Eugenio says:
can extend the point 9, for details.
A hug from Barcelona. Eugenio
Gavez
Dear Eugene:
With this answer does not only mean to satisfy your concerns on item 9 (guilt and shame for my mistake, not taking the error. Is suffering in fantasy to compensate for the error to preserve the appearance) but I tried an article that takes over most of the above-described. Many
Thanks for triggering me this opportunity to express themselves.
BASIS OF GUILT AND SHAME
A true beginning
Guilt and shame are cultural phenomena based on patriarchy and the paradigm of "transcendent truth", ie the notion that truth exists independently of the observer that we are each of us. When we are living on the understanding that there is an objective truth, and therefore a right way of being and doing, we reject our own desires and preferences, and at the heart of our doing what it should be. Traditionally
guilt arises when I judge what I do or I, damaged another. And the shame is when by my doing, or I can do, I feel I can damage my self-image. Innocence
appropriate
kids, for not meeting expectations of others, shares punished us away from legitimacy, they are actions of indifference, where we are "seen" or be taken into account by those people you trust (parents , brothers, teachers, etc.). We love given according to our results, in the belief that it is "right." I'm giving the bike if you behave well in school. You can not play with your buddies for a week that has brought very low scores in math.
When I speak of love, I'm not referring to a feeling I have for the other. I speak of love in terms of actions that define it. Behind the word love (noun), lies the foundation of it, which is to love (verb). No love without loving. In the words of Humberto Maturana, " love is the emotional underpinning the human (...) is the emotion that constitutes the accept the other's actions as a legitimate other in coexistence. (...) Love is not a phenomenon Biological rare or special, everyday is a biological phenomenon " (*)
Differentiating love as a domain that defines the actions which the other appears legitimate I refer to a relationship where the other does not, or feel you want to be changed. All processing occurs in the spontaneity of live together, not as an attempt to bring someone else on behalf of what it should be.
For example: 1st case: It may happen that a father is doctor and the interaction of a family where medicine is part of everyday life, the child learns to prefer the spontaneity of everyday medicine as a profession to follow. There is no submission, no expectations. Whether the child continue to medicine, as if following another road is being legitimized. They are in love.
2nd case: a father may be medical and family tradition or at parents believe it is appropriate for the future of the child, harass (rewards and / or penalties) to keep medicine (and no other race). Here's expectations, pressure, demands, and subjugation. Even when parents want their child, they are falling out of love.
When children live together in the repetition of interrelationships of indifference, began to assemble an appearance to be accepted and respected by a world that denies us, and we demand results. Of course parents, siblings, teachers, etc. We may want a lot, but they are not aware of this disclaimer. And because we lived and live in love, it hurts us and hurts the heartbreak.
How do you feel a little girl when your grandmother asks you to do the little dance he learned in preschool, in return for chocolate? How do you feel the little boy who soils his panties again, and puts away offended adult body? What happens to children when, because of the birth of a sibling, parents say " are now big boy, we have to deal with your brother ?
not born with looks, nor guilt, nor shame, as cultural phenomena occur, based on indifference.
When we grow in coexistence with indifference, the need to make an appearance, based on the emotional demands and control in performance under constant review.
When the reflection is more important than the reflected
In this relational context, as adults, when we do not meet our expectations comes the guilt and punishment have learned. Our physicality is narrow and restrict our world of possibilities. Suffer to compensate for alleged misconduct.
walked down the street and hit someone with no intention ... appears to blame. We kept saying to someone we feel guilt and then .... We did not meet the proposed objectives and ... feel guilt.
Now what do I agree with the guilt? The fallacy is to justify the guilt, as a concern for the other. There is a commitment to each other, in the sense of taking responsibility for what I did (or did). The commitment to blame is to preserve the appearance that I have of me. The commitment of guilt is based on fear ... fear of losing the image and not loved. Guilt is a cult of the ego. So we live in the belief that it hurt me, it balances the damage done. Guilt is a scourge order to manipulate the emotions of others, and protect my image.
this way of living, emerge the archetype of the "victim" or martyr. The victim or martyr ultimately seeking approval, recognition, love knows no generation. And it never will be able to generate while operating from the appearance, because the prevailing emotional is that of inauthenticity, where he is being denied.
The victim was ingenious method of "mea culpa" for others comforted by so much suffering. The other end saying, "hey no big deal," it's all good "," everyone makes mistakes "" As you know I . " Whenever
identified blame on me, I am genuinely concerned about the other, or respect, but I am worrying about the appearance.
Every culture has moral standards of behavior subject to an objective reality that tells us is right, wrong. So even feel guilt (suffering), to succeed, and fail, to have money, no money, or even feel guilty for loving. Whether I'm feeling the guilt, as if blame to another, we rely on the expectation of a pattern that fits as they should be things, as a metaphysical truth that exists independently of our living.
Why a windmill tour?
consider relevant at this point to bring distinction to the observer. Each of us is an observer who sees, hears and feels from itself. There is no knowing who is out of the experience. We know what we know from ourselves. To the same event, different place comments different observers.
As I wrote a few days ago Ximena Davila: " are disjoint domains." The experience of each one belongs to everyone. It is from the culture centered on the objective truth that we claim to be because of what happens to the others. The others have closed their own dynamic and determined its structure. Although we share a common biological organization, each observer is a different structure, which is configured itself to the history of each one, ie the experiences of living and coexisting. In other words, what I do, on the other triggers a process that is typical of the other, and not my doing. I do not determine the happens to the other, is another structure that determines its own happen. What happens to me is not the result of the world (the other, that), but I bring a world at hand, from my own watch and do. Why
a windmill spins ?...¿ For the wind? If by the wind, also a silo (grain container) would revolve. The windmill moves because its structure is coupled with the wind in such a way that raises the turn. No blame is the wind that moves the mill. The mill is responsible for their turn. Like every human being is responsible for his life and the environment it creates with that life. This has nothing to do with guilt. Turn
look
However can turn a mill itself, but not being a human being, not self-generate. And no human being can not think, because you can not live in the emotion of love, or language. Both the love and language, are human and we can ask ourselves, and ask for our doing. We are the only animal that is asked for his "being" and "do", turning his eyes to how we live, and how we live.
observer
When I reflect on my watch as a life that belongs to me, no objective truth, then the fault does not occur. Responsibility arises as to take care of: 1) I want, 2) my actions 3) the consequences of my actions. So we can take remedial action if my error harm to another, in trust to reflect together about what happened.
In this way of living and cohabiting in reflection, there is no compromise with the appearance, there is no requirement emotionality, control, evaluation. There are no close body. Here we set a world based on respect for the preferences and desires of each. We are committed to the relationship and joint projects, releasing the attachment to the image in trust to be seen and respected for our individuality, even though travel often involves pain. Respect based on love, not to be condescending or reverent, the respect is to stay in the center of self, authenticity, legitimizing live on the other, though not a desirable living.
Swallow me earth
Shame source has the same fault. Its origin, development and conservation, is supported by indifference. Shame the distinction as a dynamic body that sets the limit of my actions. The shame I can see as a blatant body contraction that limits me to express myself out of respect for my wishes, preferences and concerns. When I say be in shame, I can not say everything I think, I can not do everything I want, I can not choose freely from what I prefer, I let talk about everything that bothers me
If we look in shame, we see that our physicality changes. Perhaps we blush, contract some muscles, breathing accelerates, more supplies blood to the extremities, the brain receives less oxygen, appears extraordinary breathability, etc. When we are in shame, there is a "feel" of "earth swallow me, as if he wanted to be in this than I am. Is to refuse the experience I'm experiencing, is to deny the legitimacy of my life at that time. Shame the distinction as the body disposition that occurs in self-denial, and denial of recognition each experience as legitimate. Limits the spontaneity and the opportunity to experience the pleasure of doing what is right.
magic
Living In that Humberto Maturana, can not distinguish between perception and illusion . (*) For example: if I receive a phone call from a client and get confused with my partner, I will talk as if it was her. When I realize the error, there is shame. I had an experience (talking to my partner) and then breaks the experience with other experience, which makes me realize my mistake. The description of that error, and realize I was living an illusion, it happens "always" after the experience I will describe as illusory.
But while talking on the phone, I was talking to my partner. My emotionality was talking to her, the embodiment adopted was consistent with that time. Only after a while, when comparing this experience with someone who shows me my error, I can say that there was an error. The error or mistake can not be recognized as such in experience. Error is an explanation of subsequent experience. We do not know when we are wrong. If supi not be a mistake, would lie. So every experience is legitimate in itself. We do not know when something is an illusion, but it would be an illusion. We know in contrasting experience another, in this dispute.
are professional magicians illusions. These are illusions designed special events. But the spontaneous enthusiasm is part of our ordinary life, is part of the phenomenon of knowing. To live is magic, and mistakes are part of that magic.
Guilt is an experience that comes after the event. For example, my son yelled, and then feel guilty. The cry no error, the error arises in the explanation then I do. This distinction arises lightness, as opposed to emotional heaviness. Me permission to make mistakes, is taking charge to live life on the responsibility, not fall in the limited explanation of guilt or shame.
shame With this phenomenon also happens in the example of telephone call: talk on the phone, I realized the mistake and I feel shame. But shame is also emerging as a predisposition body, living the experience to predict the possibility of losing our appearance if I do (or not do) this or that action. That is, we live an experience that has not yet occurred, focusing on the possibility of rejection, such as fear of embarrassment and fear of failure. What is wrong with showing different to what I believe is expected of me? o What is wrong with not getting what they expect from me? In fact, there is nothing wrong. What you need is the threat of not being seen, not heard, not to be taken into account or not being recognized, well ... not being loved.
in shame as an experience before the event, we can not distinguish between illusion and perception. I can only tell whether or not it was an illusion, in comparison to what he thought would happen if triggered, and what finally experience while making it. For example, I can believe I'll make a fool out inviting the woman I love. How to know if it was an illusion or a perception? I can only know to do: ask out the woman that I love.
The drawback is that the shame body is the provision that limits the action of what may perjure my appearance, for that matter, no action, and I can never know whether it was an illusion. In the paradigm of objective truth, do not ask for the "illusion and perception," as the basic assumption is that we perceive reality, and find the truth in good reason, common sense. So do not question our way of observing, and reflection is not possible.
Following the example to woo women like me just will not. From the emotionality of shame, founded on a rejection, do not invite her out. The arguments are always based on rational emotional premises. Rationally argue therefore is not for me, I do not really like it so much better not jeopardize our friendship, mutilating my desires and denying myself. I'll never know it had happened if invited to leave, but I convince myself to do the right thing, holding my looks clean, and safeguarding the ego. Reflection
live In conclusion the guilt and shame are manifestations of indifference, its appearance, the paradigm based on objective reality.
appearance, and the ego occur in the action, are not components of our biology. The ego is a way of behaving, which focuses on the commitment to build a focus of my identity that I hold for others to respect me and love me.
Hold the ego is a constant tension, which I denied, and a source of suffering. On the other hand, if I can love me and respect me for what I appear, I'm caught in self-devaluation, and a deception for others and for me.
The more I buy for my appearance, I have to put more energy to maintain, more guilt, more shame, no more sorrow, more distance between want and what I do. Sometimes, following the coherence of living in the pretend, I can believe I am my appearance, adding the emotionality of resignation and resentment. Resignation expressed in conversations like: " this is what I am, is what I got, there's nothing I can do ." Up resentment in the complaint, injustice, revenge, and repressed anger towards another, the world and / or life.
How do I run from the shame and guilt? Without getting angry for behaving that way. If I feel I demand no more guilt and shame, I'm in the same paradigm that created it, reinforcing what I want to dissolve.
not a rational process is a process by which we reconfigure our basic emotional, reflection and conversation. Reflection on certainties to which we are attached, reflection about what "will" want for ourselves, we want to keep thinking about and we want to transform the way we relate to others, reflecting on that commitment we choose to build the world we bring to our doing. A great love
Ford
Fernando Saenz (*) Emotion and Language in Education Policy - JC Sáez -1990
0 comments:
Post a Comment