Thoughts and Musings

Been doing a fucking SHITLOAD of thinking lately. Have come to some realizations, but am not sure how far they've actually sunk in, emotion-wise. But true recovery takes time. I know that -- I know that -- and yet that doesn't make it any fucking easier. But it's not supposed to make it any easier, because the work still has to be done, regardless of my level of intellectual awareness about the work. See how I twist myself in circles. This is why I need help to get better. At least, this is why I THINK I need help to get better. But I guess that's better than the denial state I frequently find myself in -- or twist myself in.

THIS IS REALLY, REALLY LONG. YOU HAVE BEEN DULY WARNED.


Thoughts and musings.

- I prefer equilibrium -- a.k.a. the feeling, illusional or not (depending on the situation), that "everything is fine" or "everything's okay". [Remember this definition of the word "equilibrium", if you decide to read further, because I talk about it a LOT throughout these musings.]
- If I do not feel like "everything's okay", I freak out and get highly symptomatic.
- I do this because symptoms make me have the illusion that there is equilibrium.
- The truth is, though, that symptoms drive me further OUT OF true equilibrium.

- There are two types of equilibrium -- what I call "fake" equilibrium, and then "true" equilibrium.
- Fake equilibrium is when I do an unnatural behavior that makes me have the sensation that I am "okay" again. (Unnatural being defined, in this instance [and by me], as something that most human beings would consider disturbing, frightening, or horrific to experience if it was being done to them without their consent. In short, unnatural in this sense means the same thing as pathological.)
- True equilibrium is when I am able to feel "okay" without having to resort to pathological behaviors.

- True equilibrium, by its very nature, is MUCH harder to accomplish than fake equilibrium.
- Fake equilibrium is easier to achieve because I am very easily able to fool myself into thinking that my pathological behaviors are, in fact, not pathological.
- This is because, to my disordered mind, pathological behaviors actually seem very logical, well-thought-out, and intuitively sound.
- They feel like that BECAUSE I am disordered, and not because I am somehow inherently flawed.
- I personally have to accept that before I can move on in trying to have a better quality of life.
- This is not, however, the only thing I have to work on. It is only one piece of the puzzle.

- One of my ultimate goals, in recovery, is true equilibrium.

- It is natural, and human, to want true equilibrium, and to feel deprived and "crazy" when the desire for true equilibrium is invalidated.
- Invalidation is when someone tells me, through words, actions, or ANY type of nuances (including intuition), that what I want is not acceptable, not good enough, or otherwise "stupid" or "wrong".
- When someone tells me that my natural needs are stupid, wrong, or otherwise unacceptable, it is THEM who has a problem of their own.
- Natural needs are NOT stupid, wrong, or otherwise unacceptable.

- Concept: When engaging in trying to TRULY recover, I must determine what needs are natural and what needs are unnatural, and satisfy the natural needs while AT THE SAME TIME denying the unnatural urges. (Natural, here, means the same thing as inherent or instinctual.)
- THAT, I firmly believe, is one of the absolute most difficult things about recovery.
- Most people don't have someone to lean on that is well-educated about this concept AND all of this concept's complexities and implications. I believe that this is why most people have an extraordinarily difficult time in achieving true recovery.
- It SHOULD be easier, but it is NOT, for most people, easier.

- So here is how I try to help myself. I hope at least one or two of you will read it and take from it what you are able to take from it at this moment.

- I begin at the premise that human beings are born with a certain level of instinct that must be satisfied, or else the biological organism feels deprived, causing the mind, the psychological "higher self", to also feel deprived.
- Although biological instinct is obviously part of the equation here, the kind of instinct that I am referring to is more of an emotional instinct -- a "deeper" sort of instinct than biology cannot easily fully account for.
- This premise takes a certain level of trust in oneself -- a level of trust which is not at all easy to obtain. I feel thankful that I am even aware of this premise, let alone able to work with it. I have myself been aided, by another person, in my awareness of the premise.
- But I firmly believe that it is possible for ALL people to attain a good and real level of trust in their own, individualized, instinctive, biological and emotional needs.

- I also believe that the method by which people attain this trust CANNOT be fully explained by one, or more than one, artificial formula, dogma, or other set of carefully constructed principles (i.e. a specific psychological theory, such as CBT, psychodynamic theory, or DBT).
- This is because such a formula or constructed principle is by its very nature ARTIFICIAL, and NOT natural.
- And natural things are too complex to be explained by ONE theory, or one SET of theories, alone.

- Each person who enters a therapeutic relationship is likely to lean, in a very general sense, towards one theory or another in terms of what will help him or her recover from a psychological disorder.
- So artificial constructs, for a person who is disordered, can eventually help to lead him or her to connect once again with his or her internal, natural values or desires.
- But because all people are different from one another, each person's path to true recovery will be different, too. And that is NORMAL.

- So here's what I think.
- A PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORY SHOULD BE A STRATEGY, NOT A CURE.
- It is a starting point, not a full treatment in and of itself.

- I firmly believe that therapists should take instinctual cues from patients in terms of what works for them and what doesn't.
- If a psychologist has good instincts (which, due to bad personal experiences, I really think should be a requirement of the job!!), and has been trained to follow those instincts instead of rigidly applying an artificial construct, therapy feels better for both therapist and client, and therapy will help the client much more than if "fake" controls were held onto.

- If psychologically disordered people actually listened to what their own internal values were telling them, they would do what was best for them, and would be happier.
- If they did what was best for them, they would not feel the need to be as concerned with the way things SEEM instead of the way things actually ARE, or to act on their unpleasant feelings in pathological ways.

- Critical people who dub listening to internal values "selfish" are the people who place too much importance on outer values, and who, at their psychological core, are afraid of what would happen if these external value systems were removed, because this would disturb the fake equilibrium they have set up for THEMselves.
- Accordingly, critical people are not bad or "unfortunately mistaken" people. They are simply not currently ABLE to see another way... to listen to their own true feelings about things, instead of expecting the standards of one large (or small) group to rigidly apply to everyone.

- I submit to you that the only thing that is constant in life is that things are always, always changing.
- Therefore, humans need to be flexible and adaptive, not rigid and controlling.
- Rigidity and control, when forced upon a human being, ultimately lead to greater disharmony between the self and external circumstances, which can then lead to deep-seated insecurities about oneself and one's place in the world.
- It makes me wonder what society's psychological disorder is. Because it obviously has one, since in recent times it seeks to be rigid and controlling instead of flexible and adaptive.
- Why? Why? WHY?


But I prefer to question everything. Even everything I've written here.

But I guess that means I prefer to be flexible and adaptive... when I am psychologically able to be.

A theory becomes actual truth only when it is proved.

Right?

Right???

:P