It is currently Thu Jan 18, 2018 10:34 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Dec 22, 2014 5:19 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2014 11:01 am
Posts: 1106
Location: Hope, BC
Quote:
The Failure of Integrative Capacities in the Face of Threat

Integration. Pierre Janet (1889) and Hughlings Jackson (1931-1932; for a review, Meares, 1999) have characterized mental health in terms of the capacity for differentiation and integration. Janet held that integration involves the continuing execution of a series of mental actions. The first step is the synthesis of elementary internal and external phenomena within a given moment into meaningful new mental structures, and the second step, synthesis of experiences, knowledge and functions across time (Braude, 1995). Contemporary authors have labeled these mental actions synchronic and diachronic synthesis, respectively (Ciompi, 1991; Siegel, 1999). Thus, according to these views, creation of meaningful combinations of sensations, affects, motor behaviors, and perceptions of the environment within a given moment and across time is essential to engaging in adaptive behavior. For example, individuals who were confronted with a threatening event have been able to succeed in synthesizing the experience when they have created a coherent mental structure that involves and organizes representations of the salient external and internal events (e.g., sensory perceptions, affective and behavioral reactions to these perceptions).

An essential component of integration is personification. Personification denotes the mental actions that range from relating synthesized material to oneis general sense of self, which thus should become regularly adapted through synthetic actions, to becoming consciously aware of the implications of a personal experience for oneis whole life, giving oneis history and sense of self a continuity (Janet, 1928). To follow up the example, in the act of personification, traumatized individuals become consciously aware that the threat strikes them personally. The result is a sense of ownership of personal experience and events ("I am threatened"). Personification is a specific form of realization, i.e., becoming aware of the implications of events. In our example: "I was severely threatened, and the event has had, and still will have, major consequences for me and my loved ones." Thus personification allows for a vision of oneis self as a future personal and social existence.

As countless clinical observations suggest, and as recent studies have documented (for a review, see Marmar, Weiss, & Metzler, 1998), overwhelming events can interfere with these integrative mental actions. When personification fails, conscious awareness of the synthesized event will remain factual knowledge that does not seem to pertain to oneis self. In the terms of Wheeler, Stuss, and Tulving (1997), the synthesized material will be noetic (personal experiences that seem unrelated to self), not autonoetic (personal experiences that are integrated with awareness of self as part of the experience). Thus a traumatized individual may say: "I know my life was threatened, but it feels as if it happened to somebody else." As a result, the corresponding memory will be of the semantic, not the episodic type (Tulving, 1972). Semantic memory, which pertains to words and to knowledge of the world, lacks a self-reflective aspect: one knows something to be a fact, but one does not link a personal episode to this knowledge. In contrast, episodic memory concerns memories of events that we recall in an almost scenic or cinematic way. It involves a double awareness, in that apart from a memory of facts, there is also the knowledge that this experience comes from oneis past. Within far wider windows of time and events, personification yields an integrated, thus relatively context-independent sense of self. When personification fails, the development of a coherent sense of personal existence in a framework of the past, the present, and the future is compromised. In order to act adaptively in the present, it is necessary for personification of current experience to be based on the integration of oneis (entire) past history.

Integrating experiences similar to those already known to the individual, and that do not involve extreme emotion, generally requires a lower level of mental functioning and less mental effort than synthesizing and personifying new and highly emotional experiences. Successful integration of certain prior experiences provides templates that promote integration of later, similar experiences. Exposure to stressful events can raise oneis mental level of functioning, but when threat becomes massive and overwhelming, this level drops.

Sensory events that are not traumatic or excessively stressful are usually automatically and preconsciously synthesized into symbolic form. However, traumatic experiences in patients with PTSD and dissociative disorders seem to be encoded as more or less complex sensorimotor and affective experiences which remain relatively unintegrated and thus unavailable for the normal information processing that leads to episodic memory (Van der Kolk & Van der Hart, 1991). The reduced integrative capacity leaves the individual with an immediate deficit in the ability to adapt to the trauma, and it inhibits additional attempts to cope following the traumatic experience (Janet, 1919/25).

http://www.trauma-pages.com/a/nijenhuis-2004.php

_________________
The only thing new in this world is the history you don't know.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Psychological Theory
PostPosted: Thu Apr 23, 2015 8:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2015 9:27 pm
Posts: 9
This post reminds me of a theory. Roughly two years ago i was on vacation in colorado and drove through the mountains a lot. I was studying calculus at that time, so the topics of integration and derivation were fresh. The behaviors of the functions involved, the layers of integrations and derivations that existed and what they represented in the here and now were all running through my mind.
Anyway, i ended spinning an entire concept of mind and world trying to fit things together with the language of calculus. Once that had taken shape through a discussion comparing the language terms of psychology and math respectively, I started to think more about how psychology has always utilized other sciences to legitimize the institution of itself.

Quote:
Integrating experiences similar to those already known to the individual, and that do not involve extreme emotion, generally requires a lower level of mental functioning and less mental effort than synthesizing and personifying new and highly emotional experiences. Successful integration of certain prior experiences provides templates that promote integration of later, similar experiences. Exposure to stressful events can raise oneis mental level of functioning, but when threat becomes massive and overwhelming, this level drops.


This makes it sound about as simple as something that could be created by a controlled process like satanic ritual, or other systematic trauma. In the experience of things other factors will come into play like irrational emotional waves, and any other type of irregular emotional experience. the stability of emotions, mental level etc. All of which can be explained by calculus and differential equations.

When integrating there is definite and indefinite. When you integrate a function over certain bounds then you get a value back and i think that is the process described in this article. The simple pleasures of continuity can be experienced by integration from here to here, ie definite bounds. The definite bounds are "the mental actions that range from relating synthesized material to oneis general sense of self, which thus should become regularly adapted through synthetic actions".

You are a function, but the variables over which to integrate are being chosen by a collective reality.

So really integration is just a way to calculate infinite sums. Without integration something like a mind or an assemblage point could not interface with an infinite experience. Through indefinite integration the higher forms or derivation the lower forms are created in a formal creation and must be used as real aspects of the function(human). By not defining the bounds of this integration the human can actually process perceptive units at a higher integrative level or lower derivative level. As long as they are still alive they are a function. They will still have an input and output, but things will be different because they have integrated or derived the functional fabric of their existence.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 24, 2015 8:48 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2014 11:01 am
Posts: 1106
Location: Hope, BC
I have moved this thread here so there's less chance of it being overlooked, and what with activity being so sparse now. There's a lot to unpack here.

_________________
The only thing new in this world is the history you don't know.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 21, 2015 10:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2015 9:27 pm
Posts: 9
I still think about this even as i travel beyond calculus and into differential equations and modeling. While i still think there is an interesting correlation between these things: the derivative with respect to time of position is velocity, and the derivative with respect to time of velocity is acceleration, and a human experience of position, maybe perceptual velocity and acceleration. Variables depending on time. If you integrate acceleration then you get velocity, if you integrate velocity you get a position. Its like a little ladder which correlates to the nature of energy being quantized. The human mind and system has to be quantized as well. While it is true the ear drum vibrates at nearly discrete, according to our perception, but its really only discrete compared to the cruder quantization we make i the digital audio realm.

So i found a little bit of content that is heading in my direction and low and behold it was associated with "sufi", some of my old favorites in mystic topics.

Quote:
The science of differential equations is a means to understanding the behavior of these three types of human souls. Many mathematicians believe that differential equations allow us to mathematically predict the future because they provide an understanding of the rules that govern the changes that may occur in the future. This mathematical belief is in total accordance with the spiritual interpretation of differential equations which predicts the behaviors of human souls.


Without launching into a hasty assumption, i would postulate that eiganvalues do correspond to the
Extremes contained in a personal matrix(soul), the values of them lead to vectors that are the decided path during the period for which they are true. The german means "self " value and they are used to calculate the vectors along with the identity matrix. They are sometimes two occurrences of the same number, sometimes positive and negative, sometimes imaginary.
But the sufi interpretation i am finding seems simplistic and possibly incorrect, as i feel some people might have more than one "soul". So eiganvalues "values of self" would come and go as new functions were parameterized, and new vectors were followed. Which in my mind is really just a more detailed application of the same sufi rumors.
To me it doesnt make sense to deem someone a saint once and it sticks, what if they forgot how to be a saint, what if a normal person became a prophet for a few days and then slipped back into being a joe blow. I dont know, maybe i am simply perpetually untrusting of information sources. Once a prophet always a prophet? Or one day buddha, next day beer drinking car mechanic.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 21, 2015 10:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2015 9:27 pm
Posts: 9
Jasun wrote:
I have moved this thread here so there's less chance of it being overlooked.



Overlooked in the overlook. Perfect.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 23, 2015 1:23 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2014 11:01 am
Posts: 1106
Location: Hope, BC
ParsleyApple wrote:
I
To me it doesnt make sense to deem someone a saint once and it sticks, what if they forgot how to be a saint, what if a normal person became a prophet for a few days and then slipped back into being a joe blow. I dont know, maybe i am simply perpetually untrusting of information sources. Once a prophet always a prophet? Or one day buddha, next day beer drinking car mechanic.

Dave Oshana described it to me once (on the London Underground) as like having found the sun in a clear sky. Once you have, you can't ever lose it. It's there shining light on everything.

I didn't ask him about clouds....

I don't find the notion of reaching a final state of realization that's irreversible hard to believe. It seems inescapable, that if such a state existed, it would be permanent once reached. More likely that one would forget one's own name.

_________________
The only thing new in this world is the history you don't know.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group Color scheme by ColorizeIt!