![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Right now I'm in several classes which are presenting completely different views on some central psychological issues. Let's take this one: "Why do I do self-destructive things?"
Simplified enormously for the sake of being able to actually post this before I have to run off, but please feel free to correct me if I've misinterpreted anyone:
Freud: People have a death instinct, which is intertwined with their superego - the critical, self-hating part of their psyche - the internalized scolding voice. Also, they feel deep-seated, unconscious guilt, possibly over early incestuous desires, which makes them feel that they don't deserve to live.
Jung: Perhaps repressing and failing to confront one's Shadow makes it emerge in the form of seemingly inexplicable self-destructiveness?
Melanie Klein: Infantile envy of the mother's "good breast" and inborn aggressive/destructive impulses turned inward.
Trauma perspective: If you experience enough trauma, abuse, emotional neglect, etc, that state feels natural and real to you, and a state of calm and safety feels unnatural, frightening, and false. So you recreate a state of trauma for yourself, with your actions or purely by maintaining an internal state of fear, paranoia, etc.
Narrative perspective: Society and prior negative experiences impose a negative narrative on you, and so you consciously or unconsciously conform to it by doing self-destructive stuff, noticing negative impulses and acts, and ignoring and discounting positive and constructive moments.
Cognitive perspective: Very similar to narrative, but based around "thoughts and ideas" rather than "stories;" also, less concerned with social messages. We sabotage ourselves due to the (irrational and negative) thoughts we have which point us toward self-destructive or unproductive actions, and we can change our actions by changing our thoughts.
Like I said, very simplified. But what strikes me is that all of this stuff is basically metaphoric. None of it is provably "true." (Okay, trauma-based is the most testable. But it's also got metaphoric qualities.) It's all just frameworks for conceptualizing, understanding, and treating common issues. (In my example, "Why are people self-destructive, and how can they stop being self-destructive?")
Any metaphoric framework makes sense to therapist and client is probably going to work as well as any other, for issues that are treatable by therapy at all. (ie, let's assume the client either doesn't need medication or is already on medication and needs therapy also.) Whatever you believe is the truth of your situation - "I do these self-destructive things because..." IS the truth. It's the truth BECAUSE you believe it's the truth.
The metaphor that feels true to you is probably also the metaphor that will help you, whether it's "I was neurologically rewired by trauma" or "I have repressed Oedipal feelings for my mother."
Simplified enormously for the sake of being able to actually post this before I have to run off, but please feel free to correct me if I've misinterpreted anyone:
Freud: People have a death instinct, which is intertwined with their superego - the critical, self-hating part of their psyche - the internalized scolding voice. Also, they feel deep-seated, unconscious guilt, possibly over early incestuous desires, which makes them feel that they don't deserve to live.
Jung: Perhaps repressing and failing to confront one's Shadow makes it emerge in the form of seemingly inexplicable self-destructiveness?
Melanie Klein: Infantile envy of the mother's "good breast" and inborn aggressive/destructive impulses turned inward.
Trauma perspective: If you experience enough trauma, abuse, emotional neglect, etc, that state feels natural and real to you, and a state of calm and safety feels unnatural, frightening, and false. So you recreate a state of trauma for yourself, with your actions or purely by maintaining an internal state of fear, paranoia, etc.
Narrative perspective: Society and prior negative experiences impose a negative narrative on you, and so you consciously or unconsciously conform to it by doing self-destructive stuff, noticing negative impulses and acts, and ignoring and discounting positive and constructive moments.
Cognitive perspective: Very similar to narrative, but based around "thoughts and ideas" rather than "stories;" also, less concerned with social messages. We sabotage ourselves due to the (irrational and negative) thoughts we have which point us toward self-destructive or unproductive actions, and we can change our actions by changing our thoughts.
Like I said, very simplified. But what strikes me is that all of this stuff is basically metaphoric. None of it is provably "true." (Okay, trauma-based is the most testable. But it's also got metaphoric qualities.) It's all just frameworks for conceptualizing, understanding, and treating common issues. (In my example, "Why are people self-destructive, and how can they stop being self-destructive?")
Any metaphoric framework makes sense to therapist and client is probably going to work as well as any other, for issues that are treatable by therapy at all. (ie, let's assume the client either doesn't need medication or is already on medication and needs therapy also.) Whatever you believe is the truth of your situation - "I do these self-destructive things because..." IS the truth. It's the truth BECAUSE you believe it's the truth.
The metaphor that feels true to you is probably also the metaphor that will help you, whether it's "I was neurologically rewired by trauma" or "I have repressed Oedipal feelings for my mother."
Tags: