not all art is communicable. There is a difference between the act of making art and the finished work. Cultural art is something that should speak to observer. If it does not, then the conversation that should happen between masterpiece and observer is missing, and there is no enlightenment nor increased understanding.
Personal art needs only to speak to the artist. Under the right circumstances, a single line on a piece of paper can open the gate to passion, clarity, and wisdom--but it will only speak to that artist. It is the artist's conversation with the universe. Such a piece of work should rightly be treasured by the artist, but not necessarily enshrined for the rest of humanity. That would be telling people that this line has now been done, there is no need for more. Instead, the line should stay with the artist's heart and she should encourage others to find their own lines, to unlock their own passions and wisdom.
Which type of art is more valid? The very question itself is blasphemy in my opinion. Without cultural art, we lose our soul as a society. Without personal art, we can lose our very minds.
I must take a step back from my philosophical gushing and point out that even personal art needs to be shared to fulfill its purpose. In art therapy, this is known as "witnessing". Witnessing is when the artist shows the work to a supportive person, who lets the artist tell them what it means to them personally. There is no critique, no suggestions, just an act of listening to the sound of one person's soul being reveal.
At the same time, there is much to be gained by playing around with the art of others, as long as the original works are left physically untouched. It provides an interaction between the artwork and the audience, making the original piece more meaning ladened and important as the conversation continues. The following talk, though mostly meant to be humorous, is a prime example of entering into conversations with well-known artworks.
Granted, the conversations can become turbulent in some cases, but once you develop a personal relationship with a piece of work, it becomes alive and part of your mental fabric. Your brain now has a larger visual vocabulary to work with.
Here are a few sites online that will let you have your own conversation with art. Enjoy the process!
Shockwave needed.
Warning: there is profanity in this clip. You probably don't have to watch it to understand my next points, so feel free to skip it if you wish.
The way I see it, the artists did gain a lot from the creation of their art. Their personal exploration probably did help them to reach a better understanding of their world. However, I do side with the established painter cohersed into juding that art show. It was the actual process and not the finished work that created that transformation, so the art itself said nothing because the context had passed.
All art is useful, but not all art is communicable. There is a difference between the act of making art and the finished work. Cultural art is something that should speak to observer. If it does not, then the conversation that should happen between masterpiece and observer is missing, and there is no enlightenment nor increased understanding.
Personal art needs only to speak to the artist. Under the right circumstances, a single line on a piece of paper can open the gate to passion, clarity, and wisdom--but it will only speak to that artist. It is the artist's conversation with the universe. Such a piece of work should rightly be treasured by the artist, but not necessarily enshrined for the rest of humanity. That would be telling people that this line has now been done, there is no need for more. Instead, the line should stay with the artist's heart and she should encourage others to find their own lines, to unlock their own passions and wisdom.
Which type of art is more valid? The very question itself is blasphemy in my opinion. Without cultural art, we lose our soul as a society. Without personal art, we can lose our very minds.
I must take a step back from my philosophical gushing and point out that even personal art needs to be shared to fulfill its purpose. In art therapy, this is known as "witnessing". Witnessing is when the artist shows the work to a supportive person, who lets the artist tell them what it means to them personally. There is no critique, no suggestions, just an act of listening to the sound of one person's soul being reveal.
At the same time, there is much to be gained by playing around with the art of others, as long as the original works are left physically untouched. It provides an interaction between the artwork and the audience, making the original piece more meaning ladened and important as the conversation continues. The following talk, though mostly meant to be humorous, is a prime example of entering into conversations with well-known artworks.
Granted, the conversations can become turbulent in some cases, but once you develop a personal relationship with a piece of work, it becomes alive and part of your mental fabric. Your brain now has a larger visual vocabulary to work with.
Here are a few sites online that will let you have your own conversation with art. Enjoy the process!
Sunday, October 11, 2009
Brain Abnormalities and Environment: from the Curious to the Dangerous
A continuation of how some brains can perceive things like Capgras syndrome (impaired facial recognition), phantom limbs with learned paralysis, and synesthesia.
I want to point out that Dr. Ramachandran stresses that these perceptual abnormalities do not impaired the rest of their brain functioning. In other words, a perceptual abnormality does not mean there are problems with their ability to analyze and think logically. Truth is, most of us have some form of neurological screwiness in our brains. And most of the time, we can make it work for us, allowing us to specialize in tasks, while other people specialize in other tasks.
So for most people, these differences can actually improve society and humanity in general, if they are not squashed and demonized. I will not deny that there are mental abnormalities that are dangerous. However, from the research I have read, it takes more than the abnormality by itself to cause the danger part. It it is a combination of genetics, brain damage, environment, and development to trigger these behaviors that we have every right to fear, as shown in the following video:
It is interesting that Dr. Fallon's father and three uncles were all conscientious objectors in WWII, after so many generations of killers in the family tree. Before this talk, I had always seen conscientious objections as a personal moral and/or religious choice. However, knowing the family history of Dr. Fallon's dad, I believe that in their case especially, it was a matter of not only personal safety, but public too.
I also think this video explains the mindset of violence in areas like Ireland, the Middle East, Africa, and any other place where deep historical hatred seems to have a life of its own. The question is: can these concentrations of violence be diluted? I believe they can, based on how most of humanity has been becoming less violent over the centuries. Steven Pinker gives an excellent summary of this decline in the following video. Be prepared to have several common beliefs challenged.
The last seven or eight minutes gives possible reasons why violence can decline. It's perhaps ironic that Dr. Pinker shows in this talk how environment can change behavior, while in his TED talk about his book, The Blank Slate, he appears to make the argument that genetic aspect is a stronger force. I believe the point really is, that when environmental factors are not strongly stressful, genetics will usually have the upper hand. Sort of like how some people make fruits look like art by placing them into forms to shape them as they grow to maturity. People can be shaped by child abuse and other extreme stressors, in ways that either suppresses or triggers genetic tendencies. Without these extreme forces, a person will develop into their own behaviors and talents, regardless of parental behavior, as explained by the elderly pediatrician who counselled me as a new mother with these words: "The most important thing a parent can do is love their child. Any mistakes they may make will work out fine as long as the child knows they are loved."
I want to point out that Dr. Ramachandran stresses that these perceptual abnormalities do not impaired the rest of their brain functioning. In other words, a perceptual abnormality does not mean there are problems with their ability to analyze and think logically. Truth is, most of us have some form of neurological screwiness in our brains. And most of the time, we can make it work for us, allowing us to specialize in tasks, while other people specialize in other tasks.
So for most people, these differences can actually improve society and humanity in general, if they are not squashed and demonized. I will not deny that there are mental abnormalities that are dangerous. However, from the research I have read, it takes more than the abnormality by itself to cause the danger part. It it is a combination of genetics, brain damage, environment, and development to trigger these behaviors that we have every right to fear, as shown in the following video:
It is interesting that Dr. Fallon's father and three uncles were all conscientious objectors in WWII, after so many generations of killers in the family tree. Before this talk, I had always seen conscientious objections as a personal moral and/or religious choice. However, knowing the family history of Dr. Fallon's dad, I believe that in their case especially, it was a matter of not only personal safety, but public too.
I also think this video explains the mindset of violence in areas like Ireland, the Middle East, Africa, and any other place where deep historical hatred seems to have a life of its own. The question is: can these concentrations of violence be diluted? I believe they can, based on how most of humanity has been becoming less violent over the centuries. Steven Pinker gives an excellent summary of this decline in the following video. Be prepared to have several common beliefs challenged.
The last seven or eight minutes gives possible reasons why violence can decline. It's perhaps ironic that Dr. Pinker shows in this talk how environment can change behavior, while in his TED talk about his book, The Blank Slate, he appears to make the argument that genetic aspect is a stronger force. I believe the point really is, that when environmental factors are not strongly stressful, genetics will usually have the upper hand. Sort of like how some people make fruits look like art by placing them into forms to shape them as they grow to maturity. People can be shaped by child abuse and other extreme stressors, in ways that either suppresses or triggers genetic tendencies. Without these extreme forces, a person will develop into their own behaviors and talents, regardless of parental behavior, as explained by the elderly pediatrician who counselled me as a new mother with these words: "The most important thing a parent can do is love their child. Any mistakes they may make will work out fine as long as the child knows they are loved."
Monday, February 23, 2009
Becoming a Person
Becoming a Person
A summary by A. Doerr over Chapters 5, 6 & 7
[Yes, I am a few weeks late with this. I have been reading the material, but not writing on it. I will hopefully correct this oversight during the next few weeks.]
What does it mean to become a person? Aren't we already a person because of our humanity? While this makes sense logically, intuitively, most of us know that this isn't true. For what every reason, many of us have experienced blocks to feeling that we are actually people and deserve to be considered as such. The idea of taking "quiet pleasure in being" ourselves is a foreign and almost blasphemous concept, one often confused with pride and boastfulness. Yet, there is a difference between the loudness of boasting and the quietness of acceptance--to accept that we have just as much right to exist as anything else in this universe.
According to Carl Rogers, the inner most core of a person is basically socialized, forward moving, rational and realistic. But to get there, people must accept that they are human organisms, with the realistic ability to control themselves and socialize. To quote Rogers, "There is no beast in man. There is only man in man." And when humans are less than fully human--when they deny various aspects of their experience--then there is reason to fear their behavior. Such people cannot make adequate judgments because they have contorted their own data.
So, what are the traits of a fully emerged person, according to Carl Rogers? First, an openness to experience. This doesn't necessarily means to seek out new experiences, as it does to actually be open to what we are currently experiencing and seeing it without preconceived notions. To take the situation as it is, without distorting it. Second, trust in one's self. To believe that we are capable to make correct choices and behave in a satisfying manner in a situation. Third, to evaluate ourselves using an internal standard than to constantly compare ourselves to others. This includes accepting responsibility for our actions. Finally, to be willing to accept that we are always a work in progress and never a finished product. We constantly flow with life and its events. We don't jump from plateau to plateau.
To be able to achieve these traits, we have to move from being remote to our feelings to being able to accept them, even in ambiguity, as we feel them. We accept new experiences within their own existence, without imposing the structure of the past onto them. We reconsider our mental constructs. We are not threatened by other possibilities.
I personally believe that by lessening our frustrations created by incompatible self-perceptions, we lessen the stress that needs to be released and are more able to release it in a controlled manner that have it corrosively seep out our seams or blows up in our faces.
Friday, June 03, 2005
Abstract - Family Integrity in Later Life
My professor thought this one was great.
Author: King, D. A.& Wynne, L. C. (2004). The Emergence of “Family Integrity” in Later Life. Family Process; Mar2004, Vol. 43 Issue 1, p7.
Purpose: To introduce the concept of ‘‘family integrity’’ as a normal developmental challenge that is fundamental to the well being of elders and influenced heavily by family systems factors.
Subjects: Seven case studies of elderly adults of differing genders and ethnicity. No numbers given for other cited research.
Procedure: Comparison of case studies and other theories.
Results: Most theoretical accounts of adult development fail to address adequately the rich interplay between individual and family processes in later-life. An elder’s ability to achieve family integrity depends on three vital functions or competencies of the family system: (a) the transformation of relationships across time in a manner that is dynamic and responsive to the changing life cycle needs of family members; (b) the resolution or acceptance of past losses, disappointments, or conflicts with the dead as well as with the living; and (c) the creation of meaning by sharing stories, themes, and family rituals within and across generations. Characterized by increased wisdom and an ability to experience impartial concern for a wider social sphere that includes, but is not limited to, one’s extended family. Mutuality is attained only when prior basic relational functions. Attachment or caregiving, communication, and shared problem solving. Reflecting a type of intergenerational mutuality, filial maturity is attained when adult offspring grow in the caring support given to aging parents, and aging parents, in reciprocal fashion, become more able and willing to accept input and help from their children. The second major building block of family integrity is the ability of the elder and family to confront and ‘‘work through’’ losses or relational conflicts. The third component of family integrity involves the coherent integration of personal life stories and familial themes so that elders maintain a meaningful sense of their own place in a connected and continuous multigenerational family. This is accomplished through family story telling; the passing on of shared interests, life themes, and values; and involvement in shared family activities and rituals. Some ethnocultural groups may be more challenged than others to maintain meaningful connections within and across generations. As a clinically derived construct, the conceptualization of family integrity presented here is shaped by the authors’ culturally bound personal and professional experiences, including racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, age, and cohort biases.
Conclusions: It remains to be seen whether family integrity as described here involves primarily those who are related biologically and/or legally, or whether it includes ‘‘fictive kin’’ who are related emotionally. Further work is needed to develop a standardized measure of the construct and to test its validity across cultural and socioeconomic groups.
Remarks: I have to wonder why the authors of this article sought to publish their ideas before actually doing the research. It appears that all they did was find case studies that supported their theory and then plead for everyone else to do the real research. Though it sounds like they might have something, it calls into question their work ethic and ability to analyze research.
Author: King, D. A.& Wynne, L. C. (2004). The Emergence of “Family Integrity” in Later Life. Family Process; Mar2004, Vol. 43 Issue 1, p7.
Purpose: To introduce the concept of ‘‘family integrity’’ as a normal developmental challenge that is fundamental to the well being of elders and influenced heavily by family systems factors.
Subjects: Seven case studies of elderly adults of differing genders and ethnicity. No numbers given for other cited research.
Procedure: Comparison of case studies and other theories.
Results: Most theoretical accounts of adult development fail to address adequately the rich interplay between individual and family processes in later-life. An elder’s ability to achieve family integrity depends on three vital functions or competencies of the family system: (a) the transformation of relationships across time in a manner that is dynamic and responsive to the changing life cycle needs of family members; (b) the resolution or acceptance of past losses, disappointments, or conflicts with the dead as well as with the living; and (c) the creation of meaning by sharing stories, themes, and family rituals within and across generations. Characterized by increased wisdom and an ability to experience impartial concern for a wider social sphere that includes, but is not limited to, one’s extended family. Mutuality is attained only when prior basic relational functions. Attachment or caregiving, communication, and shared problem solving. Reflecting a type of intergenerational mutuality, filial maturity is attained when adult offspring grow in the caring support given to aging parents, and aging parents, in reciprocal fashion, become more able and willing to accept input and help from their children. The second major building block of family integrity is the ability of the elder and family to confront and ‘‘work through’’ losses or relational conflicts. The third component of family integrity involves the coherent integration of personal life stories and familial themes so that elders maintain a meaningful sense of their own place in a connected and continuous multigenerational family. This is accomplished through family story telling; the passing on of shared interests, life themes, and values; and involvement in shared family activities and rituals. Some ethnocultural groups may be more challenged than others to maintain meaningful connections within and across generations. As a clinically derived construct, the conceptualization of family integrity presented here is shaped by the authors’ culturally bound personal and professional experiences, including racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, age, and cohort biases.
Conclusions: It remains to be seen whether family integrity as described here involves primarily those who are related biologically and/or legally, or whether it includes ‘‘fictive kin’’ who are related emotionally. Further work is needed to develop a standardized measure of the construct and to test its validity across cultural and socioeconomic groups.
Remarks: I have to wonder why the authors of this article sought to publish their ideas before actually doing the research. It appears that all they did was find case studies that supported their theory and then plead for everyone else to do the real research. Though it sounds like they might have something, it calls into question their work ethic and ability to analyze research.
Tuesday, February 08, 2005
Kohlberg and Gilligan
Even though I find the results of their theories interesting, after reading some of their base assumptions, I think both of them were/are guided by some prejudices I can't agree with. Both of them seemed to want to see themselves as very moral people.
That's not to say that they don't have some truths in their levels - I just think that they may have blinded themselves to certain things for their own sense of security.
That's not to say that they don't have some truths in their levels - I just think that they may have blinded themselves to certain things for their own sense of security.
Carol Gilligan's Levels of Moral Development in Women
Gilligan felt that Kolhberg's levels were flawed. "This was based on two things. First, he only studied privileged, white men and boys. She felt that this caused a biased opinion against women. Secondly, in his stage theory of moral development, the male view of individual rights and rules was considered a higher stage than women's point of view of development in terms of its caring effect on human relationships." (from http://www.webster.edu/~woolflm/gilligan.html)
The main difference between herself and Kolhberg:
(from http://www.scu.edu/ethics/publications/iie/v3n1/men.html)
Ironically, her own work receives critism to what she said of Kolhberg's research - "the most criticized element to her theory is that it follows the stereotype of women as nurturing, men as logical. The participants of Gilligan’s research are limited to mostly white, middle class children and adults..." (from http://www.psychology.sbc.edu/Gilligan.htm
Her levels for women:
The main difference between herself and Kolhberg:
Gilligan argues that for most women, progress toward moral maturity is marked by changes in the focus of caring, not by the development of the abstract, impersonal principles that Kohlberg proposes. . .
Gilligan admits, however, that both perspectives are valid, in fact complementary. She argues that "a shift in the focus of attention from concerns about justice to concerns about care changes the definition of what constitutes a moral problem, and leads the same situation to be seen in different ways.
(from http://www.scu.edu/ethics/publications/iie/v3n1/men.html)
Ironically, her own work receives critism to what she said of Kolhberg's research - "the most criticized element to her theory is that it follows the stereotype of women as nurturing, men as logical. The participants of Gilligan’s research are limited to mostly white, middle class children and adults..." (from http://www.psychology.sbc.edu/Gilligan.htm
Her levels for women:
Level 1 - Orientation of individual survival. The only obligation is to one's own survival.
Transition 1 - Going from selfishness to responsibility. Realizes one is part of a group and makes decisions based on how these actions affect others.
Level 2 - Goodness as self-sacrifice. Morality is defined by meeting the expectations of others and being submissive to the norms of society. Guilt is a powerful tool here.
Transition 2 - From goodness to truth. Truth and honesty are more important than the reactions of others. She starts considering her own needs again.
Level 3 - Morality of nonviolence. The emphasis is on not hurting people, including oneself.
Kolhberg's Levels of Morality
Level 1 - Preconventional morality: Brought into place by external controls. People obey the rules to get rewards or escape punishment or act out of self-interest. This level is typical of children ages 4 to 10. This level has the following stages of reasoning:
Stage 1 - Orientation toward punishment and obedience - "What will happen to me?"
Stage 2 - Instrumental purpose and exchange - "You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours."
Level 2 - Conventional morality: People have internalized the standards of authority figures. They are concerned with being good, pleasing others and keeping the social order. Many do not grow out of this even in adulthood. This level has the following stages of reasoning:
Stage 3 - The Golden Rule - or maintaining mutual relationships
Stage 4 - Social concern and conscience - "What if everybody did it?"
Level 3 - Postconventional morality: People now recognize conflicts between moral standards and make their own judgments on the basis of principles of right fairness and justice. If reached at all, it will usually come in early adulthood. This level has the following stages of reasoning:
Stage 5 - Morality of contract, of individual rights and of democratically accepted law - valuing the will of the majority and the welfare of society.
Stage 6 - Morality of universal ethical principles - they act in accordance with internal standards, knowing that they would condemn themselves if they did not.
Kolhberg later added a seventh stage of “Why be moral?" where the person questions the existance of morals in the first place. The person starts to see morality from a meta-perspective.
Stage 1 - Orientation toward punishment and obedience - "What will happen to me?"
Stage 2 - Instrumental purpose and exchange - "You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours."
Level 2 - Conventional morality: People have internalized the standards of authority figures. They are concerned with being good, pleasing others and keeping the social order. Many do not grow out of this even in adulthood. This level has the following stages of reasoning:
Stage 3 - The Golden Rule - or maintaining mutual relationships
Stage 4 - Social concern and conscience - "What if everybody did it?"
Level 3 - Postconventional morality: People now recognize conflicts between moral standards and make their own judgments on the basis of principles of right fairness and justice. If reached at all, it will usually come in early adulthood. This level has the following stages of reasoning:
Stage 5 - Morality of contract, of individual rights and of democratically accepted law - valuing the will of the majority and the welfare of society.
Stage 6 - Morality of universal ethical principles - they act in accordance with internal standards, knowing that they would condemn themselves if they did not.
Kolhberg later added a seventh stage of “Why be moral?" where the person questions the existance of morals in the first place. The person starts to see morality from a meta-perspective.
Sunday, January 16, 2005
Erikson's 8 stages of Psychosocial Development
Basically I'm tired of picking them out of my text book and want to have them where I can look them over at a glance. I will probably go ahead and do this for a few other developmental theories too.
Stage 1: Infancy -- Age 0 to 1
Crisis: Trust vs. Mistrust
Description: In the first year of life, infants depend on others for food, warmth, and affection, and therefore must be able to blindly trust the parents (or caregivers) for providing those.
Positive outcome: If their needs are met consistently and responsively by the parents, infants not only will develop a secure attachment with the parents, but will learn to trust their environment in general as well.
Negative outcome: If not, infant will develop mistrust towards people and things in their environment, even towards themselves.
Stage 2: Toddler -- Age 1 to 2
Crisis: Autonomy (Independence) vs. Doubt (or Shame)
Description: Toddlers learn to walk, talk, use toilets, and do things for themselves. Their self-control and self-confidence begin to develop at this stage.
Positive outcome: If parents encourage their child's use of initiative and reassure her when she makes mistakes, the child will develop the confidence needed to cope with future situations that require choice, control, and independence.
Negative outcome: If parents are overprotective, or disapproving of the child's acts of independence, she may begin to feel ashamed of her behavior, or have too much doubt of her abilities.
Stage 3: Early Childhood -- Age 2 to 6
Crisis: Initiative vs. Guilt
Description: Children have newfound power at this stage as they have developed motor skills and become more and more engaged in social interaction with people around them. They now must learn to achieve a balance between eagerness for more adventure and more responsibility, and learning to control impulses and childish fantasies.
Positive outcome: If parents are encouraging, but consistent in discipline, children will learn to accept without guilt, that certain things are not allowed, but at the same time will not feel shame when using their imagination and engaging in make-believe role plays.
Negative outcome: If not, children may develop a sense of guilt and may come to believe that it is wrong to be independent.
Stage 4: Elementary and Middle School Years -- Age 6 to 12
Crisis: Competence (aka. "Industry") vs. Inferiority
Description: School is the important event at this stage. Children learn to make things, use tools, and acquire the skills to be a worker and a potential provider. And they do all these while making the transition from the world of home into the world of peers.
Positive outcome: If children can discover pleasure in intellectual stimulation, being productive, seeking success, they will develop a sense of competence.
Negative outcome: If not, they will develop a sense of inferiority.
Stage 5: Adolescence -- Age 12 to 18
Crisis: Identity vs. Role Confusion
Description: This is the time when we ask the question "Who am I?" To successfully answer this question, Erikson suggests, the adolescent must integrate the healthy resolution of all earlier conflicts. Did we develop the basic sense of trust? Do we have a strong sense of independence, competence, and feel in control of our lives? Adolescents who have successfully dealt with earlier conflicts are ready for the "Identity Crisis", which is considered by Erikson as the single most significant conflict a person must face.
Positive outcome: If the adolescent solves this conflict successfully, he will come out of this stage with a strong identity, and ready to plan for the future.
Negative outcome: If not, the adolescent will sink into confusion, unable to make decisions and choices, especially about vocation, sexual orientation, and his role in life in general.
Stage 6: Young Adulthood -- Age 19 to 40
Crisis: Intimacy vs. Isolation
Description: In this stage, the most important events are love relationships. No matter how successful you are with your work, said Erikson, you are not developmentally complete until you are capable of intimacy. An individual who has not developed a sense of identity usually will fear a committed relationship and may retreat into isolation.
Positive outcome: Adult individuals can form close relationships and share with others if they have achieved a sense of identity.
Negative outcome: If not, they will fear commitment, feel isolated and unable to depend on anybody in the world.
Stage 7: Middle Adulthood -- Age 40 to 65
Crisis: Generativity vs. Stagnation
Description: By "generativity" Erikson refers to the adult's ability to look outside oneself and care for others, through parenting, for instance. Erikson suggested that adults need children as much as children need adults, and that this stage reflects the need to create a living legacy.
Positive outcome: People can solve this crisis by having and nurturing children, or helping the next generation in other ways.
Negative outcome: If this crisis is not successfully resolved, the person will remain self-centered and experience stagnation later in life.
Stage 8: Late Adulthood -- Age 65 to death
Crisis: Integrity vs. Despair Important
Description: Old age is a time for reflecting upon one's own life and its role in the big scheme of things, and seeing it filled with pleasure and satisfaction or disappointments and failures.
Positive outcome: If the adult has achieved a sense of fulfillment about life and a sense of unity within himself and with others, he will accept death with a sense of integrity. Just as the healthy child will not fear life, said Erikson, the healthy adult will not fear death.
Negative outcome: If not, the individual will despair and fear death.
Copied from About.Com.
Stage 1: Infancy -- Age 0 to 1
Crisis: Trust vs. Mistrust
Description: In the first year of life, infants depend on others for food, warmth, and affection, and therefore must be able to blindly trust the parents (or caregivers) for providing those.
Positive outcome: If their needs are met consistently and responsively by the parents, infants not only will develop a secure attachment with the parents, but will learn to trust their environment in general as well.
Negative outcome: If not, infant will develop mistrust towards people and things in their environment, even towards themselves.
Stage 2: Toddler -- Age 1 to 2
Crisis: Autonomy (Independence) vs. Doubt (or Shame)
Description: Toddlers learn to walk, talk, use toilets, and do things for themselves. Their self-control and self-confidence begin to develop at this stage.
Positive outcome: If parents encourage their child's use of initiative and reassure her when she makes mistakes, the child will develop the confidence needed to cope with future situations that require choice, control, and independence.
Negative outcome: If parents are overprotective, or disapproving of the child's acts of independence, she may begin to feel ashamed of her behavior, or have too much doubt of her abilities.
Stage 3: Early Childhood -- Age 2 to 6
Crisis: Initiative vs. Guilt
Description: Children have newfound power at this stage as they have developed motor skills and become more and more engaged in social interaction with people around them. They now must learn to achieve a balance between eagerness for more adventure and more responsibility, and learning to control impulses and childish fantasies.
Positive outcome: If parents are encouraging, but consistent in discipline, children will learn to accept without guilt, that certain things are not allowed, but at the same time will not feel shame when using their imagination and engaging in make-believe role plays.
Negative outcome: If not, children may develop a sense of guilt and may come to believe that it is wrong to be independent.
Stage 4: Elementary and Middle School Years -- Age 6 to 12
Crisis: Competence (aka. "Industry") vs. Inferiority
Description: School is the important event at this stage. Children learn to make things, use tools, and acquire the skills to be a worker and a potential provider. And they do all these while making the transition from the world of home into the world of peers.
Positive outcome: If children can discover pleasure in intellectual stimulation, being productive, seeking success, they will develop a sense of competence.
Negative outcome: If not, they will develop a sense of inferiority.
Stage 5: Adolescence -- Age 12 to 18
Crisis: Identity vs. Role Confusion
Description: This is the time when we ask the question "Who am I?" To successfully answer this question, Erikson suggests, the adolescent must integrate the healthy resolution of all earlier conflicts. Did we develop the basic sense of trust? Do we have a strong sense of independence, competence, and feel in control of our lives? Adolescents who have successfully dealt with earlier conflicts are ready for the "Identity Crisis", which is considered by Erikson as the single most significant conflict a person must face.
Positive outcome: If the adolescent solves this conflict successfully, he will come out of this stage with a strong identity, and ready to plan for the future.
Negative outcome: If not, the adolescent will sink into confusion, unable to make decisions and choices, especially about vocation, sexual orientation, and his role in life in general.
Stage 6: Young Adulthood -- Age 19 to 40
Crisis: Intimacy vs. Isolation
Description: In this stage, the most important events are love relationships. No matter how successful you are with your work, said Erikson, you are not developmentally complete until you are capable of intimacy. An individual who has not developed a sense of identity usually will fear a committed relationship and may retreat into isolation.
Positive outcome: Adult individuals can form close relationships and share with others if they have achieved a sense of identity.
Negative outcome: If not, they will fear commitment, feel isolated and unable to depend on anybody in the world.
Stage 7: Middle Adulthood -- Age 40 to 65
Crisis: Generativity vs. Stagnation
Description: By "generativity" Erikson refers to the adult's ability to look outside oneself and care for others, through parenting, for instance. Erikson suggested that adults need children as much as children need adults, and that this stage reflects the need to create a living legacy.
Positive outcome: People can solve this crisis by having and nurturing children, or helping the next generation in other ways.
Negative outcome: If this crisis is not successfully resolved, the person will remain self-centered and experience stagnation later in life.
Stage 8: Late Adulthood -- Age 65 to death
Crisis: Integrity vs. Despair Important
Description: Old age is a time for reflecting upon one's own life and its role in the big scheme of things, and seeing it filled with pleasure and satisfaction or disappointments and failures.
Positive outcome: If the adult has achieved a sense of fulfillment about life and a sense of unity within himself and with others, he will accept death with a sense of integrity. Just as the healthy child will not fear life, said Erikson, the healthy adult will not fear death.
Negative outcome: If not, the individual will despair and fear death.
Copied from About.Com.
Thursday, October 28, 2004
Last assignment for Adulthood and Aging Class
5. What are some of the issues regarding work and retirement in late life, and how do older adults handle time and money?
They have to decide what to do with their later years. Do they want to keep working? Can they still work? Can they afford to retire? Should they start another career? Work for short periods of time and live a retirement lifestyle between several jobs? Enter full-time retirement spent in leisurely pursuits, with family or actively engaged in charity or other social calling? And some adults semi-retire by working the same job, but with less hours and divvy their time up in a more balanced manner between work, family and society.
Most will have fixed incomes, which will require financial planning on their part. If an elderly person's income dips into poverty, it is almost impossible to rise it again. This is probably why some people choose to "age in place" - stay where they are because their homes are paid for and they can predict their expenses easier. Others may not have this option due to health or finances. Some will move to be closer to family, especially if they choose a family focused life-style. Some may have to move to some sort of facility because of their health or their neighborhood has changed so much that they need to have more people their age around for social support.
[I think my next class is Families in Crisis.]
They have to decide what to do with their later years. Do they want to keep working? Can they still work? Can they afford to retire? Should they start another career? Work for short periods of time and live a retirement lifestyle between several jobs? Enter full-time retirement spent in leisurely pursuits, with family or actively engaged in charity or other social calling? And some adults semi-retire by working the same job, but with less hours and divvy their time up in a more balanced manner between work, family and society.
Most will have fixed incomes, which will require financial planning on their part. If an elderly person's income dips into poverty, it is almost impossible to rise it again. This is probably why some people choose to "age in place" - stay where they are because their homes are paid for and they can predict their expenses easier. Others may not have this option due to health or finances. Some will move to be closer to family, especially if they choose a family focused life-style. Some may have to move to some sort of facility because of their health or their neighborhood has changed so much that they need to have more people their age around for social support.
[I think my next class is Families in Crisis.]
Sunday, October 24, 2004
Thoughts on last week's aging class
According to my prof, who also works in a hospice, and Naomi File, the author of Validation Therapy, many older people dealing with dementia get stuck on unresolved traumatic events from their lives. Not all of them, but a large percentage do. After hearing my prof's personal experiences and some of Naomi File's stories, I had the following epiphany:
It's better to resolve your inner conflicts before you get old, so you can enjoy a peaceful dementia - instead of scaring your family and care givers with your buried demons.
After all, what would you rather have - being strapped down to a bed and sedated OR being able to sit in a rocking chair and talk to the butterflies all day?
It's better to resolve your inner conflicts before you get old, so you can enjoy a peaceful dementia - instead of scaring your family and care givers with your buried demons.
After all, what would you rather have - being strapped down to a bed and sedated OR being able to sit in a rocking chair and talk to the butterflies all day?
Adult Lifespan Journal Entry #5
I am not going to post it on here.
Basically, it's a self evaluation of strengths and short comings in certain areas and then making short term and long term goals in the same areas.
In summary, my professional and academic goals are intently being worked on. My personal and social goals are being neglected. And my spiritual goals are going as well as can be expected at the moment.
See. That's all you need to know. No point in boring you with details.
I might go ahead and repost some of my course work from earlier classes on here. Come to think of it, I do have something on why women stay with abusive men. I'll post it tomorrow.
Basically, it's a self evaluation of strengths and short comings in certain areas and then making short term and long term goals in the same areas.
In summary, my professional and academic goals are intently being worked on. My personal and social goals are being neglected. And my spiritual goals are going as well as can be expected at the moment.
See. That's all you need to know. No point in boring you with details.
I might go ahead and repost some of my course work from earlier classes on here. Come to think of it, I do have something on why women stay with abusive men. I'll post it tomorrow.
Adulthood age ranges
Thought I should post this to make things clearer:
Now I am going to sleep. The last entry I have to do in the Lifespan Journal is in a different format and I'll need to shift gears.
Young Adulthood 20 - 40
Middle Adulthood 40 - 60
Late Adulthood 60+
Now I am going to sleep. The last entry I have to do in the Lifespan Journal is in a different format and I'll need to shift gears.
Adult Lifespan Journal Entry #4
Late Adulthood
By this time, all my self-analysis and learning should produce a wise and good person. One who could look back in her life and see more integrity than despair in the final conflict as proposed by Erikson. I will have contact with many intelligent and creative people who can benefit from my experience, while I benefit from seeing them fulfill their potential. My children will have managed to overcome their own "Intimacy vs. Isolation" crisis and be in loving relationships, raising healthy children.
I will not carry grudges nor would I let petty things interfere with my relationships with people. There would be no room for that in my life by then. I will live somewhere where I will have silence and solitude when I need it and yet have the room to entertain company, even if I have to bake cookies to lure them in. I will try to listen to the life stories of those around me and save my own for my personal writings or command performances.
Most of all, I will dedicate my life to creating beauty - beautiful art, beautiful poetry and a beautiful atmosphere around me. I will also cultivate emotional and mental power in my creative works. When my final minutes come to me, I want to be in the middle of a creative endeavor.
Adult Lifespan Journal Entry #3
Social and Psychological Development
Young Adulthood
Based on the theoretical approaches to social development in young adulthood discussed in my text book, I would have to say that I have pretty much failed in the social growth aspect of life. I am hoping that within the next few years I will be able to resolve Erikson's "Intimacy vs. Isolation" crisis. I am not even going to discuss Levinson and Valliant's theories, because I don't even come close to either of them in my opinion.
I did get married in my mid twenties. I wanted someone who I could make a life with. I also wanted a protector and a father for my future children. To say I was feeling lost and alone would have also been true. I was glad to find someone of my own faith, at least superficially, and near my own age who also shown an interest in me. Unfortunately, I ended up marrying a cross between my mother and father, which would have been okay if it had been a mixture of their good qualities. He basically told me what I wanted to hear before we got married and then after a year or two, he emotionally withdrew when I needed his support. This continued until he was actively trying to destroy me emotionally and mentally. I went into therapy, got us into marriage counseling and tried everything I was physically capable of to save our marriage. The only problem is that he didn't want it saved and I had neglected my own health to the point that I couldn't do much. When he began to include the kids in his program of health neglect, I left. He then filed for divorce before I could and jerked everyone around for two years until the courts settled everything.
I got pregnant right away in our marriage and had our second child fourteen months later. My children are one of the greatest joys of my life. They constantly amaze me with their insight and humor. A lot of the difficulties I expected to have with them based on the other families I had observed did not happen. Instead I have to help them to learn how to deal with insane people while retaining their sense of self and sanity. Teaching them about science, literature and other things happens naturally in our family and I often forget the impact of that until my children surprise someone else with their knowledge.
As a parent, I am definitely an authoritative parent. I like my children to develop their own strengths and talents and I try to help them by giving them space to learn within proper boundaries. I let them discuss things with me and occasionally I will make compromises with them, if they have a better idea how to handle something. It doesn't bother me in the least that my son hates sports and my daughter loves them. Though it does bother me that their authoritarian stepmother is telling them that this means that they are going to be homosexual and will want gender changing surgeries when they get older. Luckily, I have plenty of examples to show them that this isn't true, but I may have to take this up with the stepmother if it continues.
My circle of friends is rather limited to those who can either understand my unusual views or don't care about them. Most of my friends are intelligent, creative, trustworthy and solid. Some may not have all four characteristics, but they all have at least two of them. I usually choose my friends on the basis of how they expand my knowledge of the world. Even if I don't agree with them, I do find their insights useful.
Hopefully I will catch up on social development during middle adulthood. Despite my lagging on the "Intimacy vs. Isolation" conflict, I do feel I have made headway on Erikson's "Generativity vs. Stagnation" crisis. I am already expressing generativity in a communal way by nurturing my children and a few others. However, I have made goals which will ensure I will take on more and more of an agentic form as I grow older.
I already see an improvement with my relationship with my parents and in time this should reoccur with my siblings. There had been some improvement there, but then things got sidetracked. I now understand what I need from social interactions and learning ways to achieve my needs. I hope I will eventually find a companion who I can share my life and goals with.
Young Adulthood
I did get married in my mid twenties. I wanted someone who I could make a life with. I also wanted a protector and a father for my future children. To say I was feeling lost and alone would have also been true. I was glad to find someone of my own faith, at least superficially, and near my own age who also shown an interest in me. Unfortunately, I ended up marrying a cross between my mother and father, which would have been okay if it had been a mixture of their good qualities. He basically told me what I wanted to hear before we got married and then after a year or two, he emotionally withdrew when I needed his support. This continued until he was actively trying to destroy me emotionally and mentally. I went into therapy, got us into marriage counseling and tried everything I was physically capable of to save our marriage. The only problem is that he didn't want it saved and I had neglected my own health to the point that I couldn't do much. When he began to include the kids in his program of health neglect, I left. He then filed for divorce before I could and jerked everyone around for two years until the courts settled everything.
I got pregnant right away in our marriage and had our second child fourteen months later. My children are one of the greatest joys of my life. They constantly amaze me with their insight and humor. A lot of the difficulties I expected to have with them based on the other families I had observed did not happen. Instead I have to help them to learn how to deal with insane people while retaining their sense of self and sanity. Teaching them about science, literature and other things happens naturally in our family and I often forget the impact of that until my children surprise someone else with their knowledge.
As a parent, I am definitely an authoritative parent. I like my children to develop their own strengths and talents and I try to help them by giving them space to learn within proper boundaries. I let them discuss things with me and occasionally I will make compromises with them, if they have a better idea how to handle something. It doesn't bother me in the least that my son hates sports and my daughter loves them. Though it does bother me that their authoritarian stepmother is telling them that this means that they are going to be homosexual and will want gender changing surgeries when they get older. Luckily, I have plenty of examples to show them that this isn't true, but I may have to take this up with the stepmother if it continues.
My circle of friends is rather limited to those who can either understand my unusual views or don't care about them. Most of my friends are intelligent, creative, trustworthy and solid. Some may not have all four characteristics, but they all have at least two of them. I usually choose my friends on the basis of how they expand my knowledge of the world. Even if I don't agree with them, I do find their insights useful.
Middle Adulthood
I already see an improvement with my relationship with my parents and in time this should reoccur with my siblings. There had been some improvement there, but then things got sidetracked. I now understand what I need from social interactions and learning ways to achieve my needs. I hope I will eventually find a companion who I can share my life and goals with.
Saturday, October 23, 2004
Adult Lifespan Journal Entry #2
Cognitive Development
I research for fun and relaxation. While experiencing clinical depression in my later twenties, I found solace in researching topics like industrial waste treatments, naturally occurring soap in plants, and alternate house building methods, in addition to being introduced to the field of psychoanalysis. Even during the worst part of my depression, I could recall New Testament parables with just a few details given.
Being good in math most of my life, I would plan gardens, waste treatment systems and self-sufficient homesteads down to all the technicalities I could think of. I even wrote down a five year plan to start a natural soap business and even learn how to make my own soaps. Pulling from my knowledge of chemistry, I created a "primer" for people ignorant in the history of alchemy. I taught myself how to make stained glass art and several needlework techniques.
I also developed my creative writing ability by writing poems, short stories and even a couple of novels. Some of the poetry and short stories have be published in other publications, but outside of a poetry book I self-published, I haven't received a dime for my creative works and do them mainly for my own peace of mind. Though I have received some money for my crafts and sewing ability.
I have always been considered above average intelligence. I don't think that it is possible to get a clear picture of my intelligence from the normal tests. I say this because I found after I was able to get my anxiety disorder under control, I found that my mental ability increased noticeably. On average, I had a jump about 30 IQ points according to the tests I did for about six month period. However, my mental abilities vary greatly with my stress levels and physical state.
Five years ago I would have told you the Sternberg's aspect of intelligence I was strongest in was componential intelligence. However, as I have explored and developed more, it has turns out that this is not the case. My strongest Sternberg aspect is actually experiential. I have had this pointed out and confirmed by at least two professionals in the mental health field. Though in my case, it has been compounded according to these same professionals to the fact I use my preconscious mind differently than other people. Whereas most people have a brick wall will gates and occasional windows on the boundary between their conscious and unconscious, I have the equivalent of a rod iron fence between my conscious and unconscious, which allows me to make connections others miss, while still having a definite boundary between the two. Unfortunately, this has become more of a hindrance than a help for me. Because I make connections between several sources, I come across as very strange to most people. When I try to explain the connections that lead to my conclusions, I either lose people or I become agitated and end up sounding insane. My best friend and some other people, however, do have the interest and patience to hear me through and enjoy my insights. I am often correct, but it helps to have people who are patient enough to wade through my explanations, because I can miss something.
This ability to pull from several sources mentally and a permeable boundary between the conscious and subconscious has another side effect. I get overwhelmed easily when I am trying to downshift to relate to others. When I am able to talk to my friend Roberta and a few others who can think fast enough to keep up with me, it is an amazing and heady experience. I wonder if part of my anxiety disorder is due to my inability to verbally explain myself off the cuff.
However, this same ability does make me an excellent one-on-one tutor. When explaining someone else's ideas or concepts, I am capable to find analogies that my pupils can relate to, including my own mother in algebra. Adding to this the knowledge of poetry and historical archetypes, I have been able to help several people to release their own creativity in writing. I plan to use this ability to bring the ability of written creative expression in my future career as well as in the visual arts.
As for my moral development, I have reached a cross between Kolhberg's seventh stage of "Why be moral?" and the second transition of Carol Gilligan's feminine moral system - "going from goodness to truth". My divorce and experiences re-entering the workforce has lead me to this level. I still revert to the lower levels at times and I have never been a physically violent person, but I am not to Gilligan's level three "morality of nonviolence". I still cause harm to myself and sometimes to others using the written word. I have eliminated this in my vocal communications, though.
I'm hoping that I can continue to develop my cognitive abilities and find a way to harness my unique abilities to benefit my life and others. My goals are to create a new medium for therapy and a series of workbooks to help others get in touch with the archetypes inside themselves. I plan to document my thoughts and works as I go, so when I do reach late adulthood, I have enough material to put together a definitive work on human experience. I realize this sounds a bit grandiose, but I think anyone could do the same if they tried to.
And if I don't write this work, at least I won't have to worry so much about forgetting parts of my life. I just need to make sure I set up a good retrieval system for myself. Or I could just leave it to my posterity and let them sort everything out.
I research for fun and relaxation. While experiencing clinical depression in my later twenties, I found solace in researching topics like industrial waste treatments, naturally occurring soap in plants, and alternate house building methods, in addition to being introduced to the field of psychoanalysis. Even during the worst part of my depression, I could recall New Testament parables with just a few details given.
Being good in math most of my life, I would plan gardens, waste treatment systems and self-sufficient homesteads down to all the technicalities I could think of. I even wrote down a five year plan to start a natural soap business and even learn how to make my own soaps. Pulling from my knowledge of chemistry, I created a "primer" for people ignorant in the history of alchemy. I taught myself how to make stained glass art and several needlework techniques.
I also developed my creative writing ability by writing poems, short stories and even a couple of novels. Some of the poetry and short stories have be published in other publications, but outside of a poetry book I self-published, I haven't received a dime for my creative works and do them mainly for my own peace of mind. Though I have received some money for my crafts and sewing ability.
I have always been considered above average intelligence. I don't think that it is possible to get a clear picture of my intelligence from the normal tests. I say this because I found after I was able to get my anxiety disorder under control, I found that my mental ability increased noticeably. On average, I had a jump about 30 IQ points according to the tests I did for about six month period. However, my mental abilities vary greatly with my stress levels and physical state.
Five years ago I would have told you the Sternberg's aspect of intelligence I was strongest in was componential intelligence. However, as I have explored and developed more, it has turns out that this is not the case. My strongest Sternberg aspect is actually experiential. I have had this pointed out and confirmed by at least two professionals in the mental health field. Though in my case, it has been compounded according to these same professionals to the fact I use my preconscious mind differently than other people. Whereas most people have a brick wall will gates and occasional windows on the boundary between their conscious and unconscious, I have the equivalent of a rod iron fence between my conscious and unconscious, which allows me to make connections others miss, while still having a definite boundary between the two. Unfortunately, this has become more of a hindrance than a help for me. Because I make connections between several sources, I come across as very strange to most people. When I try to explain the connections that lead to my conclusions, I either lose people or I become agitated and end up sounding insane. My best friend and some other people, however, do have the interest and patience to hear me through and enjoy my insights. I am often correct, but it helps to have people who are patient enough to wade through my explanations, because I can miss something.
This ability to pull from several sources mentally and a permeable boundary between the conscious and subconscious has another side effect. I get overwhelmed easily when I am trying to downshift to relate to others. When I am able to talk to my friend Roberta and a few others who can think fast enough to keep up with me, it is an amazing and heady experience. I wonder if part of my anxiety disorder is due to my inability to verbally explain myself off the cuff.
However, this same ability does make me an excellent one-on-one tutor. When explaining someone else's ideas or concepts, I am capable to find analogies that my pupils can relate to, including my own mother in algebra. Adding to this the knowledge of poetry and historical archetypes, I have been able to help several people to release their own creativity in writing. I plan to use this ability to bring the ability of written creative expression in my future career as well as in the visual arts.
As for my moral development, I have reached a cross between Kolhberg's seventh stage of "Why be moral?" and the second transition of Carol Gilligan's feminine moral system - "going from goodness to truth". My divorce and experiences re-entering the workforce has lead me to this level. I still revert to the lower levels at times and I have never been a physically violent person, but I am not to Gilligan's level three "morality of nonviolence". I still cause harm to myself and sometimes to others using the written word. I have eliminated this in my vocal communications, though.
I'm hoping that I can continue to develop my cognitive abilities and find a way to harness my unique abilities to benefit my life and others. My goals are to create a new medium for therapy and a series of workbooks to help others get in touch with the archetypes inside themselves. I plan to document my thoughts and works as I go, so when I do reach late adulthood, I have enough material to put together a definitive work on human experience. I realize this sounds a bit grandiose, but I think anyone could do the same if they tried to.
And if I don't write this work, at least I won't have to worry so much about forgetting parts of my life. I just need to make sure I set up a good retrieval system for myself. Or I could just leave it to my posterity and let them sort everything out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)