Psychology, Psychiatry and Psychotherapy and their Metalevels

METAPSYCHOLOGY and PSYCHOLOGY, METAPSYCHIATRY and PSYCHIATRY, METAPSYCHOTHERAPY and PSYCHOTHERAPY. A new Theory of the Psyche, Mental Disorders and Their Psychotherapy - in Particular Schizophrenia. (Preprint) Author: Torsten Oettinger. Web presence: https://www.new-psychiatry.com/ 6th Revision of the Short Version, 2021-02-15. Foreword ....................................................................................................................................................................... 8 M E T A P S Y C H O L O G Y ............................................................................................................................... 9 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................................. 9 THE GENERAL PSYCHICAL RELEVANT ........................................................................................................................... 10 Introduction and Classification ............................................................................................................................... 10 Classification Levels ................................................................................................................................................ 12 Differentiations (Analogy Language and the Psychical Relevant)................................................................. 13 Language and the Psychical Relevant.......................................................................................................................... 13 First stage of Differentiation ................................................................................................................................... 14 Second Stage of Differentiation .............................................................................................................................. 16 Dimensions .................................................................................................................................................... 18 The Absolute (A) .......................................................................................................................................................... 19 Summary ................................................................................................................................................................. 21 The 7 Synonyms of the Absolute (2nd stage of differentiation) ............................................................................. 22 Short Systematic Overview ..................................................................................................................................... 22 The Relative (R) ........................................................................................................................................................... 24 The Meaning of the Relative .................................................................................................................................. 24 7 Synonyms of the Relative (2nd stage of differentiation) ..................................................................................... 25 Symbols which show the relations between A and R ............................................................................................. 26 The Nothingness (0) .................................................................................................................................................... 26 General Units/ Systems ................................................................................................................................. 26 Summary ....................................................................................................................................................... 28 INDIVIDUAL METAPSYCHOLOGICAL TOPICS................................................................................................................... 30 General Hypotheses................................................................................................................................................ 30 Regarding the Dimensions ............................................................................................................................ 30 Solutions (a1) .......................................................................................................................................................... 31 Identity, Self (a2)..................................................................................................................................................... 31 Truth (a3) ................................................................................................................................................................ 32 Unity (a4) ................................................................................................................................................................ 33 Safety (a5) ............................................................................................................................................................... 33 Causes and Results (a6) .......................................................................................................................................... 34 Autonomy and Freedom (a7).................................................................................................................................. 36 Regarding the Differentiations ...................................................................................................................... 37 The 4 main differentiations ......................................................................................................................................... 37 Forms of Being ........................................................................................................................................................ 37 Life .......................................................................................................................................................................... 38 Qualities .................................................................................................................................................................. 38 The Positive Absolute (+A) ...................................................................................................................................... 39 The Negative Absolute (‒A) .................................................................................................................................... 40 Subjects, Objects and Subject-Object-Problem ...................................................................................................... 40 Further Examples ........................................................................................................................................................ 42 Belief and Knowledge ............................................................................................................................................. 42 Sense/ Meaning ...................................................................................................................................................... 43 Relativity of Illness and Health (resp. Death and Life) ............................................................................................ 43 Individual Units / Systems ............................................................................................................................. 44 1. All /Everything, Nothingness and Something...................................................................................................... 44 2. God and the World (Transcendence and Immanence) ....................................................................................... 45 3. and 4. People, Individual (I) ................................................................................................................................ 45 5. Personal Mind, Soul and Body ............................................................................................................................ 48 Embedding of pr Units ............................................................................................................................................ 48 P S Y C H O L O G Y .......................................................................................................................................... 49 1 IN GENERAL: PERSON AND PSYCHE ............................................................................................................................ 49 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................ 49 Important Definitions .................................................................................................................................................. 49 Person ......................................................................................................................................................................... 49 Psyche ......................................................................................................................................................................... 50 Customary Definitions: ........................................................................................................................................... 50 New Definition of the Psyche ................................................................................................................................. 51 Overview of the Classification of Person and Psyche ............................................................................................. 53 Differentiation ("Grammar of the Psyche" - Analogy of Language and Psyche) .......................................... 54 Dimensions of Person and Psyche ................................................................................................................. 56 Overview: Dimensions and Their Representatives ................................................................................................. 56 Self - the Personal Absolute ........................................................................................................................................ 56 Self-Definition in Literature .................................................................................................................................... 56 Own Self-Definition................................................................................................................................................. 60 The Personal Relative .................................................................................................................................................. 65 Relations between Spirit, Psyche and Body ................................................................................................................ 66 SPECIFIC INFORMATION ABOUT THE I ......................................................................................................................... 67 About the Term ............................................................................................................................................. 67 Own Definition of the 'I'.......................................................................................................................................... 68 'Types' of the I / Ego .................................................................................................................................................... 68 Differentiations of the I ............................................................................................................................................... 69 I and Self...................................................................................................................................................................... 71 Comparison of Self and I ......................................................................................................................................... 71 Relations between I and Self .................................................................................................................................. 71 I, Self and my 'Somethings' ..................................................................................................................................... 72 The Absolute Attitude of the I ................................................................................................................................ 73 Individuation as Psychological Concept .................................................................................................................. 75 The Concrete Person and His Analysis of Language ...................................................................................... 76 M E T A P S Y C H I A T R Y ............................................................................................................................... 77 Introduction and Overview ......................................................................................................................................... 77 INVERSION - CONFUSION OF FUNDAMENTAL MEANINGS ..................................................................................... 81 Definitions .............................................................................................................................................................. 81 Causes of Inversions ............................................................................................................................................... 81 Distinctions ............................................................................................................................................................. 82 Individual and Societal Inversions ........................................................................................................................... 83 Inversions and their Effects from the Perspective of Linguistic Analogies ............................................................. 84 Systematization: Possibilities of Inversions (optional) ................................................................................................ 85 Importance of Inversions for the Development of Mental Disorders (interim result)............................................ 86 IT - A STRANGE DOMINANT ENTITY ........................................................................................................................ 87 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................ 87 The It in General ............................................................................................................................................ 87 The Emergence of the It .............................................................................................................................................. 90 The Emergence of the Parts of the It ...................................................................................................................... 91 Examples of the Emergence of the three It-parts ................................................................................................... 96 The Emergence of the Three Sides of any It-part ................................................................................................... 98 The Different Valences of the It ............................................................................................................................ 101 Opposites, Fusions and Negations ........................................................................................................................ 103 The Fusions (Pacts) ............................................................................................................................................... 106 The negations ....................................................................................................................................................... 107 Which Its Correspond to Which Ideologies? ............................................................................................................. 107 The personal It and the Strange Self ........................................................................................................... 109 Dimensions of the Personal It ................................................................................................................................... 113 The strange Self (the strange personal Absolute) ................................................................................................. 113 The Non-Self ......................................................................................................................................................... 117 Differentiation of the Personal It .............................................................................................................................. 118 Kinds of Personal It (overview) ................................................................................................................................. 119 Origin and Kind ..................................................................................................................................................... 119 By Localization ...................................................................................................................................................... 121 Appearances of the Personal It ............................................................................................................................. 121 EMERGENCE OF STRANGE, SECOND-RATE REALITIES ..................................................................................................... 123 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................... 123 Overview of the Phases ........................................................................................................................................ 123 Emergence of the Different Spheres of W²........................................................................................................... 124 2 Roles of the It(s) in W² as Dictators, Parasites and Offenders .............................................................................. 125 Hierarchies in W² .................................................................................................................................................. 125 Hypotheses about the It-effects ........................................................................................................................... 126 The juxtaposition of contradictions ...................................................................................................................... 126 It-effects on the Dimensions of WPI ......................................................................................................................... 128 Changes of Differentiation ........................................................................................................................................ 129 Illustration of different strange realities ................................................................................................................... 131 Different Social Systems ....................................................................................................................................... 131 Different Environments ........................................................................................................................................ 132 Virtual Worlds ....................................................................................................................................................... 132 Ideologies.............................................................................................................................................................. 132 Summary ............................................................................................................................................................... 132 EMERGENCE OF THE STRANGE, SECOND-RATE PERSONAL ............................................................................................. 134 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................................. 134 All Parts of the P² (Overview) .................................................................................................................................... 136 Changes of the Personal Dimension Spheres .............................................................................................. 137 a1 Disorder of the Absolute Area of a Person ...................................................................................................... 137 a2 Disorder of the Person's Identity ..................................................................................................................... 138 a3 Disorder of Personal Reality ............................................................................................................................. 140 a4 Disorder of the Person's Unity ......................................................................................................................... 140 a5 Disorder of the Person's Safety and Freedom ................................................................................................. 142 a6 Disorder of Personal Bases and Levels ............................................................................................................. 142 a7: Disorder of the Person's Independence and Ties ........................................................................................... 142 Changes of the Personal Differentiation Spheres ........................................................................................ 143 Main Differentiations ................................................................................................................................................ 143 I. The Its Change the Personal Being ..................................................................................................................... 143 II. The Its Change the Person's Life (Dynamics) .................................................................................................... 143 III. The Its Change Personal Qualities .................................................................................................................... 143 IV. The Its Change P as Subject, the Objects and the Personal Connections ........................................................ 144 Single Differentiations ............................................................................................................................................... 147 Illustration of a Single Second-Rate Personal Part (P²) ............................................................................................. 156 Which Its Cause What and How? ................................................................................................................ 156 Strange-I (Ego) ............................................................................................................................................ 158 The Structure of the Strange-I (Ego) ..................................................................................................................... 159 Summary of the Personal Changes ............................................................................................................. 159 The Juxtaposition of Different Realities ....................................................................................................... 160 The Same in Different Second-Rate Systems (WPI²) ................................................................................................. 165 DYNAMICS OF STRANGE REALITIES ................................................................................................................. 166 General Dynamics ....................................................................................................................................... 166 Principles .............................................................................................................................................................. 166 Autonomous Phases of the It (Timing) ...................................................................................................................... 166 Interactions in second-rate Realities ......................................................................................................................... 167 General Principles ................................................................................................................................................. 167 Overview of Possible Interactions in W² ............................................................................................................... 167 Emergence of Complexes by Different Its and Their Systems .............................................................................. 169 Personal Dynamics ...................................................................................................................................... 171 Simple Personal Dynamics ........................................................................................................................................ 171 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................... 171 Personal Dynamic as It .......................................................................................................................................... 173 Personal Dynamic towards the It (Addiction; Defense, Anticathexis, Repression) ............................................... 178 It Dynamic towards P (Sacrificial-Dynamics and Consequences) .......................................................................... 188 Phases of the Interaction of P² and It ................................................................................................................... 192 Complex Personal Dynamics and Relationship Disorders ......................................................................................... 195 Possibilities of Interactions ................................................................................................................................... 195 Personal System and Relationship Disorders over the Course of Time ................................................................ 197 From Complex to Symptom ...................................................................................................................................... 208 Complex Interactions ............................................................................................................................................ 208 Role and Meaning of Illness and Health .................................................................................................................... 214 God and Evil - a New Theodicy ............................................................................................................................. 218 Concrete Examples: Hölderlin and Nietzsche (Draft) ................................................................................................ 221 P S Y C H I A T R Y.......................................................................................................................................... 222 CAUSES OF MENTAL DISORDERS ............................................................................................................................. 222 MENTAL DISORDERS FROM THE BIOGRAPHIC PERSPECTIVE ........................................................................................... 223 3 Beginning .................................................................................................................................................... 223 Overadaptation or Enmity ........................................................................................................................... 225 Crisis and Falling Ill ...................................................................................................................................... 228 PSYCHOSES ......................................................................................................................................................... 230 Psychoses in General ................................................................................................................................... 230 Schizophrenia .............................................................................................................................................. 233 What is Schizophrenia? ............................................................................................................................................. 233 A New Psychodynamic Theory of Schizophrenia ......................................................................................... 234 Inversions as the Main Cause ............................................................................................................................... 234 Schizophrenic Symptoms and their Meanings ...................................................................................................... 238 Splitting and fusion phenomena otherwise .......................................................................................................... 240 Accordance with Other Schizophrenia Theories ....................................................................................................... 247 Vulnerability-Stress-Theory .................................................................................................................................. 247 Kernberg's Object-Relations Theory ..................................................................................................................... 248 Double-Bind Theory .............................................................................................................................................. 249 Expressed-Emotion Concept ................................................................................................................................. 251 Criticism on Certain Schizophrenia-Theories ............................................................................................................ 252 Delusion .................................................................................................................................................................... 253 Hallucinations............................................................................................................................................................ 257 Depressive and Manic Reactions .............................................................................................................................. 258 REMARKS ABOUT OTHER DISORDERS ........................................................................................................................ 260 Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder ................................................................................................................... 260 Fear ............................................................................................................................................................. 262 Burn-Out ...................................................................................................................................................... 263 Pain ............................................................................................................................................................. 263 Post-Traumatic Stress Disorders ................................................................................................................. 263 Communication Disturbances ..................................................................................................................... 264 ADHD ........................................................................................................................................................... 264 Alzheimer's .................................................................................................................................................. 265 Addiction ..................................................................................................................................................... 265 Others ....................................................................................................................................................................... 265 About Anti-Psychiatry.................................................................................................................................. 266 M E T A P S Y C H O T H E R A P Y .................................................................................................................. 267 What is Metapsychotherapy? ..................................................................................................................... 267 Fundamental Problems ............................................................................................................................... 270 Solutions ...................................................................................................................................................... 271 First-Rate Solutions ............................................................................................................................................... 272 Second-Rate Solutions .......................................................................................................................................... 273 What is Best for the Psyche? ................................................................................................................................ 276 WORLDVIEWS - FOUNDATIONS OF PSYCHOTHERAPIES (CRITICAL SURVEY) ................................................................ 279 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................................. 279 Anthropocentric/ Theocentric Worldviews............................................................................................................... 280 Philosophies ................................................................................................................................................ 281 Materialism ............................................................................................................................................................... 282 Realism ...................................................................................................................................................................... 286 Functionalism ............................................................................................................................................................ 286 Idealism ..................................................................................................................................................................... 288 Humanism ................................................................................................................................................................. 289 Religions and Spiritual Movements ............................................................................................................. 294 About Islam ............................................................................................................................................................... 295 About Buddhism ....................................................................................................................................................... 297 Hinduism ................................................................................................................................................................... 299 Esoterism and Similar Ideologies .............................................................................................................................. 299 About Christianity ..................................................................................................................................................... 300 Criticism of Religion .............................................................................................................................................. 303 CRITERIA OF SUBOPTIMAL WORLDVIEWS .................................................................................................................. 307 General ................................................................................................................................................................. 307 Examples ............................................................................................................................................................... 308 OPTIMAL WORLDVIEW.......................................................................................................................................... 310 Revision of the Inversions ..................................................................................................................................... 310 Is God the Positive Absolute? ............................................................................................................................... 310 God and the Individual; The Paradise and the World ........................................................................................... 311 4 Resistance to the “Revision” ................................................................................................................................. 312 P S Y C H O T H E R A P Y ............................................................................................................................... 315 DIFFICULTIES IN PSYCHOTHERAPY ............................................................................................................................ 316 Persistence of the Strange Absolutes (sA) ................................................................................................... 316 Resistance ................................................................................................................................................... 316 Resistance against what? ...................................................................................................................................... 318 Resistance and Defense ........................................................................................................................................ 319 Desire and Resistance ........................................................................................................................................... 319 Difficulties and Resistances on the Side of the Therapists .......................................................................... 320 PSYCHOTHERAPEUTIC SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT (CRITICAL OVERVIEW) .............................................................................. 321 Anthropocentric, Secular Psychotherapies .................................................................................................. 322 Psychoanalysis and Depth Psychology ...................................................................................................................... 324 Psychoanalysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 324 Behavioral Therapies ................................................................................................................................................. 331 Positive Thinking (Mental or Psychological Positivism) ........................................................................................ 334 Rational-Emotive Behavioral Therapy (REBT) ....................................................................................................... 334 Dialectical Behavioral Therapy (DBT) .................................................................................................................... 335 Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT)..................................................................................................... 335 Metacognitive Therapy (MCT) .............................................................................................................................. 335 Behavior Therapies in the Future?........................................................................................................................ 336 Humanistic Psychotherapies .................................................................................................................................... 336 Frankl's Logotherapy ............................................................................................................................................. 336 Systemic Psychotherapy ....................................................................................................................................... 337 Integrative Psychotherapy and Gestalt Therapy................................................................................................... 337 Salutogenesis ........................................................................................................................................................ 337 Resilience Research ............................................................................................................................................. 338 Neuroscience ........................................................................................................................................................ 340 Spiritual / Religious Based Psychotherapy ................................................................................................................ 341 Spirituality in Psychotherapy? .............................................................................................................................. 341 "Third Viennese School" of Psychotherapy .......................................................................................................... 342 Transpersonal Psychology .................................................................................................................................... 342 Pastoral Psychology .............................................................................................................................................. 343 Pastoral Psychiatry................................................................................................................................................ 343 Pastoral Care......................................................................................................................................................... 344 Soteriogenesis ...................................................................................................................................................... 344 Self-Help Groups with Spirituality ......................................................................................................................... 345 Psychology, Psychotherapy and Psychiatry Today ...................................................................................... 346 New approaches? ...................................................................................................................................................... 347 Fears and Resistances against Change ...................................................................................................................... 347 PRIMARY PSYCHOTHERAPY ............................................................................................................................. 350 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................... 350 Differences to Other Psychotherapies ...................................................................................................................... 353 Examples ............................................................................................................................................................... 354 Accordances with other Psychotherapies ................................................................................................................. 355 Therapeutic Goals ..................................................................................................................................................... 357 The Top Therapeutic Goal..................................................................................................................................... 358 On the Role of Therapists and Patients ................................................................................................................ 359 Causal Therapies ......................................................................................................................................... 359 Symptomatic Therapy and Emergency Solutions ........................................................................................ 360 Pro Symptomatic Therapy .................................................................................................................................... 360 Contra Symptomatic Therapy ............................................................................................................................... 360 A) Emergency Solution at the Expense of Other People ........................................................................................... 362 B) Emergency Solution at One´s Own Expense by Disease ....................................................................................... 362 C) Emergency Solution with More Old or New Inversions ........................................................................................ 365 D) Emergency Solution by Anticathexis or Fewer Absolutizations ............................................................................ 368 E) Emergency Solution with Psychiatric Drugs .......................................................................................................... 368 “Paradoxical" Therapy ................................................................................................................................ 371 Concerning the Psychotherapy of Schizophrenia ........................................................................................ 374 Current State of Therapy of Psychoses ..................................................................................................................... 374 Problem Antipsychotics ........................................................................................................................................ 374 Healing from Schizophrenia without Antipsychotic Drugs? .................................................................................. 377 Primary Psychotherapy of Schizophrenia .................................................................................................................. 377 Remarks for Patients ................................................................................................................................... 379 5 Basic Attitudes .......................................................................................................................................................... 379 Unfavorable and Favorable Attitudes in Relationships ............................................................................................. 384 Self-Strength and Ego-Strength ................................................................................................................................. 386 Adult-Ego and Child-I ................................................................................................................................................ 389 First A then B ............................................................................................................................................................. 389 High Jump with or without a Yardstick ..................................................................................................................... 391 The Undoing of the Fixation ...................................................................................................................................... 391 Choosing the Self and God - a Plea ........................................................................................................................... 392 The Circle Closes ....................................................................................................................................................... 393 Systematization ......................................................................................................................................................... 394 Concerning the Dimensions ...................................................................................................................................... 394 a1 Absolute and Relative or: Redemption and Solutions ..................................................................................... 394 a2 Identity and Otherness .................................................................................................................................... 394 a3 Reality and Unreality........................................................................................................................................ 395 a4 Unity and Diversity ........................................................................................................................................... 395 a5 Freedom and Safety ......................................................................................................................................... 396 a6 Center and Periphery ....................................................................................................................................... 396 a7 Security and Autonomy.................................................................................................................................... 396 Concerning the Differentiations ................................................................................................................................ 397 Main Differentiations............................................................................................................................................ 397 I. Being .................................................................................................................................................................. 397 II. Life .................................................................................................................................................................... 397 III. Qualities ........................................................................................................................................................... 397 IV. Subject / Object and Relationships .................................................................................................................. 397 Individual Aspects ..................................................................................................................................................... 397 1. Everything (All), Individual and Nothing ........................................................................................................... 397 2. God and the World (Transcendence, Immanence) ........................................................................................... 398 3. People and Things ............................................................................................................................................. 398 4. Me and Others .................................................................................................................................................. 398 5. Spirit, Soul and Body ......................................................................................................................................... 399 6. Love and Sexuality ............................................................................................................................................ 399 7. Peace of Mind and Well-Being .......................................................................................................................... 399 8. Absolute and Relative Will ................................................................................................................................ 400 9. Being and Having .............................................................................................................................................. 400 10. Strength and Weakness .................................................................................................................................. 400 11. Order and Necessity........................................................................................................................................ 400 12. Primary Virtue and Morality ........................................................................................................................... 401 13. Freedom and Control ...................................................................................................................................... 401 14. New and Old ................................................................................................................................................... 401 15. Let and Do ....................................................................................................................................................... 402 16. Trust and Knowledge ...................................................................................................................................... 402 17. Openness and Reticence ................................................................................................................................. 402 18. Values ............................................................................................................................................................. 402 19. Past ................................................................................................................................................................. 403 20. Present ............................................................................................................................................................ 404 21. Future ............................................................................................................................................................. 404 22. Right and Wrong ............................................................................................................................................. 405 23. Protection and Defense .................................................................................................................................. 406 Successes of 'Primary Psychotherapy' .................................................................................................................. 407 Some Mini-Stories ....................................................................................................................................... 409 Redemption .......................................................................................................................................................... 409 The Umbilical Cord................................................................................................................................................ 409 The Small Child in Us............................................................................................................................................. 410 Neurotics .............................................................................................................................................................. 411 Nobody Can Help Me - I'm Doing Everything Wrong ............................................................................................ 412 Sadomasochism .................................................................................................................................................... 412 Story of the Slipping.............................................................................................................................................. 412 How Do I Get from the Seesaw? ........................................................................................................................... 413 The Bread-Roll Story ............................................................................................................................................. 413 The Story of the Big Trap ...................................................................................................................................... 413 The Plus 30 or Minus 70 Percent .......................................................................................................................... 414 The Story of the False Suitcase ............................................................................................................................. 414 The Story of Missing Thanks ................................................................................................................................. 414 Rail or Gravel ........................................................................................................................................................ 414 The Pit ................................................................................................................................................................... 414 The Story of the Conflicting Interpretation ........................................................................................................... 415 6 The Story of the Lost Paradise .............................................................................................................................. 415 The Story of the Prostitutes .................................................................................................................................. 415 A Neurotic Story between Myself and My Wife ................................................................................................... 415 Meditations (see unabridged German version) .................................................................................................... 416 BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................................................. 417 OFTEN USED ABBREVIATIONS ...................................................................................................................... 422 INDEX ........................................................................................................................................................... 423 AUTHOR AND CONTACT ............................................................................................................................... 427 7 Foreword Motto: “He is a doctor who knows the invisible, that has no name, nor matter but still an effect.” (Paracelsus) About me, Torsten Oettinger, the author of this book: I am a psychiatrist-psychotherapist and publish here the experiences and knowledge which I have been able to gather throughout the decades that I have worked in this specific sphere. I believe that the following texts can open up new perspectives in psychiatry and psychotherapy through a new theory of the psyche and its disorders. I also examine the influence of different ideologies and world views on the psyche and on "psychotheories". Although different ideologies and worldviews are of great importance to the psyche and psychological theory formation, this is hardly reflected from the academic side. The reason for this is that psychology and psychiatry are too one-sidedly defined as science. What is scientifically not accessible will be largely ignored.1 But the exclusion of such topics leads to deficient theories and therapies and to a strong increase in psycho-practices (`psychoboom'), which often gives people dubious answers to questions that are not answered by conventional medicine. 2 In my work, I focus more on life itself than merely on science. Therefore, I attend to that which is of ultimate concern for the patients, regardless of whether or not it is scientifically ascertainable. For me, the credibility of statements is the decisive criterion, not their provability - credibility which includes knowledge and experience but is superordinate to it.3 In this study, basic assumptions (such as philosophies resp. worldviews and religions), which are the foundations of current psychological and psychiatric theories, are critically examined as to their psychological and psychotherapeutic relevance and functionality. Furthermore, I develop a specific theory and psychotherapy which also includes subjective and spiritual factors. Thus, the theory and therapy of mental disorders are substantially expanded. One might ask the polemical question whether our psychology and psychiatry themselves do not suffer from poor health. They seem to be affected by disorders which could be called “scientitis” or “dogmatitis”, since they are too focused on science. In scientific writings, reference is made very rarely to philosophical or even religious insights. According to the 'malicious' words of Karl Kraus: “Psychoanalysis is that mental illness for which it regards itself as therapy” we psychiatrists should ask ourselves in which way our theories might be wrong or even 'in ill health' - or even we have reduced "the diseases of the mind to mindless diseases" (Basaglia).4 1 That includes the existential themes of faith, love, hope, faithfulness, dignity, trust, devotion, comfort, loneliness, despair, guilt, forgiveness, hopelessness, dying and death. Similar K. Jaspers: Science is important in psychiatry, but the elimination of philosophy for psychiatry is "disastrous." (p. 643). See more to this topic in `Critique of materialist science and psychology´. 2 For details, see the section about `Esoterism´. 3 A common statement may serve as an example: The assertion that the parents' love is good for their children is credible, but cannot be proven, since it is impossible to prove love. 4 For more details, see the unabridged German version. 8 METAPSYCHOLOGY Introduction In the beginning was God, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God … (~ by John 1:1-4) Definitions and Hypotheses • Metapsychology is the theory of everything which is psychically relevant.5 • Everything about which a person speaks or can speak is psychically relevant. • The psychical Relevant is best expressed by way of language. • General language structures are very suitable as analogies for the division of the psychical Relevant. • Psychology is the theory of the personal psychical Relevant. Based on the multiple meanings of the prefix 'meta' (above, between, behind, beyond), I define metapsychology as a level of analysis above psychology, from which the latter can be surveyed and scrutinized. At the same time, metapsychology comprises and permeates all subjects which are associated with psychology. Among the disciplines connected with psychology are, first and foremost, psychiatry, as well as sociology, neurology, biology, and linguistics. However, I also include philosophy and theology which are partly superordinate. The main subject of psychology is the psyche. The subject of metapsychology is all that which is important for the psyche, which interrelates with the psyche, has an impact on it and is able to reflect upon it from a higher level. Therefore, metapsychology examines and reflects upon what I name the psychical Relevant. The consideration of metapsychology and its subject-matter, the psychical Relevant, is very adequate since an isolated analysis of the psyche alone neglects very important connections. In my view, the examination of all aspects of our human existence should be undertaken, rather than limiting our analysis to facts which are only accessible by scientific methods. This means that in addition to all scientific insights acquired by academic psychology, attention should also be given to that which transcends our experiences, which is beyond the demonstrable and perceptible. Thus, all relevant meta-psychical, meta-empirical, philosophical and religious phenomena of existential importance should be considered. In contrast to this perspective, the notion "metapsychology" is used - following Freud - by scholars of psychoanalysis to describe the dynamic, topical and economic interrelations of psychical phenomena. Regarding the sphere of topography, Freud was primarily concerned with the concepts of the Ego, Id and Super-ego; regarding the sphere of psychodynamics, he investigated the mental forces between these entities of the psyche; regarding the sphere of economics, he examined the benefits of specific psychical processes for the person concerned. 5 I denote `everything that is relevant to the psyche shorter `the psychical Relevant´ to simplify matters.This is not exactly the same like the relevance. 9 This study also discusses structural, dynamic and qualitative aspects similar to the psychoanalytic ones. However, these are merely a small part of metapsychology and psychology and are presented from a different perspective.6 More generally, one might say, that none of the models provided by conventional medicine are able to transcend the anthropological perspective i.e. they look at the psyche and its illnesses only from a "horizontal point of view", considerably limiting the possibilities of analysis and therapy. In particular, questions that are most important for a person and which have existential meaning are therefore not answered or only inadequately answered. Existentialists, in particular, have pointed this out. The part "Metapsychology" (similar to the other chapters) will first be discussed in general and then in more detail using concrete examples. At the end of this chapter, I will briefly address some metapsychological topics that are important for this publication. This will only be a selection of a variety of topics, since all topics relevant to the person and examined especially in philosophy, anthropology, psychiatry and psychology, are psychically relevant. • The first section (general issues of psychical relevance) is subdivided into a horizontal and vertical structure. Horizontal arrangement: Differentiation of that which is psychically relevant by presenting analogies of fundamental language structures. Vertical arrangement: The psychical Relevant in its dimensions/ fundamental meanings. • In the second section, important topics are discussed which are psychically relevant. The psyche itself is the focus of attention in the next chapter 'Psychology'. THE GENERAL PSYCHICAL RELEVANT Introduction and Classification In this chapter, we examine what is relevant for the psyche. Synonyms: psychic(al)/ psychological/ that which is significant, important to the soul/ psyche. Nearly all things are psychically relevant (pr). It is difficult to imagine an issue which might not be psychically relevant or which could not become so. The term 'reality' might come as close as possible to that which is psychically relevant. If reality were to be defined as that which affects us, then reality is not merely an objective but also a subjective matter. It is about to differentiate the psychical Relevant and to arrange its meaning. More precisely, it is about an adequate classification of reality and world, person, psyche, and individual according to its importance for the human him/herself. 7 I divide the psychical Relevant (or the reality) in general into In this perspective, Freud's` topography´ appears equivalent to the representatives of psychically relevant (pr) nouns and subjects; the dynamics equivalent to the pr verbs and predicates, and the economics equivalent to the representatives of the dimensions in particular. 7 Sometimes, I use in this work for world, person and individual/ I the shortcut WPI. 6 10 • Differentiations • Dimensions. Concerning the differentiations, I derive from the basic patterns of language both basic patterns of psychically relevant forms and those of the psyche. I'm referring here to simple grammars of developed languages. The differentiations represent the `horizontal classification´ of the psychical Relevant. I use several stages of differentiation and would like to briefly introduce the first one: The four "main aspects": forms of being, life, properties and their connections are derived from the three main word classes: nouns, verbs, adjectives and fourthly from syntax. These will be further differentiated in the course of the study. The dimensions represent fundamental meanings of the psychical Relevant. I distinguish the following fundamental meanings: - the Absolute (A) = absolute dimension - the Relative (R) = relative dimension Nothing(ness) (0).8 I use these as guiding concepts for similar fundamental meanings (More on that later.). The dimensions represent the `vertical classification´ of the psychical Relevant.. Taking differentiation and dimensioning together, the following picture emerges: the A B S O L U T E (A) NET of LANGUAGE the R E L A T I V E (R) Building of each pr unit/ system the N O T H I N G N E S S (0) The psychical Relevant resp. the reality with its units is classified by differentiations and dimensions as by a horizontal and a vertical level. In the horizontal division, basic patterns of language differentiate the psychical Relevant in such as if one would lay a net with coordinates horizontally across that which is to be determined, to order it. This division is designated as horizontal since no evaluative assertion is to be made here as to a specific object's importance and position. Rather, it is the vertical division, the 'dimensions', that provides information about this. Thus, this graph shows the classification of the psychical Relevant through language patterns in specific dimensions. One can also say: The psychical Relevant is derived from what one can say about reality (persons, environment, etc.) and whether that has absolute or relative meaning or no meaning. 8 For the special role of nothing, see later. 11 Classification Levels I distinguish the following 3 stages in the classification of the psychical Relevant (dimensions and differentiations). DIMENSIONS 1st stage of dimensions: the Absolute (A), the Relative (R) and the Nothingness (0). 2nd stage of dimensions: 7 synonyms of the Absolute and Relative 3rd stage of dimensions: All terms listed in the `Summary Table´, concerning dimensions. DIFFERENTIATIONS 1st stage of differentiation: 4 main aspects: being, life, qualities and connections (Abbr. BLQC) 2nd stage of differentiation: 23 single aspects 3rd stage of differentiation: All terms listed in the `Summary table´, concerning differentiations. Note: For the sake of simplicity, I usually only use the 1st dimension stage (AR0) in this script for the dimensions. Concerning the differentiations, I usually use the 1st or 2nd stage. (More on that later.) 12 Differentiations (Analogy Language and the Psychical Relevant) Language and the Psychical Relevant “Language is yet more than blood.” Franz Rosenzweig The differentiation of the psychical Relevant is based on the formation of analogies between patterns of language and patterns of that which is psychically relevant. (This also includes the psyche.) I repeat: the psychical Relevant can be classified horizontally or vertically. The horizontal division differentiates the psychical Relevant and the vertical division, with its dimensions, provides information about their fundamental meanings. The differentiations resemble a grid, such as the one we use to zone the earth's surface into longitudes and latitudes, so as to guarantee better orientation. In the analysis of that which is psychically relevant, it is the language which offers these 'longitudes and latitudes' ('horizontal division'), while the dimensions of the Absolute, Relative and Nothingness provide us with information about the 'altitude' (significance) of the subject-matter ('vertical division'). Initially in this chapter, the differentiation of the psychical Relevant will be discussed in analogy to general language patterns. No other instrument gives us as much information as language about that which is psychically relevant. Language has not only individual but also general meanings and forms of expression. The psyche with its connections can only be determined indirectly. One can draw conclusions about the psyche and that which is important to it from the behavior of people, their dreams, from culture and art, from the history of mankind, or even from their language and many other sources. Therefore, language is by no means the only instrument of expression available to humankind, however, in my opinion, it is the most important means to communicate. This seems to correspond to everyday experience. 9 Do we not learn the most about the world and ourselves from what we say? Isn't language also suitable for drawing conclusions about our inner being? Does language not best reflect the psyche and what is relevant to it? I think so. Language thus appears as a priority metapsychological instrument/medium for making statements about the psyche. Therefore, it seems natural to see also in basic language structures analogies or homologies for psychical structures and to use them as a classification of psychically relevant facts and the psyche itself. Lévi-Strauss and Lacan had a similar idea, postulating a `homology´ between language and (albeit merely) the unconscious.10 I would like to expand and clarify their hypothesis. I believe: 9 Victor Klemperer: "Language writes and thinks not only for me, it also distracts my feeling, it controls my entire spiritual being ..." (p.24) 10 See e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structuralism , 2017. 13 • Basic characteristics of the language in relation to its structure, dynamics, and quality statements are similarly found in the psychical Relevant and the psyche. • This also means that the psyche shows similar characteristics to language in terms of its structure, dynamics, and meaning contents. It seems obvious that in the development of language, general language components and rules of grammar can be understood as reflecting what has been psychically important to people for thousands of years. That which is important to humankind has not only been defined by means of words but also by means of corresponding language patterns. By using language in this way, humankind not only denoted specific terms with specific phenomena but also reflected whose connections and functions as expressions of our psyches and their world experience. Therefore, general, basic language components, such as the parts of speech, prove to be excellent analogies for the representation of general psychical relevant and psychical "basic elements" - and the syntax, in turn, gives us in form of subject, object, predicate and their functions point to analogous psychical forms and their functions, and the semantics shows their meanings. Like language, I also see the psyche as a highly-differentiated system that has certain characteristics on the one hand, but on the other is very flexible and always alive. In analogy to the grammar of the language, one could speak of a Grammar of the psyche. As said, I use in this paper simple grammars of developed languages which are essentially the same in their rules. But here I can only briefly deal with this topic. First stage of Differentiation A basic classification which can be found in almost all developed languages is one which differentiates between nouns, verbs and adjectives, as well as, syntactically, between subjects and predicates. The table below shows the resulting psychically relevant analogies. 1st stage of differentiation Forms of language word class syntax nouns verbs adjectives Psychically relevant forms `main aspects´ I. forms of being II. forms of life III. qualities IV. connections correspond with units dynamics qualities connections, subjects/ objects Therefore, what is both psychically and linguistically relevant can be divided into the following four main components: Being, life, qualities and their connections. In this book, they will be utilized as psychically relevant correlates. Their interplay takes place on different 14 levels with different dimensions, which are particularized in a subsequent chapter. By analogy with language, this differentiation is expanded to include 23 aspects. This is the “second differentiation stage” of that which is psychically relevant, and of the psyche itself. At the end of all differentiations, one would find what all possible pr words represent in their infinite variety. Thus far, the following analogies were made in the first stage of differentiation: I. Nouns = being (= forms of being or units) II. Verbs = life (= dynamics) III. Adjectives = qualities IV. Syntax = subjects, objects and their connections. Abbreviation: (BLQC) In the first stage of differentiation these four main aspects of that which is psychically relevant have been determined. I believe they also reflect 4 important themes of humanity: I. Being or not-being, II. Life or death, III. Good or evil, IV. Subject or object. These in turn are embedded in the theme of the Absolute. (See also: Fundamental Problems in Metapsychotherapy).| 15 Second Stage of Differentiation If we further differentiate the four main aspects mentioned above, a different number of aspects will accrue, depending on the method employed and the stage of differentiation envisioned. In my experience, further differentiation to the following 23 individual aspects is very helpful: Forms of l a n g u a g e SINGLE ASPECTS of psychical relevant forms Units 1 Everything / Something (Nothingness) 2 God / World 3 People / Things 4 I / Other(s) 5 Personal Spirit/ Soul, Body 6 - / Gender Forms of life Dynamics (and Modalities) Modalities 7 to be 8 to want 9 to have 10 can 11 must 12 should 13 may, be allowed Activities 14 to create 15 to do, to produce 16 to perceive 17 to reproduce 18 to judge Times 19 past 20 present 21 future Qualities Qualities 22 right, wrong 23 negative, positive Forms of being I. NOUNS Articles II. VERBS Modal auxiliary verbs Full verbs III. ADJECTIVES The single aspects of differentiation are differently dimensioned. In the 1st-5th unit in the above table, the aspects with absolute dimensionality are named first, whilst aspects with relative dimensionality are shown behind the slash. Further explications can be found in the unabridged German version. The 3rd stage of differentiation is presented in the `Summary table´. 16 The method employed here to categorize that which is psychically relevant or psychological, by determining analogies from language, has the advantage that the single aspects can be expanded indefinitely so that everything concerning people (and therefore each psychologically relevant term) can be integrated into this system. An objection raised against this kind of differentiation argues that there are languages with basic structures that are entirely different. In fact, even for the most advanced languages, there are very different grammatical theories, that differ from the usual simple "school grammar" used here. Doubtlessly, this is a valid objection. However, I believe that, from a certain point, every kind of language and grammar can be used to express what is most important to a person. (Otherwise, adequate translation into many different languages could not be possible.) Therefore, the classification used here is merely one of many possibilities to infer that which is psychically relevant from general forms of language. I intentionally use simple grammar (“school grammar”), since it best reflects the every-day use of language. Alongside language, that what is psychically relevant is reflected in many ways: It is obvious in our behavior, gestures, facial expressions, art and much more. Yet, none of these forms of expression is as differentiated and yet comprehensible, as is language. 17 Dimensions “If names be not correct, language is not in accordance with the truth of things. If language be not in accordance with the truth of things, affairs cannot be carried on to success.” (Confucius) "The word, according to its nature, is the freest among the spiritual creatures but also the most endangered and dangerous. Therefore, watchmen of the word are necessary." (Hrabanus Maurus) 11 Explanation and Terms The dimensions represent fundamental meanings of the psychical Relevant. `Fundamental´ means that all (and not only certain) the psychical Relevants are recorded in their basic and most important meaning. So you can say that each psychical Relevant (each existence) has absolute and/or relative meaning. 12 This is not about any assignment of meaning per se, but an assignment that encompasses all that is psychically relevant and at the same time says the most important thing about it. For example, the categories 'right or wrong', 'pleasant or uncomfortable', 'ripe or immature', `rational or irrational´ and similar terms would neither include everything that is psychically relevant nor show their most important meanings, priorities. Similar terms are: existential, basic determining meanings, -reference systems, -scale, -positions, -standpoints, -perspectives, -importances.13 As mentioned, I distinguish (1st stage of dimensions) • the Absolute (A) • the Relative (R) 14 [Nothingness (0)] 15 As said, I use these terms as guiding concepts for the later named `7 synonyms´ (2nd stage of dimensions). These are different aspects of the same. Comparison of the most important `fundamental meanings´. absolute self actual whole unconditional primary independent relative different possible partial conditional secondary dependent The dimensions represent the 'vertical classification' of that which is psychically relevant. They attribute the respective fundamental meaning to the pr units and differentiations: 11 1. Cit. by H. Cibulka: Tagebücher, Halle (Saale), 1976, p. 137. Emphasis by me. 2. Similar Ortega y Gasset: „... it is by no means indifferent how we formulate things. The law of life perspective is not only subjective, but rooted in the nature of things ... itself. ... The mistake is to assume that it is up to our arbitrariness to assign things to their proper rank." [In: „Triumph des Augenblicks Glanz der Dauer“ DVA Stuttgart, 1983 S. 75ff. Tranlated by m.E.] 12 For inversions of these meanings, see the section `Metapsychiatry´. 13 In this paper, I use the terms fundamental meanings and basic meanings synonymously. 14 Abbreviation: Relatives = R. I deliberately set the R in italics in order to distinguish this symbol from the abbreviation which denotes the (psychical) Relevant (R). 15 As said, the nothing plays a special role, which I will come back to. It only exists as a pseudo-nothing (not²), because there is no 'real nothing' (nothing1). (In my opinion, this would be a consequence of −A). 18 an absolute or relative meaning. It is the absolute dimension which is the decisive factor. The Absolute and the Relative have thoroughly different characteristics and effects. This fact is important if considering the theory of the genesis of mental disorders. The Absolute (and the Nothingness) have a primarily "spiritual nature", while the Relative is more material. Absolute or relative adjectives prove helpful in representing the nature of the respective dimensions. They provide information on whether forms of being and forms of life, qualities and their relations have absolute, relative or no significance. In this study, the relative dimension is marked by gradable adjectives, whilst absolute adjectives serve to identify the absolute dimension.16 Classification Overview Overall, I classify the dimensions according to the following categories: • their `spheres´ (absolute, relative, null = 1st classification stage; or to the corresponding 7 synonyms = 2nd classification stage), • their 'rank' (first-rate, second-rate) • their 'orientation' (pro/+, contra/‒, nothing) • their place of occurrence (e.g., dimensions of the world, the person, the psyche, etc.) (More on that later.) In this way, each pr phenomenon can be classified according to the following categories: absolute, relative or nothing (0); first-rate, second-rate; pro/+, contra/‒ or null, and by its place. The Absolute (A) `The ground of things is the unconditioned, the Absolute.´ (freely adapted from Novalis)17 What is it that is our ultimate concern? What is it that affects us most? What, for us, is of utmost importance? Hunger and love? (F. Schiller). The drives and the unconscious? (S. Freud). The "chow"? (B. Brecht).18 Religion? (P. Tillich). Genes? Pleasure or reality? Ideologies? The laws of nature? The views differ. I call it the Absolute (A). I distinguish: • first-rate, actual Absolute (A) • second-rate, strange Absolute (sA).19 Both types can have positive or negative connotations. (The sA can also be ambivalent.) 16 An absolute adjective is an adjective with a meaning that is generally not capable of being intensified or compared. The gradable adjective means we can have different levels of that quality. 17 Novalis: "We seek the unconditioned everywhere and find only things."(NS II: 412, Nr. 1). 18 B. Brecht in `Dreigroschenoper: ”Chow comes first; morality second.” 19 The terms 'actual´, `real' and 'first-rate' as well as the terms 'strange' and 'second-rate' are used synonymously. 19 That´s why I distinguish • an actual, positive/ or negative Absolute (+A/ ‒A) • strange, positive or negative (or ambivalent) Absolutes (+sA, ‒sA or sA). (More in this section of `Metapsychiatry'.) I believe: the Absolute is the determining spirit of anything psychical Relevant. Similar to nothingness, it can neither be proven to exist nor compared to another matter; nevertheless, it is of existential significance. Since it is the foundation of our spiritual life, it is always with us. Our live rests upon it. We stand or fall with our Absolutes. We live or die through them. Of course, what is most important to people, or even the Absolute, is very diverse. I believe that every person has their own Absolutes. Subjectively and individually, we have thousands of Absolutes: Gods that we love with all our heart, or devils and enemies that we fear and hate. Some people think safety is paramount, whilst others believe that health is the greatest good. A third group might say that the meaning of life is realized to be good people, whilst yet others are convinced that progress is of the highest significance. Others consider certain individuals to be the most important etc. In this way, every one of us has its own outlook on life and a frame of reference, in the center of which there is an Absolute. Mostly, an individual's parents and the environment have a great influence on the development of this `framework´. Some of these worldviews are known by a certain name, as is the case regarding religions and ideologies but others are not. I have experienced that even individuals who are members of a particular church have a variety of private beliefs which often strongly contrasts with their relevant confession. Therefore, a formal profession of belief in God due to an individual's affiliation with a Church might not be specifically meaningful. Besides their formal religion, they may also believe in money, power, progress, a political party, their father, mother, their wife or simply themselves - and is there someone of us who does not?20 However, the most important may also be negative. It may seem most essential to a person not to be immoral, unfaithful, dependent, or not to become like another person. This negative goal then needs to be avoided at all costs, it is considered to be the worst possible outcome, an unacceptable condition, the unforgivable, mortal sin, or the like. - In my view, all approaches to life, all worldviews, whether formalized or private, conscious or unconscious, have different Absolutes which are the basis of these worldviews and ideologies. - Furthermore, the simple conclusion follows that these Absolutes determine also to which extent an individual is able to cope with their own person, with other people and the world around them. Therefore, these respective Absolutes are also crucial for the genesis and therapy of psychical illnesses. 21 - Considering the Absolute as the core of the psyche is not a new concept. The philosopher 20 21 F. Nietzsche: „There are more idols than realities in the world...“ (Twilight of the Idols). For example, it is a crucial difference whether I believe that morality is for man or man is for morality. Or whether progress or science or any other Relative is for man or vice versa. 20 Karl Jaspers claimed that the kind of God a person believes determines his true being. (More precisely, one might say that the kind of God and the kind of devil a person accepts determines their true being.) S. Kierkegaard expressed similar thoughts. Especially psychotherapists of the “Viennese School” (W. Daim and I. Caruso) were convinced that misabsolutizations are decisive of the emergence of mental disorders. Unfortunately, their work is little known. Summary The Absolute (A) is the core of a person's identity. (This concept can be summarized in the mottoes: “I am like my A” or alternatively, “my A is my life”.) In addition, the A is the ultimate creative sphere. Whatever a person places above themselves becomes an Absolute. Though the Absolute cannot be proven, it can be experienced and it is more or less apparent and plausible. It is not possible to prove the Absolute in general, nor is it feasible to prove the Absolute of a person (their Self). It is only possible to believe in it. In principle, the Absolute is a metaphysical or spiritual category, which means that we can only describe it in words or portray it by using analogies or metaphors, etc. In this sense, it is unspeakable, elusive. It is a priori, a basic assumption. The Absolute is only defined by itself. It is self-explanatory. 22 Different rules and characteristics apply to the sphere of the Absolute than to the sphere of the Relative. (This statement will prove particularly relevant if examining the effects of inversions and the genesis of illnesses, as will be explained in the following chapters.) An investigation of the causes of mental disorders is ultimately (!) a quest for the Absolute. Similarly, the main and most important answers (therapy) are also found in the sphere of the Absolute. 22 Thus, it appears reasonable that God should say of himself “I am who I am”. 21 The 7 Synonyms of the Absolute (2nd stage of differentiation) The character of the Absolute (A) becomes more apparent if looking at the origin of the word: It originates from the Latin word “absolutus” and denotes a matter or subject which is detached and independent. In this study, I use the following 7 synonyms: 1. absolute 2. self 3. actual 4. whole, complete 5. unconditional 6. primary, first-rate 7. independent The term `absolute´ is the keyword. Short Systematic Overview Rank of the Absolute After the rank I distinguish actual first- and strange second-rate Absolutes.23 • To the first-rate Absolutes (A): - the first-rate positive Absolute (+A) - the first-rate negative Absolute (‒A) - and the personal "attitude toward the Absolute", which I will discuss later. 24 • To the second-rate, strange Absolutes (sA) - positive/pro and negative/contra-sA (+sA and ‒sA) - strange nothingness (s0 or only 0). 25 They play an essential part in the emergence of mental disorders and will be discussed in greater detail in the following chapters. Spheres of the Absolute The first-rate actual Absolute (A¹) has the following parts: A-center = the core-Absolute is only and exclusively-absolute. A-external = the external Absolute is relative and also-absolute. Core-Absolute (only absolute) The whole Absolute Outside-Absolute (relative or also absolute) In the first-rate reality, the Relative is co-absolutized by the Absolute, so that this Relative is here `also- absolute´. 23 Hint: first-rate and actual, and second-rate and strange are synonyms! I use these different names depending on the topic. For the sake of simplicity, I often identify the first-rate A instead of A¹ only with A. For further details see.'Absolute attitude´. 24 25 I use the terms `positive' and `pro' as well as the terms `negative' and `contra' synonymously. 22 Preview: Spheres of a second-rate, strange Absolute (sA). The core and relative spheres of the sA are divided and distorted. More details can be found in this section of 'Metapsychiatry'. Representatives, Places of Occurrences • Representatives of the 3 actual Absolutes - Representatives of +A¹: God / love as the +A¹; Personal: the + `Absolute attitude´ toward the Absolute´. - Representatives of −A¹: `the absolute evil' and its choice. - Representatives of the absolute sphere of person. • Representatives of strange Absolutes (sA) +sA: general or individual +sA parts e.g. ideal of itself = 'Ideal-I' or 'Self-Ideal', ideal of others (e.g. ideal of other people, of the world as idol, ideologies, etc.) ‒sA: general or individual ‒sA-parts with absolutely negative connotations (e.g. taboos etc.) 0 = negated or repressed first-rate matters. Overview and preview of important terms and abbreviations +A¹ A¹ first-rate ¹ = actual `absolute attitude´ –A¹ It-core of a `dyad´: second-rate ² = strange sA = strange Absolute, A² personal sA as sS = strange-Self and 0 •  = strange All • 0 = Nothingness C*= Complexes It Many Its It-core of a`triad´: • pro-sA / sS • contra-sA /sS ▪ 0 = Nothingness A = the Absolute sA = strange Absolute sS = strange Self (the personal sA) = strange All in an all-or-nothing relations. 0 = Nothingness It = complex of strange All and 0 (`dyad') or of pro and contra and 0 part (`triad') in the core. C = general abbreviation for complexes that dominate personal and other areas of reality. 26 The terms will be explained in detail in the section 'Metapsychiatry´. 26 The complexes range from the simplest complexes, the sA, sS,  and 0, up to the Its, which consist of them and further to complexes, which consist of two or more Its, or as 'hypercomplexes' of very many Its. (See also the section on Complexes in the part `Metapsychiatry'.) 23 Hint: pro-sA and +sA on the one hand and contra-sA and ‒sA on the other hand will be viewed as equal throughout this book. The Relative (R) The Meaning of the Relative 27 The Relative is created by the Absolute. The Relative is subordinate to the Absolute. It has a relative meaning in relation to it. Other than the Absolute, which only has one meaning and is first-rate, the Relative has a great variety of meanings. Relative would, strictly speaking, only be described in comparative terms. It could be compared to the interpretations of dreams or of symptoms, which are also not limited to one single specific meaning. So basically, you cannot think of the Relative as an independent. When we use the term “the Relative”, we should actually say “the Relative of the Absolute”. Therefore, the Relative is not as independent as the term might have you expect. The word relative mainly describes a relation. The Relative cannot exist without the Absolute, in a similar way as there is no part without the whole - just as no illness exists in isolation from the affected person - or it is said, it would have a relatively independent existence. The Relative can be proved, the Absolute may only be believed. 28 The Relative is best defined from the Absolute. The first-rate relative sphere forms a continuum with its components but our language divides this continuum into separate entities. This also applies to the classification of diseases. Contrary to the Absolute, the Relatives can only be in a relative opposition. I.e., two Relatives can only be set in relative opposition to each other. Therefore, there is no dualism or absolute opposition of body and soul, health and illness, subject and object and so on in the first-rate reality. Absolute opposite and separation only exist between +A and ‒A. The Relatives as strange Absolutes (sA) however, can be of absolute relevance to the individual. Then they are not only ambiguous but often appear to be contradicting and paradoxical. The qualities of Relatives are not absolutely distinct, which means that something that usually has a negative meaning, can appear positive (and vice versa) - i.e. everything Relative has one relative positive (+) and one relative negative (‒) side, or several of these sides. There is no Relative that is solely positive or negative. Then it would not be relative but absolute. The sayings: “Everything (Relative) has two sides” and “Everything has its advantages and disadvantages” are well-known. This fact is also important when it comes to mental disorders, which are also Relatives. It relativizes the statement that illness and its causes are solely negative and health and its causes are only positive. Only God, more or less also the first-rate Self, spirit, and life can be seen as actual Absolutes. The terms “person”, 27 28 Unless otherwise stated, this is about the first-rate Relative. One might formulate more precisely: the Relative is ultimately only relatively good to prove, while the Absolute is believable. 24 “personality” and “self” can be used best to show the Absolute part of a person. Also, terms such as sense, truth, fairness, dignity, freedom, and love are indicators for the actual Absolute. Terms such matter, body, thing, object, the worldly or functions are important representations of the Relative. 7 Synonyms of the Relative (2nd stage of differentiation) Just as I named 7 synonyms of the Absolute in the 2nd stage of differentiation, I also name 7 synonyms of the first-rate Relative. The Relative (compared to the Absolute) is: 1. relative, relational 2. different 3. possible 4. partial 5. conditional 6. secondary 7. dependent29 The term `relative´ is the keyword. Preview: For comparison, the most important characteristics of second-rate Relatives (R²). For their identification I mostly use the left, first mentioned forms. (See also in the `Summary table columns I and L lines 1-7. The character of the sA ibid. Column K lines 1-7). 1. inadequate/ hyperabsolutized/ unrelated 2. strange/ hyperidentical/ without identity 3. unreal/ hyperreal/ essenceless 4. split/ one-sided/ detached 5. accidental / determined/ undetermined 6. second-rate/ extreme/ unconnected 7. too heteronomous/ pseudoautonomous/ detached. Assignment of certain absolute and relative aspects Absolute Relative absolute self actual whole unconditional first-rate (primary) independent relative different possible partial conditional secondary dependent More about 'The Absolute and Relative in comparison' - see unabridged German version. 29 As said, relative properties should always be presented in the comparative form, however, for the sake of simplicity, I will portray them in their base form in this study. More on later. 25 Symbols which show the relations between A and R A A R R R A R A R A (Fig. 1) These symbolic pictures show the priority of A compared to R (from left to right): The Absolute is the center/ the superordinate/ the basis/ the primary/ and the comprehensive. According to it, the Relative is the peripheral/ the subordinate/ the superstructure/ the secondary and the limited. Nothingness is outside of AR. The Nothingness (0) I believe that the actual nothingness is a result of the negative Absolute. The strange second-rate nothingness may be seen as a result of the sA or else as a category of second-rate realities. Something became worthless, meaningless, nothing, null, void, negated, etc. (See also `Emergence of the nothingness´). General Units/ Systems Terms/ Definitions I distinguish the following pr systems/units that will be described more specifically later on: (I denote the more absolute before the Relative). 1. Everything, All - Something 2. God - World 3. People - Things 4. I - Others 5. Spirit - Body, Mind. If you look at the dimensions, there is an absolute and a relative sphere in every system/ unit. In the absolute sphere, there can be one or more Absolutes. If it is a first-rate pr system, there is only one actual Absolute. Is it a strange, second-rate pr system however, there will be at least two if not stranger Absolutes. Shortcut: system, unit = Σ (The terms unit and system are used synonymously here for the sake of simplicity .) World, Person and I “That I recognize what the world holds together in the innermost.” Goethe, Faust. The world, the person and the I (= WPI) are made of one first-rate reality and a lot of second-rate realities. Whether our world is „the best of all possible worlds“, as Leibniz said, or whether one is, as Schopenhauer (and Buddha) said, stricken by “the sorrow of life“, or the person is considered good or bad - philosophers have very different opinions about that. I think everything from ‒A to +A is represented, although most of them are probably somewhere in between. I.e., people live in a world between heaven and hell - sometimes 26 belonging more to one side than the other. This is a world that will always be in need of redemption, just as we are. A commonality of all realities/ systems (Σ) is that they are determined by different Absolutes (A or sA). (Fig. 2) This illustration shows how different systems can be interconnected by equal absolute spheres. See also: The juxtaposition of different realities and Relations between spirit, psyche and body. For details on the following topics see the unabridged German version: Basic relations in pr realities/ systems. The interplay of general language forms and differentiations. Relations between various pr units. The person between +A / ‒A and R. 27 Summary In the chapter 'Metapsychology', you will find the introduction of the classification of any kind of psychical relevant topics. The classification has a vertical and a horizontal axis. The vertical axis consists of dimensions of the Absolute, Relative and nothingness. The differentiations make up the horizontal axis. These are deduced from fundamental forms of language. All psychical relevant realities have specific dimensions and differentiations, where the absolute dimension determines the specific reality. It is divided into first-rate and second-rate, strange dimensions and thus, into a first-rate and second-rate realities. Usually, those have very different characteristics. Here, the second-rate strange realities (particularly the second-rate psychical) form the most important basis for the development of mental disorders. One can say: 1. General: Metapsychology, or what is psychologically relevant, has to do with existential, fundamental meanings whose main representatives are the Absolute, the Relative and the nothingness, and with what nouns, verbs and adjectives represent - i.e. with "structures" (forms), "movements" and "qualities". And psychically relevant connections have something to do with what subjects, objects and predicates represent (1st classification stage). 2. The `2nd classification stage´ corresponds to the first vertical column of the `Summary table´. In keywords, Metapsychology or the psychical Relevant (as well as the psyche) has to do with: The Absolute, with sense, with identity, truth, unity (wholeness), unconditionality (security), causes, independence (a1-a7); Further with: Everything and nothing, God and the world, I and other people, spirit, mind and body, gender, conditions, aspirations, ownership, necessities, obligations, rights, the new and the old, actions, information, portrayals, meanings, mistakes, the past, the present and the future, with qualities and with all `movements', i.e. actions and processes that are connected to them. They all can have (actual or strange) absolute, relative or no importance. 3. To the `3rd classification stage´, one could allot all pr terms of the `Summary Table´. 4. Infinitely differentiated, one could say: metapsychology or everything psychically relevant or the psyche ultimately has to do with every psychical relevant word and sentence. For me, it was most useful to use the usual grammar as a basis for analogies in order to differentiate psychically relevant things. Thus the used classification appears, like the language itself, as an open system, which can be extended or changed if necessary. It seems to me that this categorization, therefore, offers considerably more possibilities than the usual classifications in psychology and psychiatry to represent something psychically relevant in general or the psyche in particular. The attention to the existential basic meanings of the psychologically relevant ("dimensions") and the presentation of their confusions is, in turn, beneficial for understanding the genesis of mental illness. 28 Summary of the classification LANGUAGE PSYCHICAL RELEVANT DIMENSIONS (absolute / relative) Comparation (Comparative forms of adjectives) absolute / and relative adjectives a1 a2 a3 a4 a5 a6 a7 absolute / relative self / different actual / possible whole / partial unconditional / conditional primary (first-rate) / secondary (second-rate) ndependent / dependent MAIN ASPECTS (General Differentiation) Word class Nouns Verbs Adjectives Syntax Being Life Qualities I Units: Spirit / Matter II Dynamics: Life / Functioning III Qualities: abs./ relative Qualities Contexts IV Contexts: Subjects/ Objects SINGLE ASPECTS (Single Differentiation) NOUNS Forms of being VERBS Modal auxiliary verbs Forms of life Modalities Full verbs Activities ADJECTIVES Qualities Units All / something (nothing) God / world People / things I / other(s) pers. spirit / soul, body Gender Dynamics (and Modalities) 7 to be 8 to want 9 to have 10 can 11 must 12 should 13 may, be allowed 14 to create 15 to do, to produce 16 to perceive 17 to reproduce 18 to judge 19 past 20 present 21 future Qualities 22 right, wrong 23 negative, positive 1 2 3 4 5 6 29 INDIVIDUAL METAPSYCHOLOGICAL TOPICS Here, I focus on the topics of the `2nd classification stage´. I will try, in particular, to find answers to the following questions: Which are the most important psychical relevant (pr) topics? What is reality, truth, freedom, the Self, the I and so on? Is there only one reality, just one truth, one freedom, one Self, etc.? Or are there a large number of them: a large number of realities, a large number of truths, a large number of freedoms, many Egos and Selves? And if so, what are they? General Hypotheses “Hypotheses are nets, only he who casts will catch.” (Novalis) In this chapter, I distinguish with regard to every specific, psychical relevant topic between absolute and relative forms and between first-rate (= actual) and second-rate (= strange). • The first-rate forms consist of only one +Absolute (divine/ celestial form), which comprises many relative forms. • The second-rate forms consist of many strange absolute and strange relative forms. Here, the strange absolute forms are separated into two opposites and one zero part. (Why this is so, I explain later here.) So I distinguish between one first-rate Absolute (+A), which forms with its Relatives (R¹) a manifold unity: one first-rate reality/ world (W¹) - and many second-rate, strange Absolutes (sA) with many second-rate, strange Relatives (R²) which create diverse second-rate realities/ worlds (W²).| (These statements are basically statements of belief, although a large number of the specific literature gives the impression that this is not the case. Phrases like “there is no absolute truth!” can be found often. However, the author should say: “I believe, that there is no absolute truth!”) Regarding the Dimensions In the following section, the 7 aspects of the dimensions are sequentially ordered (`2nd stage of dimensions). What applies to +A and the sA, also applies to their synonyms: therefore to first-rate or second-rate identity (a2), first-rate or second-rate actuality, truth (a3), first-rate or secondrate unity (a4), first-rate or second-rate unconditionality/ safety (a5), first-rate or secondrate causes (a6) and first-rate or second-rate autonomy and freedom (a7). They will be specified further in the following. At each first-rate aspect, I mention a `Meta'-term. So I want to make it clear that this firstrate meta-stage is the highest, includes everything Relative and is stronger than any sA, which have only relative importance from this perspective. 30 Solutions (a1) The Absolute and the Relative were discussed above in `hypotheses' and as `general conceptions' in chapter `Dimensions' (1st stage). In relation to their (main?) function one can say: • There is one first-rate absolute solution (= salvation and redemption) and many first-rate relative solutions. • In contrast, there are many second-rate solutions: second-rate (pseudo-) absolute, when a relative solution has been absolutized, or second-rate relative, when other solutions have been derived from a pseudo-absolute solution. (For details, see section `Solutions´). Identity, Self (a2) Identity can be understood as the 'inner unity of a person' or as 'essential likeness'. I distinguish first-rate, actual identity and second-rate, strange identities: • The first-rate, actual identity encloses all possible relative identities, no matter if they are positive or negative. I think that the identities we give ourselves, such as 'a good person', our profession or our status, are not the absolute identity but more relative/ attributive identities. In my opinion, the highest identity is the identity that God gives to us, (theomorphism), which also continues to even if we are not at ease with our own idea of our identity. It represents itself personally as the positive Self. It also integrates our second-rate, strange identities. That means, that I can always feel identical to myself, even if I am strange to myself or can't see who I actually think I am. Even from that perspective, entirely alienated, I receive a fundamental, indestructible identity (from God / the love). One can identify this identity also as `meta-identity´ because it stands above all other relative or strange identities and compensates these.30 • In contrast to that, there is a large number of second-rates (pseudo-)absolute identities. They consist of one hyper-identical and one contrary, strange and one zero part. They are fixed on specific identities and exclude other, mostly negative ones. In this case, the affected person has either the sense of a strange or even unacceptable identity, of a hyper-identity, or no identity at all. Example: If my status as psychotherapist establishes my absolute identity, then I would feel as if my entire identity is lost when losing this status. Also, relativistic over-identifications may lead to a strange or non-existent identity, although many authors see it differently, e.g., “The structure of the complete Identity is a reflection of the whole social process”. 31 The definitions of the Self by Kernberg and others goes into the same direction. It appears good, to define the above named attributes (nationality, profession ...) as something that is part of one’s actual Self. Stronger, however, is the first-rate core identity, which can be found deep within a person that causes me to be myself. But whenever relative identities become absolute, the person is confronted with a large number of 30 Man has absolute identity only in his absolute basic attitude. See also `Self - the personal Absolute´ in part Psychology. 31 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbolischer_Interaktionismus 31 different, sometimes paradoxical identities that cannot be integrated anymore. Isn't that one of the main problems of our clients, that the free and unshakable identity is being limited and bound to severe requirements, so that we can only feel comfortable and identical to ourselves if those internalized requirements affirm it? Isn't it obvious, how vulnerable, questionable, delicate and potentially pathogenic such an image of man is? But we need an indestructible identity. (See also `Disorder of the person's identity´). Truth (a3) "The higher a truth is, the higher you have to look to understand it." (Antoine de Saint-Exupéry) I am convinced, that there are several “truths”. I distinguish between first-rate, actual truth and “second-rate, strange truths”. • The first-rate, actual truth includes all potential, relative truths. The first-rate, actual truth is an entity with a variety of relative sections of truth. More specifically: Every relatively true statement is connected to a relatively opposing statement, which is also relatively true.32 Both “truths” are neither absolutely true nor absolutely untrue.33 Those relative truths only stay true if they are embedded in the firstrate actual truth. The first-rate truth does not only include objective truths but also subjective truths. One could identify it as 'meta-truth'. Also: objectivity will be the most truthful if it does not attempt to be solely objective but also includes subjectivity. And subjectivity will be the strongest and truest when it involves objectivity. The first-rate truth is stronger than the second-rate, strange truths, and can compensate those. • In the case of “second-rate, strange truths”, a relative truth is turned into an absolute truth, and a relative opposite becomes an absolute opposite. Then, there is only absolutely true or absolutely untrue, right or wrong, black or white etc. What someone has absolutized will also determine what he thinks is true and right. So a capitalist will believe true and right is that what increases his capital, or a moralist, what serves morality, etc. Also: If a (relative) truth will exaggerate, a relative untruth arises. Similar to the truths, the various realities also depend on the Absolute. They are subordinated to an Absolute and this Absolute determines if they are first-rate or secondrate. Those statements go hand in hand with the conceptions of the modern logic. For example: “The correctness or falsehood of a system can only be determined from outside of the system” = Gödel's incompleteness theorems. 34 32 Sometimes, a relative untruth can be truer than a relative truth. E.g.: Although the statement is generally right that one should not hurt other people, the opposite may be more right in individual cases (e.g. surgery). 33 Therefore, the endless discussions about who is right are mostly useless because usually neither side is absolutely wrong. 34 Logik Wörterbuch p. 189 32 Truth and Rightness Truth is stronger than rightness because the latter is often `short lived´. (P. Bamm) Here are just a few keywords: We need to differentiate between truth and `rightness'. Truth is an important topic in philosophy, rightness/ correctness in sciences. The truth one can believe, the rightness one can prove. Truth first and foremost captures the essence, correctness the thing in itself. Similar statements: truth is a semantic category, correctness a syntactic category. Truth is believable, the rightness is provable but the credible is stronger than the provable. "The dignity of man is inviolable" and similar statements are truths to me. But one cannot prove that they are right. Although the truth is often defined as accordance between reality and intellect ("Veritas est adaequatio rei et intellectus"), I see no accordance because reality is only partially logically comprehensible. The rightness should be embedded in truth and the search for truth should not be independent of the search for that which is correct. To me, rightness appears as a kind of relative truth. Unity (a4) I distinguish between first-rate, actual unity and second-rate, strange “units”. • The first-rate, actual unity may be absolute or relative. There is only one first-rate unity, in which all relative units are embedded. Personally, I believe that the unity of a person with God is an absolute unity. This unity contains all the (positive and negative) Relatives, also splittings and dissociations. From that standpoint, nothing can separate us from God and there cannot be any kind of dissociation within us because we are always protected and secure in that unity. Therefore, I believe that this is the strongest force against any psycho-pathological division and dissociation because every society and every individual tends to split off the negative, and our human power is often not strong enough to overcome these splittings. This first-rate, actual unity is a kind of `meta-unit´. • In contrast, there are many second-rate, strange "units" that are determined by strange Absolutes (= 'It'). These Its and their units are self-contradictory (→ The It as a nine-sided triad, `Disorder of the person's unity´), they have a contradictory dynamic (see, for example, `Disorder of the person's identity´) and are found in all mental illnesses (e.g., Schizophrenia). Safety (a5) I distinguish between first-rate, actual safety and second-rate, strange safeties. • The first-rate, actual safety may be absolute or relative. There is only one first-rate absolute safety with a large number of first-rate, relative forms of safety. One can speak of a `meta-safety´ because it is higher than all relative safeties or uncertainties and compensates these. That means, that in spite of uncertainties, a person might still feel safe at a "higher 33 level". • In contrast to that, there are many second-rate, pseudo-absolute and strange relative safeties. The pseudo-absolute safeties have one “over- secure” variant, one opposite too insecure and one zero variant. Example: Something can cause a person to feel absolutely safe: such as being absolutely sure, to reach a certain goal. However, if this safety is questioned lost, the safety may become a big uncertainty. Anything in-between is missing. Also, there is no awareness of other safeties (zero variant). Causes and Results (a6) I distinguish between: a) first-rate, actual causes, which can be first-rate and absolute (“primary cause”), or hereinafter relative (“first-rate relative causes” from R¹). b) second-rate, strange causes (“strange causes”), which emerge first from sA, or hereinafter from their Relatives (R²). To be more exact: • To a) One may think of one first-rate, actual cause with a large number of relative causes from R¹. Personally, I see the first “primary cause” in God. A second, “primary cause”, corresponds to the basic attitude of a person, which can be the foundation of multiple other causes. For our topic, it is important, that people do not only see themselves as victims of a complex interplay of conditions and requirements but also as a person who can primarily and independently bring new positive to a system. • To b) Second-rate, strange causes emerge if relative causes are given pseudo-absolute importance. These are causes for certain behaviors, perceptions, etc., that often not correspond to the actual fundamental attitude of a person. They are products from It/sA or their systems. Those have two opposite parts and one zero part. That means, that the second-rate causes, especially the heteronomous desire, are divided into a pro-part (“I want this”), into its opposite (“I want the opposite”) and into a zero part (“I want nothing”). The It/sA are typical second-rate causes.35 They create second-rate worlds/realities, secondrate personal and individual changes (WPI²). Those may become further second-rate causes, especially of illness. The It/sA as second-rate causes have very special characteristics and effects, which will be listed in detail later on (`General effects of the Its´). It is worth mentioning that they mainly have indirect and ambivalent effects. They also extend far beyond the original range of action (s. Spreading). They are the cause for Vicious cycles.36 35 36 Reminder: sA = strange Absolute, It = sA, Contra-sA and 0sA as three-part "unit". Since vicious cycles occur in the relative range, they are best resolved from an + absolute range. (See later) 34 Six Hypotheses on Causes of Changes of the Psychical Relevant 1st hypothesis: The primary causes of a pr occurrence come from the absolute sphere of a personal subject (`individual´). That “subject” may be a person, God or ‒A. Put otherwise: The above-named subjects are able to bring something totally new into pr systems. So, as said before, the person is not just a product of some relationships but may add something new to his own healing process. 2nd hypothesis: In a pr system, any pr cause may have any relative result. That also means, that, put the other way around: Any relative result - negative or positive - (such as health or sickness) may come from every kind of cause. But with very different probability! (Exceptions s. below.) That also means, that any psychical symptom of illness, may have a large number of different causes, even if the probabilities are very different. E. Bleuler said something similar to that: “It took very long until one realized that a psychopathological disorder can be caused by very different noxas and that one noxa may lead to different disorders.” 37 That also means there is no absolute clear interpretation of symptoms, dreams and other kinds of pr phenomena but interpretations may only have high or low validity. (In that context, it is good to mention that opposite interpretations of second-rate realities are more likely than one would assume.) When it comes to therapy that means that: There is a great variety of therapeutic possibilities, even if the quality is very different. 3rd hypothesis: Is about an exclusion of the 2nd hypothesis: An absolutely positive cause has no absolutely negative result, and the other way around: An absolutely negative cause has no absolutely positive result. Expressed in religious terms: There is nothing absolutely negative coming from God but something relatively negative sometimes (something that feels negative, such as sorrow and illness). Also, there is nothing absolutely positive that can come from ‒A but something relatively positive. God focuses on the +A, while the goal of ‒A is the absolutely negative. 4th hypothesis: Results of causes may become causes for other results. These can occur as circular or systemic causes, or as web or bundle of causes. 5th hypothesis: First-rate causes originate from the spiritual sphere. Although the primacy of a spiritual (or ideational) causation cannot be proved, nor the primacy of material causation, there is presently the danger of one-sidedly searching for causes of mental illness in the material-somatic sphere and, accordingly, of treating them unilaterally (KW Psychotropic drugs). [Since it is known that traumatizations can cause brain and gene changes that can be inherited, some ideas of heredity are also relativized.38] 6th hypothesis: If the principles (axioms) are wrong, then their derivatives too. (→ Further see on Causes of mental disorders.) 37 38 Bleuler E. Lehrbuch der Psychiatrie. Springer-Verlag Berlin-Heidelberg-New York, 1983, p. 132. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgenerational_trauma 35 Autonomy and Freedom (a7) We, as humans, are only total independent when it comes to our absolute ability of choice. Otherwise, we are more or less dependent. I believe that only God is absolutely free. We are only free in relation to the Absolute.39 S. Kierkegaard said something similar. Therefore, I believe that the goal of absolute autonomy and independence, that a large number of people and therapists have, is unreal and overexerts us. I distinguish first-rate, actual freedom and second-rate “freedoms”. • The first-rate, actual freedom may be absolute or relative. There is only one first-rate, absolute freedom with a large number of first-rate, relative forms of freedom. • In contrast to that, there are a large number of second-rate (pseudo-)absolute and relative² “freedoms”. Those are split into one too free, 'libertarian', one strange and one unfree part. Freedom is first-rate if it is connected with responsibility and embedded in love, in God. Whenever freedom is isolated from responsibility and love and still put as absolute, it becomes a second-rate, strange Absolute. First-rate quasi celestial freedom also exists, when I can say that I am free, even though I am actually not. Put in other words: I also have the freedom of being dependent/ not free. The first-rate freedom is stronger than the second-rate freedoms/ unfreedoms. An important sign of second-rate freedoms is the limitation of choice. 39 This is what I define as the `choice of the Absolute´ or `primary virtues´. 36 Regarding the Differentiations The 4 main differentiations Forms of Being In this section, I want to contrast forms of being that represent Relatives (matter, etc.) to those which are close to the more absolute (spirit, soul, etc.). I assume that in the first-order reality there are fluid transitions between these entities, without the respective entities losing their own characteristic features. Limitations and divisions only occur in the second-rate realities on account of the sA. That´s why I believe that the human person is only unity in its first-rate reality. But since we also live in a large number of second-rate realities and also exist as such ones, we, like our environment, are more or less torn. That also means that there are usually splits, contrasts, disassociations (and other sA-results) between spirit and body or within the psyche or the spirit. Put in other words: There is a great variety of forms of being in the first-rate reality but which together form a single entity. In the second-rate realities, however, there are a large number of forms of being, which are partly strange or opposite to each other. Therefore, they might become incompatible and the cause of illness. They are, however, relativized and integrated by the +A. In other words: if I still feel so torn and broken, I can feel complete and safe in myself at a higher level. Matter and spirit: Which one is the dominant one? I assume that the spirit is dominant in relation to the matter, i.e., the first-rate spirit determines the matter and not the other way around. As mentioned, spirit and matter are not necessarily opposites, since the matter may be a possible expression or result of the spirit. Surely, the matter can also determine the spirit but only the relative sphere of the spirit, not the absolute spirit. But matter can dominate a person as a strange Absolute. The actual absolute spirit, however, remains free and can be chosen at liberty. I think of a similar hierarchy when it comes to humans. The hierarchy would be: spirit > psyche > body. In the best case, there would be no kind of contradiction between those “parts”. The latest findings of natural science raise doubts about the primacy of the spirit in relation to the matter. But it will probably depend on a person’s belief, what is seen as the primacy. I have little doubt as to the fact that the spirit has the most power (positive and negative). The following questions are of great relevance when it comes to practical aspects and everyday life: Is the body more important than the spirit or vice versa? Is the matter more important than the spirit or vice versa? Is the soul more important than the body or vice versa? Is the outside more important than the inside or vice versa? What are the top priorities of therapy and analysis of mental disorders? Are the priorities mostly found in the spirit or in the somatic area? 37 Can one not be happy, although one's body is “broken”, while it seems to be impossible to be happy when one has a broken soul but a body that is perfectly in shape? Doesn't the spirit eventually determine the personality and not the genes? Fanatic ideologies that took millions of lives; children of Nazis, such as the son of Nazi Borman and others, who lived in an absolutely different way than their parents, are important examples of the power of negative and positive mindsets, that cannot be explained with the genes alone.40 (See also later on Relations between body, soul and spirit). Life Life is a characteristic of the first-rate reality/ world (W¹). In W¹, the functioning is subordinated to life. The first-rate reality lives essentially (in the core) on its own accord. In the second-rate realities, the functioning dominates the life of the individual. If we have the feeling that we are only functioning and not living, then we are in a second-rate, strange reality. Qualities The question of good and evil is one of the most central questions of our lives. Not without reason, we lost paradise after eating the forbidden fruit that promised knowledge of good and evil (or of right and wrong?). If something is good or bad is basically a question of belief. There is a general consensus that the good and positive benefits a person, while the negative causes harm. Subjectively positive or negative is whatever one feels or defines as positive or negative. The subjective and objective view of positive and negative may be the same but often, it is different. Sometimes, we make something into our inner or outer enemy, although it is actually something positive (→ Resistance) or it also happens the other way around: We think something is positive and good for us, although objectively, it is something harmful and negative. At times, we love or hate the same thing/ a person too much, even though the “object” is unchanged. Such ambivalences and contradictions are ubiquitous. Whatever a person labels as good or bad does not only play a big part when it comes to 'peace or war' but is also relevant as 'inner war' for the development of mental disorders. What is thought of evil, devilish, hostile, etc., is usually hated and fought. One cannot identify with it, not integrate it, and, if necessary, splits it off. The positive, much-loved things are usually loved too much, so that the person overidentifies him-/herself with it. That which we consider being the absolutely positive (+sA) or negative (‒sA), is split in two opposites. In itself, it is only relatively positive or negative but it is reduced to the two opposing sides: either solely positive or solely negative only. Whoever has idols (+sA), with 40 In this study, 'ideology' is the guiding concept for all inversive attitudes, including the individual ones. But: Every ideology has positive aspects, too. It is all the better, the more it resembles the positive Absolute (+A), which is discussed later, and the worse and more morbid, the more antagonistic it is to +A. 38 whom he identifies, also has corresponding devils, enemies (‒sA), which then threaten him. If we continue with the above-mentioned classification, we could say: • There is the one, first-rate absolute good / positive (see +A below) and a large number of first-rate relative good / positives. And there are many second-rate “good” / positives. • There is the one, first-rate absolute evil / negative (‒A) and many first-rate, relative "evils" / negatives. And there are many second-rate "evils" and negatives. • The good is not necessarily associated with well-being. • The +A integrates everything relative negative or absolutized one. The Positive Absolute (+A) I distinguish between the following first-rate positive Absolutes: • God - as the unconditioned, comprehensive, positive personal Absolute - so far as a "definition" is possible at all. (God is, of course, more than the +A. He also includes all the Relatives, also the absolutized Relatives!). +A (God) without the Relative would be absolutistic. • The absolute attitude of a person towards the +A . (For more information, see section: "The absolute attitude of the I"). Both of these together express a loving relationship that includes the possibility of free choice. (Such as it is in human relationships.) This +A (God, love, and the Self) cannot be proven. If it was provable, it wouldn't be absolute. No proof is necessary. They are self-explanatory and self-evident. “I love you!” and not “I love you, because...”. That means that love is basically absolute. It is causeless, unprovable, not disputable. It cannot be 'produced', but wanted and given. It appears by itself. So it is basically very simple but does not mean that you should not put effort into keeping the love. Love, at its core, is something spiritual. (It is also something spiritual and physical - but first and first-rate spiritual.) Love represents something godly and heavenly. I believe, man was made for love and freedom (God) that is also: the man has the freedom to reject God and love. Also the universal human rights are not provable but obvious such as love, the Self or God and therefore it may only be believed. To me, the Ten Commandments, morals, good deeds, etc. would be of relative first-rate positive relevance only in comparison with God, like altogether, all the positive sides of worldly life. Those and other first-rate +Relatives such as +realities, truths, freedoms and so on, create only a peaceful unity with the +A. As positive Relatives, you could also say: they are also-love, also-in-God. Important: +A integrates anything Relative and also the strange Absolute (sA). (See also `Absolute and relative will´and `Right and wrong´.) 39 The Negative Absolute (‒A) The negative Absolute (‒A), also seems basically to be an actual Absolute. 41 However, it is 'weaker' than the positive Absolute. Therefore, one could call it, in comparison to God, the 'weaker actual Absolute'. One could make the following distinctions: 1. An outer- or supra-personal negative Absolute (which was formerly called the devil). 2. A personal negative Absolute. About 2): I believe that the personal negative Absolute is a fundamental, unrevoked, destructive attitude of an individual in favor of the absolute evil. I also believe that it is justifiably unforgivable because such an individual does not want forgiveness. In the bible that is called mortal sin. Unfortunately, a large number of people, theologians included, view some other negative behavior or attitudes as unforgivable, as a mortal sin. So: No fear of mortal sins, which are not mortal sins. For details, see: No Fear of False Gods and Devils and Right and wrong .. Further the topics: Is there evil at all? And on dualism. See the unabridged German version. (Notes: In my opinion, dualisms and monisms prevail in the second-rate realities - but in the first-rate reality, diversity dominates. Because our world is both, first-rate and second-rate, the question of what is dominant can only be answered with regard to a specific situation.) Subjects, Objects and Subject-Object-Problem About the Subject I am dealing here above all with the person (P) as a subject. • We can distinguish between two parts of the first-rate person (P¹) as the subject: - P¹ as an absolute subject = the absolute te I-self, with an absolutely free choice of the A and with absolute attributes such as uniqueness and singularity. - P¹ as a relative subject. A first-rate subject (P¹, God) compensates or integrates all relative and absolutized objects without becoming identically with them. • As a second-rate subject, P² is a surrogate-subject because it is determined by an It/sA and acts as such. Therefore, I also call it “Sobject” because it is half subject and half object in its core. Mentally ill people often see themselves as an object because they are determined by a strange subject (It/sA) as a sign of second-rate personality (P²). Also S. Freud, like most secular psychotherapists, only saw humans in their second-rate dimension - that is, only as a secondary subject ("sobject"), which itself is only an object of strange Absolutes or superordinate instances (especially Id and Superego) is. 41 Although I consider the ‒A to be very important for the development of diseases, I have limited myself mainly to the pathogenic effects of sA in this work, since these are alterable and the former (‒A) is not. 40 Object As first-rate object, the object can probably not be first-rate absolute but only first-rate relative. As second-rate object, it will be controlled by an It/sA, or it is absolutized itself. Subject-Object-Problem - In P² there is either a subject-object-split, a subject-object-fusion or a subject-objectnegation. - P¹ is a first-rate subject at its core; otherwise, in its relative sphere, it is subject and object at the same time. Here, there is no subject-object-split, no dualism but only a difference between a subject and object. That also means, that as long as the subject is connected to +A, it can integrate all objects, even the negative ones, so that it will not come to a subject-object-split or fusion. That is very important for the therapy of psychoses. However, the subject-object issue is not only relevant for psychiatry but it is also a superordinate problem. Therefore, it is briefly mentioned here because the problem's solution offers practical consequences. “The subject-object issue is a major problem of epistemology and of the occidental way of thinking in general, which consists of the question, as to determine the, in principle, twoparted relation between the subject and object."42 (→ Subject-object-reversal) Additional questions: Can I, as a subject, view the world completely objectively? Only in part. Can one objectify a subject completely? Probably just as little as you can turn an object into an actual subject. I think objectification of a subject or an object is only relatively easily possible. And: subjective things can be captured best using subjective methods. 42 Meyers Großes Taschenlexikon, keyword: Subjekt-Objekt-Problem, 4. Ed. 1992. 41 Further Examples Belief and Knowledge “Cogito, ergo sum“ or “Credo, ergo sum“? “Nil sapientiae odiosius acumine nimio.” (Seneca)43 A question of priority, similar to the one of matter and spirit, is one of belief and knowledge. Belief pertains to spirit and knowledge seeks provable facts. The borders between belief and rationality are fluent. In the first-rate reality, there is no conflict between both of them but rationality and knowledge are subordinate to belief. Every bit of knowledge is based on specific fundamental ideas. Belief, however, is not based on the fundamentals of knowledge. How absurd would it be if a person were to demand: “Prove to me that you love me; that I am worthy; that I have a basic right to live, etc.?” Belief moves the heart, the core, the absolute area of a person, more than knowledge. Belief is stronger but not better than knowledge. But: A good belief is better than good knowledge. On the other side, negative or destructive belief can be much more dangerous than negative knowledge: The belief in some sort of ideologies, leaders or idols killed innumerable people, more than anything else. Goebbels once said something like: `You don't have to understand the leader (Führer, Hitler) but you do have to believe in him.´ Therefore, inhuman ideologies are the most dangerous. Why should we not use belief in a positive way if it has so much power? It seems, that we paradoxically renounce to talk about problems of belief, due to an exaggerated belief in science. It is not only good knowledge that should help our patients but also a good belief that helps the patients to get better. I experienced that patients have more trust in a believable therapist than in an intelligent one. Some catchwords referring to that topic: - Belief and knowledge are like brothers - but belief is the most powerful, the most prolific and is said also to be the most terrifying. - You may believe anything. Beliefs have a great variety - knowledge is limited. - Belief contains knowledge but knowledge per se does not contain belief. One can say: “I believe this or that because there is proof.” But one cannot say: “I know this and that because I believe in it.” - Knowledge is not accessible to everyone but belief is. Example: “The mother is talking to her baby ... and nobody says: 'What are you saying? The baby doesn't even understand anything you say!' But the mother believes that her child understands, even if it does not know what she is saying because the mother imparts the most important: love that you can 43 “Nothing is more hateful to wisdom than too much cleverness.” https://www.grin.com/document/118189. Similar thoughts in: `Adieu Sagesse´ (Daphne Du Maurier); `The Delusions of Certainty´ (Siri Hustvedt). 42 only believe in. (See also `Criticism of Science in General´ and `Trust and knowledge´.) Examples of unilateral attitudes of belief and rationality: Fideism: Overemphasis of belief associated with the undervaluation of knowledge. Scientism: “Over-evaluation of science, that makes appear that all ... problems can be solved through science.” Positivism: Philosophy ... assuming the priority of data of experience … and viewing metaphysical consideration as useless and impossible. (Cit. correspondingly by Schischkoff). Sense/ Meaning I distinguish between first-rate, actual sense / meaning and second-rate, strange sense/ meanings: • The first-rate, actual sense/ meaning can be absolute or relative. There is only one firstrate absolute sense/ meaning and many first-rate relative forms or definitions of sense/ meaning. It is reasonable, for example, to do good things, to stay healthy and fit (and so on). However, I believe, that these are not of absolute but of relative importance and are embedded in a greater sense/ meaning, which I believe, is the unconditional love of God to us. That love still exists and causes happiness within us, when all the other sense/ meanings seem to be lost. I call this first-rate sense `meta-sense´ because it is more important than all strange sense/ meanings but integrates them. • In contrast to that, there are a large number of strange, second-rate, pseudo-absolute and -relative forms and aspects of sense/ meanings. These have two opposite and one zero component. Example: If success has first-rate meaning for a certain person, then it has a strange, pseudoabsolute meaning and then it also seems reasonable, to fight or oppress other people if those are endangering the success. Relativity of Illness and Health (resp. Death and Life) Only a few notes: - We should free ourselves from viewing illness as something solely negative, something that has to be eliminated. Health and illness are only of relative relevance. That means, that illness also has positive aspects and health also has negative aspects. Experience shows the same: illness can have important functions for the protection, resistance, relief or identity of a person. (→ Morbid gain). Although disease is predominantly negative and health predominantly positive, however, health can be predominantly negative and disease can be predominantly positive. Therefore, I also use terms such as "positive depression", "positive psychotic phase", "positive anxiety" or "positive compulsion". Examples for positive suffering/symptoms: withdrawal of drugs, surgery, compassion, detachment-processes. Examples for 'negative well-being': well-being through drugs, symbiotic relationships, of flow experiences. - There are connections between good/bad and healthy/ill: The good is correlated more with 43 health, and the bad with illness. - There is a fluent transition between illness and health. There are probably very few people that are completely healthy or completely ill - that also applies to the psychical sphere. We all have something neurotic and potentially psychotic in us. - If health or illness is taken too seriously (absolutized), distorted theories and therapies may occur. Against the absolutization of health Our society not only has an idealized perception of health - looking at the WHO definition but it also persuade us to believe that this ideal can be reached and that everyone is entitled to it.44 If we, as doctors, absolutize health, there will be disorders. Absolutized health can make people ill or charge another high price. If we enforce health at any price, the probability is high that it will disappear. That is a well-known mechanism we also experience on a daily basis. 45 There is also the general trend that our society tends to absolutize our earthly life. (See also: "Role of disease and health" in `Metapsychiatry'.) Individual Units / Systems As mentioned, I distinguish between the following pr units: [The more absolute unit is mentioned first, then the relative one]. 1. All /Nothingness and something 2. God and World 3. People and things 4. I and others 5. Spirit, soul and body 6. (Gender) Short: 2-4 = WPI (frequently used abbreviation) 1. All /Everything, Nothingness and Something I distinguish between first-rate and second-rate all/ everything, something and nothingness. I use the terms `all´, 'everything', `reality' and anything that is psychical relevant, as synonyms in this publication. Here about reality. One hypothesis is: There are a large number of realities: one that is first-rate and many which are second-rate. So there is one first-rate reality, which is manifold (W¹), and on the other hand, there are many second-rate, strange realities (W²), which are fashioned according to the all-or-nothing principle. That is, the second-rate all/ everything is opposed to the nothingness. (For details, see later or in the unabridged German version). 44 45 Keyword: „Healthismus“. S.a. dynamic between pro-sA and contra-sA. 44 2. God and the World (Transcendence and Immanence) I defined God as the unconditional, positive personal Absolute - provided a definition is even possible. From the first rank perspective, it can be said that there is only one God, and with him, an immeasurable diversity of life and being, for God embraces all that is not ‒A. There is a large number of second-rate things which are taken to be God or stand for God. They can resemble God in parts or be quite dissimilar to God. Unlike the ‒A, however, they do not stand in absolute opposition to him. (That is why I name them `strange Absolutes´). God is best and directly to be experienced through Jesus. He is thus directly "testable". God permeates the world with the Holy Spirit but he is not identical with it. Unlike other Gods, he lets all of us decide freely if we want to be with or against him. Therefore, the world is also ruled by other spiritual powers and not solely by God. That is why God is only partial (albeit always) effective, although he is omnipotent. For further characteristics, see section `+A '. 3. and 4. People, Individual (I) [Person/ Psyche and I → `Psychology´] The Human One can specify human existence as follows: I distinguish between first-rate, actual human existence, and second-rate, strange forms of human existence. • There is only one first-rate, absolute human existence with many first-rate relative forms. • In contrast to that, there are many strange, second-rate forms of human existence. Since, by nature, every human being has the potential to be relatively positive and negative, man encounters problems when he idealizes his relative positive parts or taboos his relatively negative parts because then second-rate personal forms arise and then he lives against his original nature. But this, I believe, affects more or less all humans. That is, every person has one first-rate as well as many second-rate forms of existence (such as otherworldly forms of existence). The latter are divided into two different or opposite parts and one zero part. Regarding the question of the unity of body, soul and spirit, this implies, that if those have a first-rate, actual character, they are a diverse entity. But in second-rate forms of human existence, it also means that the human is also split at parts where it is unreal and strange. That kind of splitting does not only occur between body, soul and spirit but can also be found within the body, soul or spirit itself. Briefly more to the following questions: Does the human person have free will? Can the human person be the creator of something absolutely new? 45 I believe so. Otherwise, every new creation, every kind of creativity, every invention would be a combination of old components only. Anything really and completely new would not exist. There would not be anything that is completely one's own. Wouldn't innovation and progress be only a better, new use of something old in that case? Do artists just combine familiar things only in a new way? Are there no real inventions? Those questions are connected to the individuality of one's personality. Otherwise, everything would only be a new composition of old components (genes). Then, the human person would only be a product. The Human and the Absolute Hypothesis: The human is designed towards the +Absolute.46 People definitely need an Absolute. And: people want to be absolute themselves, too. Every person has one or many Absolutes that can be actual or strange. Humans often try to find their Absolute in the Relative. With that, not actual but strange Absolutes are created which elevate a person but also cause the person to break down. The human is also `AR-dimensioned´ i.e. with absolute and relative parts. However, other than the rest of the world, every human has it's special and specific Absolute, here stated as → 'absolute Attitude'. The absolute sphere of a human person has two parts: 1st The mentioned absolute individual choice/ attitude of the Absolute, 2nd The absolute attributes which are given to the human person by God such as first-rate freedom, personal integrity, the right to self-determination, absolute identity and dignity. The world gives a person just something Relative, and therefore only an ephemeral existence which can be manipulated and suppressed - in my opinion, that is a situation which causes mental disorders. So the human person is only completely absolute in his choice/ attitude of the actual Absolute. That means that a human person is never completely absolute, nor absolutely himself, nor totally identical with himself, nor completely real or true, nor totally consistent, nor absolutely unconditional, nor fully independent, and so on (except 1st). Instead, the human person is always somewhat paradoxical or senseless, a little strange, split, chaotic, fixated, crazy, extreme, uncertain, pseudo-autonomous etc. What does the Human Need? It seems that the human person needs a large number, especially love and food. But what is more important? I believe that love is more important for a person than food. People have a great longing for love. In our earthly sphere, in shape of the search for a partner; spiritually, in the shape of the search for God. The experiment of Friedrich II of Staufen is well-known. To find the primeval language of the human person is, he commanded women to take care of orphaned children without talking to them. The children received anything but no love. They died sadly. And there are still a large number of people nowadays that are experiencing the same dilemma. They have everything that they need in their lives, yet they kill 46 This refers to the +A and its synonyms. 46 themselves. That's why I believe that man desperately needs love. I believe that our souls carry the pain of the loss of paradise throughout the entire life and they are longing for paradise to be back. F. Nietzsche said: “… all joy wants eternity”.47 Modern psychology however, views the human primarily only as immanent. According to Rudolf, "the goal of the ego's activities is to assert its own interests while at the same time ensuring the necessary social relationships." (p. 67) The Human and the World The person differs from the impersonal world as follows: - The person has access to the sphere of the Absolute. Therefore, the person has an absolutely free choice - the impersonal world does not. The person has the potential of selfdetermination and free choice absolutely only in relation to the Absolute and relatively towards the Relative. Thus each person has his own individual Absolute and is so individual (indivisible and unique). - The human person has the potential to create something which is not derivable. Those possibilities are being disputed by some psychological theories. Some neuroscientists are trying to persuade us to believe that the 'I' is only a product of neuronal processes and does not have its own will. - The human person has the ability of self-reflection and has self-awareness. - The world (W) and person (P) interrelate with each other. P is embedded in the world, is a part of the world and is influenced or even determined by it - on the other hand, P also changes and determines the world. Society, States These pr units are of great importance when it comes to the possible causes of mental disorders. Because the structures and characteristics of societies and states are essentially the same as those of realities, they are therefore, only mentioned briefly. Such as all the pr systems, they represent as a mixture of one first-rate and many secondrate realities. Every society, state, community or any kind of group has positive or negative influences on the individual person. The second-rate units/ systems, which are dominated by different ideologies, have a predominantly negative influence. The dynamics in societies and states are quite similar to the psychodynamics of humans. The goodness of a society or a state is recognized above all if it is able to integrate its weak or ill members. | 47 Thus Spoke Zarathustra: Part IV: Chapters 10–20 (p. 3) 47 5. Personal Mind, Soul and Body Especially for the therapy, it seems to me important that the spirit not only has a much greater influence on the psyche than the body but also that the spirit is considered much freer, more variable for therapeutic interventions and/ or is most important for personality changes. Therapies that emphasize the material-somatic sphere (e.g., the psycho-pharmaceuticals) are of course still relevant. |For more information see `Psychology'. Embedding of pr Units A Psyche I (A) People Nouns R Verbs W o r l Adjectives Syntax d 0 The graphic shows: 1) that the different pr systems/units have similar fundamental structures. They consist of noun-representatives, verb-representatives, representatives of the adjectives and their connections (syntax), especially in form of subject- and predicate- or object-representatives (horizontal level). All these aspect may have an absolute or relative or no meaning (vertical level). The sphere of the Absolute determines their interaction. 2) Further the graphic shows how smaller systems are embedded in bigger ones. I A indicates that the individual has its own `choice of absolute´ - contrary to non-personal spheres and thus cannot be determined automatically from other units. The illustration of the connection of the different units/systems is important to understand, how certain changes, especially disease-promoting influences, can be transferred from one system to another one. The same classification for all the pr units, shall make it easier to understand the connections. 48 PSYCHOLOGY IN GENERAL: PERSON AND PSYCHE Introduction In this chapter, the terms, definitions and dimensions of the person and psyche are explored. Since the terms 'psyche' and 'person' are rather similar, both of them will be discussed together in the following paragraphs (whereby the concept of the person is more comprehensive). Both notions will be abbreviated by the letter 'P', unless further specified. While the term 'human' comprehends the spirit, soul and body alike, the concepts of the person and psyche emphasize spirit and soul. Therefore, the concept of the person appears better suited to discuss the topic at hand than the notion of the human. Previously, the similarities between the 'structures' of the world and those of the person in their respective psychological relevance were discussed. These are similarities between the 'outer' world on the one hand and the person with their 'inner' world, their psyche, on the other hand. Due to these similarities, a repetition of certain parts already presented in the chapter 'metapsychology' cannot be avoided. Important Definitions • The psychical Relevant: that which is relevant to the psyche of human. • World (W): the humans and their environment. • Human: Entirety of the spirit, psyche and body. • Person (P): the human, with a particular focus on his psychical-spiritual dimension. • Psyche: The personal psychical Relevant. • I (I): The individual person. (For more details see `Own definition of the I´.)48 • Self: The Absolute of the person. • Personal something: The personal Relative (relative dimension of a person, esp. the body of a person). Person The definitions of the term 'person' vary in specialist literature: The word 'person' is defined as follows: - “An individual in its unique character.” (Schischkoff) - “The human as cognitive individual.” (Brockhaus) - “The human as individual in his physical and mental whole with the capabilities of an Ego which is conscious of itself.” (Psychology) - “Human as an individual spiritual being, in his specific peculiarity as the bearer of a consistent, conscious Ego.” (Wahrig) 48 The term `I´ stands mostly for the first-rate form and the term `Ego´ stands mostly fora second-rate form. 49 I define the person as described above: Person (P) = “the individual, particularly as seen from the perspective of their mind and spirit.” Or: Person = "Totality of all forms of personal being, life and qualities in their contexts, represented by analog personal nouns, verbs and adjectives (and other language components) and their syntax in various dimensions." Psyche Customary Definitions: The definitions of psyche are very different. Two quotations show that: 1. "The prevailing understanding of psyche today refers to the 'total system' of all those (life) 'impulses' that 'the vernacular' has long termed as inner life or soul life, there subdividing the same into rational mind and emotional life, as does academic psychology too. This refers first to the totality of such 'life expressions' or self-reactions that are primarily or exclusively accessible to self-perception, and thus can only be observed and described from the subjective or today's so-called 'first-person perspective' ... ".49 2) “Entirety of subject-linked appearances of reflection of the environment caused by higher nerve functions.”50 While the first definition corresponds to the findings of our study, the second complies with the mainstream of academic psychology, which, as previously mentioned, strongly favors a purely scientific perspective. However, the main problem connected with such an understanding of psychology is the fact that the psyche of a person can only be analyzed superficially with the use of scientific methods. A number of authors, including myself, are attempting to overcome such one-sidedness as is also the view of Frank A. Gerbode: "In this way reintroduces the original meaning of psychology, which includes 'the study of the soul or the spirit', whereby, in its methodology, metapsychology reflects the invariable and common goal of psychologies and religions, regardless of whether one defines this goal as the attainment of sanity, enlightenment, happiness, or salvation.“51 It is the objective of this discussion to facilitate an extension of perspective, rather than to exchange the one one-sidedness by another. Not: brain on the one hand and spirit on the other. Not: psychology on the one hand, and philosophy or religion on the other. 49 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psyche 6/2015. http://www.dwds.de/cache/shortcuts/Psyche 12/2010. 51 Frank A. Gerbode in http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?5935-Introduction-to-Metapsychology 50 50 New Definition of the Psyche I define psyche as the personal psychical Relevant.52 And I define psychology as "the study of the personal psychical Relevant." Psyche is the sphere of a person that contains, represents and reflects all that is relevant to it. That includes all, which affects the inner of person itself, as well as that which is meaningful to the person outside of her/him. 53 1) In terms of location, the psyche is not limited to one person. While it has a core (the Self), which is individual and unique, it is also connected to the environment and transcends its own boundaries. Thus, the psyche of each and every person is embedded in a metapsychological sphere. 2) The psyche cannot be limited to certain topics or aspects. It can include, contain, process and reflect everything that is relevant to a person. This fact is important, since there has always been a tendency of bounding the psyche to certain aspects. At present, there is the tendency to limit the psychical to that which is objectifiable, only to that, which is scientifically provable. 3) For the human psyche, something may be of absolute, relative or no importance. The most important for a psyche is, what is of absolute importance. 4) Since the human is able to reflect upon himself, he simultaneously occupies the role both of a subject as well as that of an object. Here is a danger of subject-object-division, as well as subject-object-fusion or dissolution of the two. (More details in `Subject-Object-Problem´ and in `Subject-Object-Reversal´). In a vein similar to all the other psychical Relevant, the psyche has distinct dimensions and differentiations. The dimensions of the psyche are the following: absolute, relative (and zero) dimensions, or their 7 synonyms. In this study, the differentiation of that which is psychically relevant, as well as the differentiation of the psyche, are deduced from the forms of language portrayed above, leading us to the define four main differentiation aspects of the psyche (`1st classification stage´): I. Psychical forms/structures – deduced from personal substantives. II. Psychical dynamics / “movements” - deduced from personal verbs (and predicates). III. Psychical qualities - deduced from personal adjectives. IV. Psychical connections, subjects, objects, predicates - deduced from the personal syntax.54 • Actually, one cannot define psyche exactly, because it contains a spiritual, unprovable core - something metapsychic, so to speak. • In this publication, the terms 'psyche' and 'soul' are used synonymously. 53 That is why psychotherapy is not only about the psyche in the narrower sense, but about therapy of the psychical Relevant as a whole. (See 'Primary Psychotherapy' in part Psychotherapy). 54 The term “personal” means that the form, dynamics or quality of a matter are related to a particular person. Examples of "personal verbs" are words such as: to identify, commit, allow, believe, feel etc. 52 51 That is to say: Psyche has something to do with what person-relevant nouns, verbs, adjectives express in absolute, relative, or void importance. And psychical connections have something to do with what, for the person relevant subjects and predicates resp. objects represent. A further differentiation is the `2nd classification stage´.55 This 2nd classification stage corresponds to the second vertical column of the `Summary table´. A summary involving relevant keywords might say: The psyche comprises: the personal sense, identity, truth, union (wholeness), the unconditional (security), causes and triggers, freedom (a 1-a7). Furthermore: personal (inner) All and nothing, God and the world, other people and me, mind and body, gender, conditions, aspirations, possessions, possibilities, necessities, obligations, rights, new and old, actions, information, representations, meanings, past, present, future, wrong and right (individual aspects) and all related personal `movements', thus actions and processes - which are dominated by the dimensions, i.e. with their absolute, relative or negligible role. To a `3rd classification stage´ one could attribute all terms found in the `Summary table´. A rather comprehensive definition might phrase the concept as follows: The psyche of a person involves all that affects the person. All things may affect a person but a person is most affected by that which holds absolute significance for him or her. That which affects the person will find its most important and nuanced expression in language (the language of the respective person himself or herself, as well as that of the person who is speaking about the respective person). It is also the case that all matters about which a person speaks, are an expression of the individual's psyche, with the respective absolute expression shows the decisive factor for the psyche. In this, matters expressed in language correlate with the matters affecting the psyche and patters of the language used correlates with the patters of the psyche.56 Advantage of this definition: One can well classify psyche by using analogous language forms (differentiations) and their meanings by different dimensions. Thus we get different personal resp. psychical relevant units or subunits. Thereby the term 'psyche´ is not limited to the realm of the mind and soul but includes the body, which is also 'inspirited'. In this way, the body belongs to the psyche. In my opinion, this definition expresses much more clearly that these are not two separate entities (body, psyche) but rather, this is a union with different accentuation. Moreover, as I said, the definition of psyche is even broader, for it includes not only the person himself but also everything outside the person, which is of some significance to him. 55 56 As stated in the `Summary table´. I would like to emphasize again that, while I do not regard language as a person's exclusive way to express themselves, I consider it to be the most important and nuanced way of expression. 52 Overview of the Classification of Person and Psyche In this study, the terms "person" and "psyche" are discussed in the same paragraphs and used synonymously due to their general congruence. At times, for the sake of simplicity, merely one of the two terms are explicitly mentioned. The terms first-rate / actual or second-rate /strange are used synonymously. Often, I use only one term. The readers may apologize that I only present this extensive problematic in a nutshell. Similar to that which is the psychological Relevant, the 'categorization' of person and psyche is undertaken according to the following categories: • Dimensions: - their spheres (absolute, relative or 0-range) - their 7 synonyms - their order of priority (first / second-rate) - their orientation pro +/ contra ‒). • Differentiation by means of analog patterns of speech which are relevant to P. • Units that may be relevant to P. Note: That which is the personal Absolute will be termed the 'Self'. For more information, please ether see the table on the right and in the following. Classification of Person and Psyche DIMENSIONS Spheres Absolute sphere Self Core of Self Relative sphere (R) Exterior of Self = R of P57 0-sphere the Nothingness of P 7 pers. A- und R- spheres absolute relative self different 7 synonymous real/ actual possible A/R terms whole partial unconditional conditional primary secondary independent dependent Rank 1. first-rate of P 2. second-rate of P 0 null of P Orientation pro/+ of the dimensions pro/+ contra/‒ contra/− 0 orientation 0 DIFFERENTIATION Main aspects being(B) B of person/ psyche life (L) L of person/ psyche qualities (Q) Q of person/ psyche C of person/ context (C) subjects of P objects of P pers. representatives of: Units 1. All / some (nothingness) 2. God/ world 3. people/ things 4. I / others 5. pers. spirit/ psyche/ body 6. gender e.g., aspirations, possessions, opportunities, obligations, needs, more single aspects rights, actions, information, representations, meanings, past etc. of / in P. Different to the common classification of the psychical Relevant resp. the world, the person and psyche are here in the center of attention. Thus, individual new terms or terms that have to be defined more specifically, have appeared and need to be defined with accuracy. These are, in particular, the terms 'Self', 'I', and 'It'. In order to remain rather close to reality in my study, I have attributed to these terms the meaning they are given in everyday language. However, further clarification of these terms is necessary, since they are also terms which are central 57 In the first-rate personal sphere, the relative sphere of P is at the same time an also-self-sphere, because the relative personal is enclosed by the Self. This is not the case with the second-rate, strange personal to be discussed later in the `Metapsychiatry' section. 53 in psychoanalysis. There is a considerable degree of congruence with the concepts discussed in psychoanalysis, however, there are also some differences.58 Differentiation ("Grammar of the Psyche" - Analogy of Language and Psyche) The structure of the person and the psyche shall be described more specifically in the following paragraphs. I derive the psyche (= the personal psychical Relevant) in the same the way I derived the General psychical Relevant (see part `Metapsychology') because the structure of psyche resp. person resembles the structure of the world from the perspective of its psychological relevance. However, there are decisive differences: The person has absolute freedom of choice, the ability to create and to reflect upon himself/ herself. Similar to the dimensions of the 'world' resp. the psychical Relevant, I distinguish with regard to the person between the Absolute, the Relative and the Nothingness. That which is the personal Absolute will be termed the 'Self', that which is personal Relative shall be termed the 'personal something', and the individual person will be referred to as the 'I'. (As mentioned above: `Ego´ is the second-rate I; we will return to this matter at a later stage). Thus, that which pertains to the psyche can be categorized into the four main spheres with which we are already familiar, the 23 aspects and their dimensions, by using the linguistic analogies. Derivation of the four main aspects of person in their absolute and relative dimensions (1st classification level): personal A B S O L U T E = Self I. pers. nouns = pers. being II. pers. verbs = pers. life III. pers. adjectives = pers. qualities IV. pers. syntax = pers. context personal R E L A T I V E (= pers. something) Analogous to this, psyche is, classified according to the IV main aspects, the personal psychological Relevant with their being, life, properties and their contexts in absolute, relative and 0 dimensions. 58 As mentioned above, I shall use the term person for reasons of simplicity and understand it to include psyche. 54 Further derivation into 23 individual aspects (1st - 2nd classification level): Person/ Psyche pers. DIMENSIONS   absolute relative = Self (S) = some pers. MAIN ASPECTS: I. pers. being II. pers. life III. pers. qualities IV. pers. connections I Nouns Language of/about person A II Verbs III Adjectives IV Syntax I pers. being Person/ Psyche A II pers. life III pers. qualities IV pers. context 23 24 1 2 22 3 21 4 pers. being 20 5 19 6 18 pers. A/S pers. 7 qualilife 8 17 ties 16 9 15 10 14 13 12 11 IV pers. context = pers. SINGLE ASPECTS: 1. pers. all / some/ 0 2. Image of God/world 3. of people things, ideas 4. I and others 5. pers. spirit, psyche, body 6. pers. gender 7. pers. conditions 8. pers. will, drives 9. pers. belongings 10.. pers. opportunities 11. pers. needs 12. pers. obligations 13. pers. rights 14. pers. creations 15. pers. activities 16. pers. information 17. pers. representations 18. pers. meanings 19. pers. past 20. pers. present 21. pers. future 20. pers. rights / wrongs 21. pers. positive/negative 22-24. not noted Illustration of the derivation of the psyche from analogies of the language with the central Absolute and peripheral Relatives. The main forms of language of the upper row are equal to the psychically relevant aspects of the lower row. On the right hand side you can find a list of the 23 aspects of differentiation. This illustration should also clarify that any aspect, that is not 0 (nothing), has an absolute and a relative (grey) part. Each form (noun) is related to certain dynamics (verbs) as action (action verb) and/ or process (inchoative verb) with corresponding quality (adjective) in a corresponding context (syntax). The syntax gives us information about the functions and relations of the named personal "elements". We can differentiate here according to the function: personal subject, predicate / object and depending on the direction of the "dynamic": active, passive and reflexive. All this on the basis of different dimensions. This categorization has the advantage that nothing personal or psychical or psychical Relevant is excluded but also taken into account the fact that everything psychical Relevant can become an absolute importance and then determines a person. 55 Dimensions of Person and Psyche Overview: Dimensions and Their Representatives There are 2 (or 3) spheres of dimensions of person and psyche: 59 1. personal Absolute (pA) = the Self (S). 2. personal Relative = personal something.60 (3. personal nothingness).61 Alongside these, there are the second-rate, strange Selves, (sS) which are discussed in greater detail in the chapter 'Metapsychiatry'. Self - the Personal Absolute „What lives is ineradicable, remains free in its deepest form of servitude, remains one even if you split it to the base, remains unwounded even if you pierce it to the marrow and its being flies victorious from your hands.“ (F. Hölderlin) Questions about the Self Is there a Self? And if there is, what exactly is it? Does every person have a Self? Even a new-born? Is the Self an entity which is given at birth or is it developed with time? Is the I-self an unity, as Hölderlin wrote, or is it split, for instance into “I” and “me” (G.H. Mead), or else, as Lacan wrote, into “je” and “moi”? Or is the I-self, in line with Nietzsche’s beliefs, with regard to morals, always a “Dividual” - an entity which is divided within itself? Is the Self and therefore also the 'I', thus never an individual, undivided, a whole? Self-Definition in Literature In modern psychology, the Self is generally considered to be: 62: 1 – “System of conscious and unconscious knowledge of what a person believes to be.” 2 – a “term to describe the coordinated control of these knowledge processes, frequently referred to as 'ego'.” (S. Freud).63 3 – a “term to describe an inherent principle of a person's development, whereby the Self represents the cause and the purpose of the maturing and differentiation of the personality in the sense of self-realization.” (C.G. Jung, C. Rogers et al) 4 – The Self as “the sum of self-representations”. Similarly, O. Kernberg wrote: “The Self is an intra-psychical structure which is constituted by multifarious self-representations and corresponding emotions. Self-representations are affective-cognitive structures that reflect There are two dimensions, if we look merely at the absolute and relative dimensions; however, there are three dimensions, if the nothingness is considered to be a separate dimension. 60 This stands In contrast to the `It' - the absolutized Relative - which dominates a person and will be discussed later. 61 A nothingness which is personal² however, seems to be exclusively assigned to the second reality. 62 Point 1-3 adapted from articles in: Brockhaus Encyclopedia, Mannheim, 1996, keyword `self ' 63 1. A similar definition can be found in http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/self?s=t (Philosophy, a.) 2. Nuclear Self and core Self are the same in this publication. 59 56 the self-perception of a person.” 64 5 – Kohut speaks of “the realization through action of the (life) plan laid down in [man's] nuclear self.”65 6 – Similarly, Tilmann Moser: “No-one has an innate self which could come to maturity by its own efforts ... However, all men are born with a desire to develop a self ...”.66 7 – Psychology Lexicon: Self - “The entirety of all qualities, behaviors and attitudes which one believes to be characteristic for one's own person.”67 8 – Rudolph: “the self can be defined as the moment when the Ego, on a quest for an object, comes to take itself for an object.” 68 9 - Today's philosophy of the mind explains it in the following way: “If by `self´ one refers to an essential, immutable nucleus of the person, some modern philosophers of mind believe that no such thing exists. The idea of a self as an immutable essential nucleus derives from the Christian idea of an immaterial soul. Such an idea is unacceptable to modern philosophers with materialist orientations ... However, in the light of empirical results from developmental psychology, developmental biology and neuroscience, the idea of an essential inconstant, material nucleus … seems reasonable ... The following conception is the most widely accepted: The 'self' is not to be understood as an immutable, essential nucleus; rather, the 'self' is itself constantly changing ... In this respect, striking similarities between some ideas of the modern philosophy of the mind and traditional beliefs of non-European cultures (such as Buddhism) come to light ...”. 69 Criticism In general: Most of the authors do not point out the difference of the actual Self and the strange Self, or the difference of the core-Self and the relative Self (also-Self). Often, the Self is understood to be the consciousness of oneself, which is something else. Also therefore, there are a large number of different definitions. Further to the different definitions presented above: Ad 1 – A definition of the Self is certainly a matter of belief. I believe that the notion of the (actual) Self refers to a real matter. If, for instance, a person is convinced that he/she is worthless on account of an illness, then the respective person would be suffering from an inferiority complex which, in turn, convinces this person to believe that he/she is worthless. However, in reality, this person's value is equal to that of all other individuals. This person is clearly wrong in their beliefs. They believed in that which I termed the strange Self. Ad 2 – The term described in this definition is categorized as 'I' in this study. „Borderline-Störungen und pathologischer Narzissmus.“ Suhrkamp, Frankfurt, 1978, p 358. Similarly in G. O. Gabbard: Psychodynamic Psychiatry in Clinical Practice, American Psychiatric Publishing, Inc. 2005, p 45. 65 A similar definition can be found in A Dictionary of Psychology (4 ed.) 66 Tilmann Moser by Alice Miller: „Das Drama des begabten Kindes" in DER SPIEGEL 29/1979 of 16.07.1979, p 141. 67 In: http://www.psychology48.com/deu/d/selbst/selbst.htm 68 Rudolf p 63. 69 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophie_des_Geistes, 2016. 64 57 Ad 3 – In this definition, the (actual) Self is clearly to be regarded as cause and purpose. This definition is very similar to Aristotle's concept of entelechy, meaning that there is something within us, “which has its own purpose within itself.”70 If this metaphysical reality transcends the individual person and yet envelops him or her in a loving manner, then this would appear to be the best self-definition. However, if “maturing, differentiation and selfrealization” have to be accomplished primarily by the person themselves, then these are, in my view, rather functions of the 'I'. This, in turn, would merely identify a part of the Self (the relative Self) would be described, not the nucleus of the actual Self which is effective by itself. I wish my children a stable sense of self-worth, whether or not they have realized their full potential, whether or not they are stagnant in their maturing process or personal development, or have even reverted to a previous state - and do we not all make this experience? A Self dependent on any progress, however, would be subject to constant fluctuations, which would permanently endanger the person. Ad 4-6 – The Self of Kernberg is also a limited, weak Self. In my opinion, it would merely be the sum of numerous strange Selves. The actual Self however provides the humans with a sense of an actual Self. This Self encompasses the entire breadth of an individual's life, thus giving the person identity, dignity and strength, regardless of all people or an individual's own conscience. Ad 7 and 8 – While these are clearly definitions of the whole-Self, they do not distinguish between the nuclear Self and also-Self, nor do they provide any information about an innate nuclear Self. Ad 9 ‒ Thinking the Self as the immutable core of a person's being corresponds, to a large extent, with my beliefs. However, this definition describes solely the nuclear Self and does not take into account that its deselection is possible. Much as we acknowledge that the individual has absolute free choice of the Absolute in general, so we should also concede that they have a free choice of the personal Absolute, the Self - this means that we can confirm or reject the positive absolute nuclear Self given by God. This can be an, at times unwitting, activity or attitude of the absolute I-self-nucleus and would also mean that, having been given an innate nuclear self, we also possess the innate option to confirm, change or even reject the nuclear self. Thus, even the Self which we obtain from God is not imposed upon us but offered to us. I consider this to be a sign of an unconditional love which neither leaves man to the necessary to find himself, nor imposes a Self upon him. 71 It is also my belief that the innate, actual nuclear Self urges the individual to further develop their personality, however it does not make this by itself but requires our co-operation. Will the actual nucleus (given by God) disappear whenever we are not growing? I believe that it can be suppressed but that the actual nuclear Self is continuously active as a discreet and caring companion, in such a way that we notice a certain tension and feel challenged to 70 71 Schischkoff, KW `Entelechie´. In this study, this relationship has been characterized before as a loving relationship between God and people. 58 courageously be ourselves. For therapeutic purposes, it is important to know that, notably in the Christian conception, the innate Self is inviolable, indivisible and even stronger than an individual's active I. (See also section: 'Self-strength and Ego-strength´.) This conception of an innate Self corresponds to the beliefs upon which the universal human rights are based, expressly ascribing in the preamble, an innate dignity, freedom and equality with all others to every individual. Therefore, in my opinion, there is an innate nuclear Self, such as an innate dignity exists too. If it were otherwise, every person would be easily manipulable. Is there an immortal, eternal Self resp. I-self? Is there a supportive, constant Self or merely a Self that is temporary and inconstant? Academic psychology will deny this, since it is, ultimately, based on an atheistic position. However, experience shows that, alongside our inconstant self-image, we feel that we are always the same person. While I might feel different from day to day or in various periods of life, nevertheless, I have the impression that I am always myself, always Torsten Oettinger and no other person. In my opinion, both of these self-images persist alongside one another: on the one side, there is a temporary, inconstant self-image, which corresponds to the relative Self, and, on the other side, we have a constant, deeper self-image/ sense of Self that is equivalent to the nuclear Self. Reducing the person or the Self to the relative Self (or its self-representations), leads to the exclusion of the most important thing. Contemporary psychology does not view the Self as an indivisible whole but as an entity that consists of many self-representations (see Kernberg). One might also say that a person is not thought to be an individual (indivisible) but a 'dividual', one who is composed of parts.72 This view is not advantageous for a therapy especially of schizophrenic psychoses, since it serves to create an image in which the various, ultimately unstable self-representations, not being held together by a greater entity, are given rupture lines, by which the affected person's personality may fall apart when stressed or overstrained. As well, groups, families or societies may fall apart or split asunder. In conclusion, one might say that if the client is not granted a nuclear self resp. an absolute personal Self but merely a conditional, relative Self, the client will be much more unstable and vulnerable than a person who is conscious of their unconditional, absolute and inviolable Self. Therefore, the therapist's perception of the Self appears to be an essential factor in psychotherapy. 72 One of the exceptions: Luise Reddemann: "Würde - Annäherung an einen vergessenen Wert in der Psychotherapie". Klett-Kotta, 2008. 59 Overview of Criticism Prevalent opinion in scientific psychology/psychiatry The Self is: not innate, not immortal, destructible, partable. It is made of many self-representations that are not connected to each other by an indivisible whole. Those self-representations can be lost at any time. They, and the Self in general have to be maintained by making efforts. The self-image is equivalent to a relative attributive Self and does not know the characteristics, of the described core-Self. In my opinion, it is a weak, stressful self-image, that is not an ideal basis for psychotherapy. Christian image of Self The core-Self is: innate, potentially immortal, not partable, indestructible. It exists on its own, functions by itself and does not have to be constituted nor maintained by the I. Also, the person has the free choice supported the actual Self or to establish a new one. Since the person does not have to strive to sustain the self, it saves a lot of energy. It is much more suitable to be used for therapeutic purposes. Own Self-Definition Overview To me, the term 'self´ includes, in general, any use and meaning of the word 'self´ in the colloquial language. Self = anywhere, where one can say 'self'. In order to limit the Self to the personal Self, which is our topic, we can define as it as follows: Wherever one can say 'self' in meaningful, person-related sentences, it is a personal Self. (When I speak of the Self in the following, I mean this personal Self.) I distinguish between an actual, first-rate Self (a) and those which only appear thus so - the strange Selves (b). a) The actual Self, containing: • core-Self or 'only-Self'; involving: transcendent part personal part (absolute attitude of a person) • also-Self (relative part of Self, “relative Self”) the whole actual Self pers. relative = also-Self b) strange Selves (sS) containing: • the core of the strange Selves is split into: pro (or +) sS-core contra (or ‒) sS-core non ( 0) self-core • also-sS similar to the core involving pro, contra and 0-parts. core-Self (`only-Self´) the whole strange Self split core of the srange Self in the middle pers. strange relative = also-strange-Self outside 60 Notes: 1. To make it easier to understand, I will usually identify the whole actual Self (core-Self and also-Self) as 'Self' and name other kinds of the Self differently. As said before: Nuclear Self and core Self are the same in this publication. 2. In the section 'Metapsychiatry' the strange Selves are explained in detail. The issue of the Self of a person is above all an issue relating to the identity of the human person and an issue relating to the underlying Absolute or the underlying spirit. That means that the image we have of ourselves tells us who we are. There are many questionable answers: You are what you have! You are what you know! You are what you do! etc. And there are a lot of unanswered questions: What is self-realization? What does it mean to trust yourself? What is that kind of Self? Who am I? The Actual, First-rate Self As already mentioned, the term 'Self' is used to describe the actual, first-rate, whole Self, unless indicated otherwise. 73 Similar to the description of the character of the general Absolute (A), the character of the Self is absolute, too. It is the personal Absolute. The Self also has 7 synonyms (2nd classification stage). The Self is: 1- absolute, 2- identical with itself, 3- actual, 4- whole, complete, 5- unconditional, 6- firstrate, 7- independent. Question: What is a `core-Self´ and an `also-Self´? What is absolute and what is relative? 1st answer: The `core-Self´ is exclusively absolute, exclusively itself, exclusively actual, exclusively whole, exclusively unconditional, exclusively first-rate and exclusively independent. (You could also say: It is absolutely absolute, absolutely itself, absolutely actual and so on.) The `also-Self´ is also absolute, also itself, also actual, also whole, also unconditional, also first-rate, and also independent. But at the same time, it is also relative, also different, also possible, also partial, also secondary and also dependent. 2nd answer: The core-Self = in a sentence where you can insert nothing but 'self' or one of its synonyms (invariant). Also-Self = alongside the term 'self', you can also insert another term without risking mutual exclusion. Examples of the difference between core-Self and also-Self = the absolute and relative dimension of P: - I did not understand in the past when someone said: "I myself have done this and that" or similar. Then I thought, who else than he did that? It was enough to say, "I have done this 73 Self means only the positive Self, unless otherwise indicated. 61 and that." But it seems that people have an unconscious feeling that the statement "I do this or that" does not clearly define the subject 'I', as if there were many Egos in a person and one correctly has to differentiates between a certain "I-self" and other Egos, which obviously could not mean the I-self, but an `I-also´ or a strange Ego. (Which corresponds to the conception of this study.) - One says: "I have arms, legs, a heart, I have a mind, a soul, a spirit, character" and so on. I have all that and I am it, too. But what I am exclusively? Where I am only myself and not me, too? I have assigned further possible characteristics of the Self to these 7 synonyms. I mention them here in parentheses. The Self is: 1st absolute 2nd self (identical with itself, unique, exists on its own, irreplaceable, unmistakable, individual) 3rd actual (per se, true, real, definite) 4th whole (complete, inseparable, unrestricted, unlimited, one) 5th unconditional (in any case, constant, definite, existential) 6th first-rate (primary, centrical, fundamental, superior, most important, determinant, ultimate, direct, primal.) 7th independent (autonomous, free, detached, indomitable but available for choice, untouchable). The Self as the personal Absolute is spirit. It also permeates the personal Relative, especially the soul but also the body, that therefore become an also-Self. (→ Embodiment). And ultimately, it also permeates areas outside the person - that is, fellow human beings, the environment, and more or less the world - as further also-Selves. The Self is created through love. (Strange-Selves have other origins). The Self itself is not definable (such as is God). However, it is evident, believable, plausible and can be experienced. One could say: It is defined by itself, it is self-explaining. Or: It is defined by love / from God. I believe that especially parents have a natural feeling when they attribute a Self to the newborn (sometimes unknowingly). To me, it is hard to imagine that the newborn does not have a Self yet, or that it has to fight for it first or may lose it at any time. That only applies to the strange Selves or to the relative Self. The true Self is of divine origin and a gift that can be accepted by the people. It is of divine and individual origin. One could also say: It is the sphere where God and people are one; where the metapsychical and the psychical are united. The Self in psychology is usually equivalent to the also- resp. relative Self that may also be called the attributive Self. That means, to the Self something is assigned that is making it a "Self". That way, it only has a relative character, it is not constant, is not of a long duration and so on. (Detailed description of the actual Self see the unabridged German version.) 62 The 'Self' in Linguistic Usage Amazingly similar conclusions about what the Self is and what its function is, you see if you consider the possibilities of the use of the term `self´: In the German language, it is connected with the noun or personal pronoun. Although it does not stand alone and grammatically leads rather a shadowy existence, it has, at closer inspection, extraordinary importance. `Self´ stands for: • Me and no other person resp. I myself personally. (e.g., “He said that himself.” “She has to choose by herself.”) - which means it stands for irreplaceability, individuality, uniqueness. • Authority (e.g., “I decided that myself.”) • Self also gives a person Identity (e.g., “I come to myself.”) • 'Of one's own accord´ (e.g., “He does that by himself”) - i.e., it stands for freedom. • 'Effortlessly', 'automatically' (e.g., “Something runs by itself.”), i.e., it stands for autonomy, easiness. • Integrity (e.g., "He is the calm himself"). • `Self-evidence´ (e.g., "It is self-evident"). • `Alone´ (e.g., „Only he alone can make it“= „To be oneself") - it stands for independence. • Reflection (e.g.," I come to myself") = i.e., it stands for sense, identity. • It stands for one´s own interest (e.g., “I am doing this for myself”.) • Finally, 'self' is about 'free choice' (Fleischer). It has a free position in a sentence and accompanies the personal pronoun. Therefore it may be compared to a faithful and discreet companion. • The language also shows that 'self' cannot be configured. It is sovereign. • In the Greek language `self´ is called `autos' and means there personally. • Whenever we do or take something personally, it is related to the Self. • There is per se no plural form of self - so the language also shows that there can be only one actual Self.74 (A plea for an actual, original Self - see unabridged German version.) Summary (partly review) - Every human person is unique, irreplaceable, once-only and individual. The Self gives a person identity. The Self is the actual and unmistakable core of the person. Although you can speak generally about the Self of a person and assign certain characteristics to it, the single I-self or YouSelf, however, is unique and has its own identity if it is not strange.75 To put it in a religious way: We are all God's children but everyone is unique. We have an identity due to our Self if that Self is actual. That well-known answer to God, to the question: "Who are you?" “I am who I am”, also applies to us, no matter who we are. Therefore, it is something absolute, maybe even holy. It is of godly origin. We have the same attitude towards our own children feel themselves. They are always allowed to be true to themselves, they are always good enough, and they can always trust in their Self, they never have to deny themselves. The above- 74 75 I hope these examples are just as obvious in the English language las they are in German. I have not strictly distinguished between the actual Self and the I-Self in this section. 63 named characteristics of the Self, state in general that every one of us is unique but they cannot define what exactly the individuality of every person is. Each individual characteristic is given only by everybody´s I-self. - The Self is the actual, vital, existential sphere of a person. - It is the cause of the being and living of people. It is their origin and foundation at the same time. It is also a goal; and it is an answer to the question: “Why do I exist and live?” - It is free and has autonomy. The Self is absolutely free in its core-sphere and relatively free in the relative-sphere. - It is potentially eternal = every human is created for eternity. - It is worthy of love and wants to be loved without preconditions.76 - It is already there, basically inherent. It is for free, a gift. You do not have to earn it or fight for it. The Self is self-evident. But anything Relative is not self-evident. - The Self is self-evident. But anything Relative is not self-evident. - In the beginning, you are not conscious about the Self. However, one should learn to know one´s own Self and live out of it. - The Self is also made for self-protection. - The most important signs of the Self are: “I am”, “I want to”, and “I am free”, the preservation of the right to self-determination, a life based on the voluntary principle. The actual, first-rate life is based on it. - God/Love is the key to the Self. - The Self is in its core a last piece of the paradise within us that we should keep and protect. Its core is beyond any kind of earthly responsibility. It is beyond away from right or wrong and good or bad. It is above conscience. It is in its core also beyond anything that is relative and therefore from most of our earthly problems. One can press it and suppress it but it is not to be destroyed, as Hölderlin wrote, - unless the particular person definitely does not want that self. Otherwise, it cannot be killed. - The Self is also the best basis for the integration of all relative and strange things. So it integrates the wrong and the relative evil, such as immoral, abnormal, sick, hardly forgivable things, without being identified with them or being influenced by them. -The Self lives by itself in its core, therefore it is also somewhat alone - separated from the Relative although it permeates the Relative. - The Self is unfathomable and cannot be challenged like the Absolute, like love and like God. It is therefore only to be believed and not to be proved. It does not need to be justified. (Religious: God loves the man for his own sake). - It is the personal, the resource/substance, the child (of God) within us. - Self-confidence is the process of becoming aware of the actual Self. - The Self can be chosen by the I, like the Absolute but cannot or does not have to be produced. - The Self is independent of our actions and performance. - One absolutely needs an Absolute, a Self. If one has no true Absolute, a true Self, then he must "make" a Relative to a (strange) Absolute, i.e. to a strange Self. In summary, you can say that the Self has the function of giving a person absoluteness and to be an absolute basis for the relative sphere of a person. 76 For people with pronounced heteronomy, it is hard to believe they could be loved for their own sake. They yearn indeed for this, but also believe that they have to prove that they are worthy of love. In parallel, they demand that others prove their love. The strange-self says: You have to earn love. The self says: Love is free. 64 What are the "disadvantages" of the Self ¹? The Self is not conscious from the start. You cannot enlarge it. You cannot create it. But you can choose your own. One cannot prove that this Self is "the right one", one can only believe it. A person with a Self does not have more worth than another. These "disadvantages" are essential reasons for the Resistance within us to live from this Self. The Personal Relative I distinguish between personal and non-personal Relatives. Concerning the personal Relative: a) actual personal Relatives b) strange personal Relatives c) absolutized Relatives within a person = strange Selves (sS). About a) The actual personal Relative (¹) has an actual Self as the basis. It is also first-rate. It is an also-Self, a peripheral Self. The main representative of the personal Relative is the body of a person. More comprehensively, the personal Relative is mainly the dimension of 'something' (or 'it'): of things, objects, functionalities, materials, parts of a person (physical and psychical). The actual personal Relative is less important than the core-Self and depends on it. About b) The strange personal Relatives have strange Selves as a basis. About c) The absolutized personal Relative is called the strange Self (sS) in the following sections. As mentioned, it plays an important role in the emergence of mental disorders, as discussed in greater detail in `Metapsychiatry´. Brief differentiation between the actual Self and the strange Self: Strange-Selves may also be called conditional, second-rate Selves; or personal false absolutenesses. They manifest, whenever a person sees something Relative as absolute. Then another strange Absolute arises alongside the actual Absolute, which may become a center where second-rate realities accumulate. These are very important when it comes to the emergence of mental disorders. (Concerning the strange Self see esp. in part "Metapsychiatry"). 65 Relations between Spirit, Psyche and Body BODY PSYCHE SPIRIT The illustration symbolizes relations between body, psyche, and spirit in the first-rate personal sphere. The borders between them act like semipermeable membranes: The spirit permeates and determines psyche and body, just as the Absolute penetrates and determines the Relative. In the opposite direction, the spirit is neither dominated by the psyche nor by the body, however, it is influenced in the form of conditional feedback. (Symbolized by the broken lines). To put it bluntly: a good spirit is interested in its soul and body but one cannot manipulate the spirit. The Self as the personal Absolute is spirit.77 The spirit has different characteristics in comparison with the body and psyche and determines those two. Body and psyche may influence the spirit (the Self) but they cannot dominate it. In other words: They influence the person (P) but do not dominate him/her, as long as the person is in the first-rate situation. If body and psyche dominate P, they assume the role of a strange Self (sS), and P is then no longer him-/herself in this case but is strange to him-/herself. The psyche dominates the body (more than the other way around), but does not dominate the core-Self, but is part of the total Self.78 The body does not dominate the Self (spirit), sometimes the psyche but influences both.79 Body and psyche change, depending on which Self resp. spirit the person possesses. That means that something of P (such as a feeling) changes, according to whether he/she is self-determined by the Self or strange-determined by a strange Self. Changes in a first-rate body or psyche do not change the core Self but changes of a first-rate Self always change the body and the psyche. That means also that relative changes within a person only have relative consequences. You cannot view the body and the psyche as absolutely separate from the Self because they are not detached; they may only be viewed as dependent or relatively detached. In the second-rate personal spheres, the relations are different: Body and psyche may become (pseudo-) absolute, (e.g., in the case of an idolization of the body) - then they become strange Selves. Depending on which sphere or part of the person has become a strange Absolute/ resp. Self, this will determine the other P-components. Then, in contrast to the first-rate P, the body can determine the psyche or the spirit - or the psyche the spirit. That kind of strange Self, however, is also unstable and costly. It is a hermaphrodite. Every person has definitely one Self and usually many strange-Selves too, which act as a basis or as centers. I use the terms spirit and Self, interchangeably here in and in the positive connotation. More → Own Self-Definitiion. As described, I see the psyche not limited to the individual → `New Definition of Psyche´. 79 This point corresponds to embodiment theories (e.g. J.J. von Uexküll, F.J. Varela, H.G. Petzold and others). 77 78 66 Therefore, the body and soul of people are usually only relatively actual and also strange, relatively whole and not whole or even divided. In first-rate personal spheres spirit, soul and body are neither separated from each other nor fused with each other. They are a differentiated unity. In the second-rate personal spheres however splittings and fusions occur. Spirit and body appear to be two poles of a whole (the human). The “pole” spirit is little structured but lighter, more variable and flexible, whereas the “pole” body is more structured, more firm and immovable. The psyche has characteristics of both sides and is settled in between but belongs more to the spirit, depending on how one defines psyche. To me, it seems very important to know, especially for therapies, that the spiritual sphere does not only have much more impact on the psyche than the body but also that the spiritual sphere should be viewed as more independent and variable. It should be the focus of therapeutic interventions for personality changes. Finally, it is also relevant, that changes that are created by a good spirit, are basically free from side effects. But of course, therapeutic approaches that focus on the material-somatic sphere (especially psychotropic drugs) should not be excluded. Indeed they are often the first and most important measures, especially in acute situations. In the long term, however, they result in a symptomatic, less sustainable and less effective therapy with more side effects than therapy with the primacy of the spirit. SPECIFIC INFORMATION ABOUT THE I About the Term Concept of psychology and philosophy which is defined and described differently depending on the school. In psychoanalysis mostly `Ego´. I use the term `Ego´ only for the strange, second-rate. Otherwise, I use the term "I" for every situation in which "I" is used in everyday language. Examples from the relevant literature: • “Term for the core of consciousness, the carrier of self-awareness of the physical-psychical wholeness of a person” (Schischkoff) • “The itself self-aware origin and carrier of all psychical actions (thinking, realizing, feeling, acting) of an individual.” • “In psychoanalysis, the Ego is an inner agent of the psyche (next to Id and Superego), that helps with its conscious ego-functions (perception, memory, thinking, planning, learning) as well as with its unconscious ego-functions (defense mechanisms), to mediate between the different requirements of the outer world, sexual drives, the Id and the moral requirements 67 of the superego.” • “In behavioristic theories of the personality the total of all behaviors of an individual.”80 Own Definition of the 'I' a) The term 'I' has the same meaning as in common usage. It stands for the individual person in its entirety, who speaks of itself in the role of the subject. That is, the term 'I' as a personal pronoun means everything that I can say about myself. The emphasis is on the active part of the personality, its role as a subject (I act, I perceive, I feel, etc.). b) 'The I´ resp. `the Ego' as an object (for example, the I as a subject becomes the object of psychological examinations - but then (in contrast to `a') it is possible to say: someone examines me. 'Types' of the I / Ego I distinguish between: a) the actual I b) the strange I (= Ego) c) the Non-Ego About a) The actual I stands for a person, that has an actual Self as the basis. It is equivalent to an I-self, or else synonymously: first-rate I = I¹. This term not only includes the first-rate absolute dimension but also the relative dimension of the I. The term `Only-I-self´ includes only the absolute sphere of the I, its individual unique core of being, that also distinguishes it from other people. The relative sphere of the I-self, which could be called the ` Also- I-self´, expresses parts of me (my body, my mind, etc.) or similarities with other people. (“I am also like you”). Structure of the actual, first-rate I: I-self-core = Only-I-self = IA and GA 81 Also- I-self relative (something of me) and at the same time also Iself, also-absolute. I-self 80 The last 3 quotes are taken from: Brockhaus Encyclopedia, Mannheim 1996th. = Abolute choice of the I. GA = God's absolute love. 81 IA 68 About b) The strange-I = I² or Ego. (→ Strange-I (Ego)). Their main feature is that these parts are controlled by strange Selves (sS). 82 About c) 'Non-Ego'= I°. Important: The “normal" individual, represented by the personal pronoun 'I', is made of its own, actual I-self-part and multiple strange-I-parts (resp. Ego-parts), that overlay the actual I-self. The Egos are vulnerable and destructible but not the core of the actual I-self, even if it is strongly overlaid by Egos. That fact is very important for the therapeutic attitude. The I cannot live without a Self. The I needs an absolute basis. The basis may be either the actual Absolute or just an alleged, strange Absolute. So, the basis can either be the Self itself or alternatively a strange Self. The I is too weak by itself, too incomplete and (except the `absolute-choice´) too relative, to be an entire, undivided I-self. The I chooses its Absolute(s) (possibly unconsciously or intuitively). In this way, its Relatives are also determined. If the I chooses the actual +A, the I stays the actual I. It remains I-self. The only if the I chooses +A, then it is strong enough to prevent that it is dominated by absolutized Relatives. If the I chooses a Relative (R) as its Absolute, then a strange Absolute (sA) or strange Self (sS) arises and on the basis of it a strange I (Ego). Then, in addition to the actual I itself, a (or several) strange Ego(s) emerge. Thus, the I can be actual and first-rate or can be an Ego, which operates on the basis of a strange Self. The I can thus be an I-self or a strange I (Ego) or a "Non-Ego". In the last two cases, I do something but what I am doing does not correspond to my real intentions, not to what I myself really want. In my opinion, this situation, which is the result of `inversions´, is the most important basis for the emergence of mental disorders. (See later in 'Psychiatry'). Differentiations of the I I will only briefly look at this topic since the differentiations of the psyche/ person were already described in greater detail earlier and they are very similar. Concerning the main differentiations, it is mainly about: I. Forms of being of the I (my forms of being). II. Forms and manifestations of life of the I (my life-forms and manifestations). III. Qualities of the I (my qualities and characteristics). IV. The I as a subject, object and in contexts (predicate). As mentioned, I orient myself to words the everyday use of language rather than to words the psychoanalytic or behavioral therapeutic definition of the I. That is, everything is said after "I ..." or "My ...", I count to the I-sphere. Everything where you say 'I myself' is part of the I-self area. 82 See also S. Freud: "The Ego is not master in one's own house." Freud described only what I called second--rate personal, the first rate was unknown to him. 69 Overview: Classification of the I Classification of the I DIMENSIONS Spheres Absolute (A) (= Self) Relative (R) 0 7 Synonyms Ranks 1. 2. 0 Orientations + − 0 DIFFERENTIATIONS Main aspects B L Q C A = Self of the I (my Self) A-core of the I (only I myself) - A-attitude of I (IA) (absolute point of selfdetermination) - God in the self-sphere of the I (GA) (God in me) Exterior-A of I = R = Something of the I [When I¹ that is also I myself] 0² (zero sphere, Non-I) [Only at I²] (here only first-rate) my Absolute / Relatives my identity / differences my reality / possibilities my unity / diversity my security / freedom my causes / results my independence / refuge I-self = I¹ strange-I = I² = Ego Non-I = I° pro + I / Ego contra ‒ I / Ego 0 I / Ego Being-forms of the I (my being) Life forms of the I (my life) Qualities of the I (my qualities) Contexts of the I I as a subject I as a object Units /N G/W P/Th I / Others further aspects my all or something or nothing my God and my world my representations of persons and things my representations of myself and others e.g., my spirit, my self-awareness, my body, my "states", my activities, my information, my skill, my duties etc. 70 I and Self Comparison of Self and I SELF I The Absolute, cause, basis, `essence´... of a person. Not declinable. Symbolized by the heart. Can only be believed. Has in particular a spiritual dimension. Although it has basic effects, it does not act as I. A person is rather not conscious of the Self. Declination (Inflection) is not possible. Personal pronoun = that which is in the place of nouns is (the name, a declinable word - here the individual person). Symbolized by the head (and body). Can be known and proven. Has more physical and psychical dimensions than the Self. Is predominately an acting subject. The I is more conscious than the Self. Declinations (Inflections) are possible. actual Self = first-rate Self. strange-SELF (sS) An actual, positive cause, second-rate, which forms a unit with unreal basis. the actual I, is eternal, unassailable, etc. Declination (Inflection) is not possible. actual, first-rate I (I¹) The I is based on the actual Self = I-self. strange-I (Ego) The I is based as Ego on a second-rate, strange Self. Non-I (I°) Relations between I and Self In my opinion, the use of language provides the best answer to the question of which connections there are between the I and the Self. In any sensible statement, where the firstrate I is used as subject, it is possible to replace the “I” with “I myself”. You can say, "I am doing it". You can also say, " I am doing it myself". This is the wording used whenever one wants to emphasize the irreplaceability of the person by anything else, "I and no other, I and only I am doing that." Adding the (my-)self shows that something is individual, nonexchangeable. Later on, we will realize that the I can only work together with the actual Self without problems and not with the strange Self. The I and the actual Self create a natural union if the I afirms the actual Self. It is then the I-self. It is an original desire of the I to be I-self. Why we do not fulfill this need at many times, will be described later on. The Self itself cannot act as a subject. You cannot say “(My-)self answers”, or “(My-)self acts”. The Self needs the I (and God) to act, such as the I needs a Self. The actions of the I would be inconceivable without some connection to something like a Self. Who else should be acting if not myself? Whenever a person does not say “I myself” but only “I”, it seems to be a simplified formulation, as if people were always acting themselves. Or does the leaving out of `self´ show that it is not always clearly ourselves acting, even if it seems to be obvious? I think it is so. Sure, we seem to always be the ones, which act but sometimes there are so many strange powers and emotions within us, that there is not much left of the actual Self. These other, different, strange things that also cause us to act the way we act, are called the strange Self (sS). Sometimes, we realize that kind of 71 heteronomy. If I for example only fulfill the expectations of other people, then I am determined by others. Though I still act it is not the actual but a strange Self which determines me. So the I can act with the intentions of the actual Self or the strange Selves. Most of the time, that will be actions and processes that happen unknowingly and unconsciously. Religious view The I and the Self are connected but not identical. I and Self are a whole if the Self is quasi-divine. The I-self and God are then one, without loss of identity or individuality. One could also say: The I has its roots in the Self and the Self in God (and myself). The I finds most of its strength, its inner peace and the possibility that all other of the 23 aspects are fulfilled in the actual Self, in God. The Self needs to be approved by the I. As said, therefore, the I is entirely absolute when it comes to the decision of affirming or declining the actual Self - so, for or against God - or “the good principle”. But only there. Besides that aspect, the I cannot be absolute without disorders occurring. In that case, it would try to be its own Self, its own God and would be unable to cope. The actual Self, however, integrates all the I-positions - no matter how the I is: Whether it is right or wrong, responsible or irresponsible, whether it is healthy or ill, successful or inefficient, also whether it is based on a strange Self (!) or not, the person may always be identical, may feel worthy and well. The I-self is always worth the same and basically identical to itself because it is not determined by a Relative. We cannot raise the value of the I-self and also do not have to do so. What the I-self is doing has ultimately only relative importance. The I-self is by no means free of errors. The person who lives their Self may also make more mistakes than others, the Self (God) will compensate for everything. The breath of life that is provided by the actual Self is almost unlimited. It is only in the case of the above mentioned absolute decision for absolute evil that the person loses itself. It is only in the case of the above mentioned absolute decision for absolute evil that the person loses itself. I, Self and my 'Somethings' “The facts of life do not penetrate to the sphere in which our beliefs are cherished; they did not engender those beliefs, and they are powerless to destroy them ...” Marcel Proust, Swann's Way. I, Self and something (of me) are all connected to each other. They form an undivided whole in the first-rate personal sphere. The I is rooted in the Self. I and Self form the I-self. My 'somethings' are like relative part(s) of the I-self. The structure of the psyche can be compared to a tree: The tree has roots, that form the basis (the Self), it has foliage (the something) - and the whole thing is the tree (the I-self). The concept of the I-self involves the something like the concept of the tree involves the foliage. However, the term foliage does not include the tree but a tree remains a tree without the foliage. So, the term 'something' does not enclose the I-self but conversely, the I-self remains the I-self without the something. So, the I can have an actual Self as a basis or as roots but it can also be based on a strange Self. Then it is like a tree with strange roots. It is a hybrid, a hermaphrodite, or a mongrel. The individual is not in-dividual (indivisible) anymore but `dividual´ (divisible). Its I is a strange-I, based on a strange Self. 72 In the best case, if the I is based on the actual +Self, it is identical to itself and integrates whatever is personally relative (the something). The I-self integrates (all) something(s), everything that is relative even if it is wrongly absolutized, without being identical. The following icon shows the first-rate status of the Self towards the something. I SELF R= sth. of me Icon image that shows the priority of the Self over the individual Relative, the `something´ of the I. I postulate that mental disorders can arise by inverting the roles of the Self and any something. Then the actual Self becomes some kind of something and something becomes a kind of a Self - a strange Self. It is about: Who dominates? Do I have something, or does something have me? In other words: Am I I (and also something), or am I mainly something and only a little bit of the I? (In the latter case I call the dominant something the `It'.) Concerning mental disorders, the absolute-sphere of a person, the Self, is deranged. That is why the protection and the strengthening of the Self should be mainly focused on. The conflict dynamism mainly occurs between the I, based on a Self and the I-parts, based on strange-Selves. There are parallels to the general dynamics of the human person between the Absolute and the Relative or, in other words: It shows the human caught between heaven, earth and hell. The Absolute Attitude of the I Synonyms: The absolute I-Self with the absolute basic or existential attitude/will, the absolute point of decision, the highest absolute responsibility of the I. Short: IA, PA. 83 In the positive case: primary virtue, good will in principle. → Absolute and relative will. The absolute point of choice between the positive and the negative Absolute. The center point of the I-self and thus of the person is constituted by an absolute decision point for +A or for −A on the basis of an inviolable dignity and an unconditional right of self- 83 This `absolute attitude of the I´ is similar to the 'absolute I' of Johann Gottlieb Fichte and the `absolute spirit´of Hegel but not identical to both. This absolute I-Self cancels the object-subject opposition but distinguishes both and gives priority to the subject. 73 determination.84 At this point, the highest or the most actual absolute of a person is directly confronted with the opposite actual Absolute (+A # ‒A).85 The choice of +A or ‒A is an existential right of self-determination of humans. Freud may have thought with the distinction of `libido´ and `destrudo´ (destructive instinct) in a similar direction. Goethe saw, on the other hand, the fundamental conflict of man in the "conflict between unbelief and faith".86 Those are only hypotheses that perhaps appear irrelevant. But in the positive case, as I will explain later, this decision is the "only one" prerequisite for the acceptance of a fundamental, positive, absolute Self. The existence of an absolute decision-making point is also important because I believe that love or God leaves us this free choice and does not determine deterministically, which are the "good" and the "evil" humans and the individual stands on this point on the same level as God and can in principle (!) want the good or the evil. If a person principally wants well, then, in my understanding, he has decided on an absolutely positive, indestructible (core) Self. All of these people, I believe, go to “heaven” whether they are religious or not. However, if a person fundamentally and irrevocably wants the absolute evil, then I believe that leads to his own destruction (the so-called "mortal sin").87 Other choices In all other cases, the I has only relative options and makes only relative decisions. This has a favorable and an unfavorable side. Favorable is that I have to meet, even in an absolute sense, only one (perhaps unconscious) decision, to feel basically free and redeemed. This gives the person freedom and relief! I have not to do anything. The "unfavorable" side is, that I cannot make in the absolute sphere also anymore. In other words, I can´t redeem myself by any particular actions or increase my value. Since the I is only relative (besides the absolute decision), it can become a strange Self - the I-self alienates from itself. A free absolute or relative will should not be confused with a will which is determined by a strange Absolute and which forces us to want to do something that we actually do not want. "Protect me from what I want!". (→ Obsessive-compulsive disorder) The described choices are similar to the theses of the standpoint theories. However, those only mark relative (earthly) standpoints, while I assume the possibility of the existence of an absolute standpoint. 84 As a completely independent center of a person or an individual, it only corresponds to a "pure" absolute personal / individual subject, because otherwise person and individual are more or less subject and object at the same time. (See also terms `subjectoid´ and `objectoid´ as terms of second-rate subjects or objects). 85 I already mentioned the following actual Absolutes: God, as the positive Absolute (+A) on the one side, the negative Absolute (‒A) on the other side and the free attitude/ will of a person toward those. 86 West-East-Divan, Isreal in the Desert. 87 I postulate here the priority of a free will /attitude towards the Absolute instead of a conscious act of faith. 74 Individuation as Psychological Concept A choice of literature • “The principle of individuation [...] generally describes the way, in which a thing finds identity that distinguishes itself from others. The concept […] can be found in publications by Carl Jung, Gilbert Simondon, Bernard Stiegler, Friedrich Nietsche, Arthur Schopenhauer, David Bohm, Henri Bergson, Gilles Deleuze and Manuel De Landa …”88 • “In Jungian psychology, also called analytical psychology, `individuation´ names the process in which the individual self develops out of an undifferentiated unconscious - seen as a developmental psychical process during which innate elements of personality, the components of the immature psyche, and the experiences of the person's life become integrated over time into a well-functioning whole."89 “Jung regarded the process of individuation as a lifelong, incomplete process with a steady approximation to a 'distant goal': the Self. … The person is always being asked to actively confront itself with problems occurring throughout the way of its individuation and to take responsibility for the decisions of the Self. Individuation means, not to follow 'what someone should do' or 'what would be generally right' but to listen to one’s Self, to realize what the inner wholeness (the Self) wants to achieve 'with me or byt me' in that certain situation." 90 • An example for a sociological concept is Bernard Stiegler, who considers „the psychical individuation always as a collective process."91 Criticism: Individuation in the sense of the above is, of course, a very important process of personal self-development. In my opinion, it will be best to succeed if it takes place on the basis of a personal Absolute, which not only has to be constituted by the individual himself but already exists from the outset. This primary Absolute, this primary innate Self is rarely considered in the literature. But in fact, it corresponds to human experience, as reflected for instance in the universal human rights or in love relationships. There, the individuation is subordinated to an already existent absolute self-being, a first-rate dignity, freedom and uniqueness of the human. In the first place is not the "becoming" but "being" and the "you are already!" An already existing absolute individuality is assumed thus and superordinated to the individuation. This innate, absolute individuality and identity does the person concerned not have to establish. This is it which has unconditional, vital meaning, not the mentioned above individuationprocesses, no matter how important they might be. However, if the latter are of absolute importance, we are fundamentally overstrained because the individual should always be on the way to find and reach the "ultimate goal" (as described by C. Jung) to feel identical with 88 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individuation#Carl_Jung , 2017. www.gutenberg.us/articles/eng/individuation 2017. 90 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individuation 2017. 91 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individuation or more in www.gutenberg.us/articles/eng/individuation 2017. 89 75 himself. (Maybe many people with identity disturbances, like above all schizophrenic patients have resigned and have given up the fight for such a self-becoming or have never got to know that primary absolute innate Self). Though, the absolute, inherent individuality does not convey the illusion of a feeling of total being identical to the Self but more realistically, the feeling of a fundamental deep and undestroyable self-being, which is the best requirement for individuation. An absolute, actual individuality and identity of a person is not provable. It is an apriori. Only relative identity - what you also are, or what you make of yourself - is provable. One should maybe say it as God does: “I am, who I am”, or: “I do not have to become different. I might even regress, without losing myself.” PS: As already mentioned, a newborn would not have any individuality without an inherent Self. However, with that Self, every newborn is already born as unique, irreplaceable, individual, endearing personality. According to my theory individuation is a process with relative importance. The person is in the core-Self from another people totally different, while the relative self-spheres displays similarities with other people. This theory shows the person neither as completely different from other people nor as a collective product but also integrates both concepts. (See also “The journey is the destination” in Buddhism). The Concrete Person and His Analysis of Language How does the concrete person present himself in this context? Looking at the analysis of language, you could say: What the person concerned says about himself and the world, or what others say about him gives the most concrete conclusions about the person concerned. The most important is, what is of absolute relevance for the person. This is recognizable again in absolute statements in sentences or words. (See `How are inversions expressed? (Linguistic Analysis)´ in part Metapsychiatry). Thus it is likely that a person who uses, for example, often formulations like „I must absolutely" or "I may not", if relative needs are absolutized (Asp.11) or if another expresses that his life aim consists in becoming once a millionaire, or if ownership (asp. 9) will be absolutized. In this respect, an individual language analysis brings important clues to the psychological situation of the person concerned, as indeed in practice, usually what the person says about himself or what is said about him, is the most important source for the assessment of an individual. However, the thinking and the spoken words do not always match, so that such an analysis of speech has to be viewed as imperfect since the Absolute often cannot be absolute defined. But I believe that the present concept for diagnostic purposes is also very suitable, although this is not the main intention of this script. In this case, it would be the primary task to consider the respective individual Absolutes of the person, as I have tried to express in the sketchy sentences of Hölderlin at the end of the part `Metapsychiatry' in the unabridged German script. 76 METAPSYCHIATRY `Every ideology is (potentially) deadly - it demands and justifies different victims.´ (~ Andrea M. Meneghin) “Man is an ideological animal.” (Louis Althusser) Introduction and Overview I define metapsychiatry as a theory which reflects on psychiatric topics from higher points of view. These are above all worldview standpoints. Therefore, one could also speak of `philosophy of psychiatry'. However, metapsychiatry also includes sociological, psychological, neurological, biological, and language spheres since these also deal with important psychiatric and psychological issues. Note: The term “metapsychiatry” is used with slightly different connotations in American English. That meaning is rarely used in German.92 While metapsychology focuses on things that are important to our soul, metapsychiatry focuses on what of those matters can make us mentally ill and how that happens, resp. which of the psychical relevant matters are pathogenic or “sick” themselves. Generally speaking: Metapsychiatry is about everything that has to do with mental illnesses. Since the causes of mental disorders may be in person or environment, a metapsychiatric view is indispensable about this topic. We may be affected by positive or negative, healthy or morbid factors in our surroundings, in our fellows and even in nature, which is often not taken into consideration. Therefore, usual psychoanalysis and psychotherapy can become one-sided. I reflect on this area from (general) linguistic, existential-philosophical and religious-scientific perspectives. Their common theme at issue here is what I call "the strange psychological Relevant" or "strange, second-rate realities", which include mental illnesses, too. 93 I hypothesize that `inversions´ of fundamental meanings94 (absolute, relative, nothing and their synonyms) are the main causes of the emergence of these strange realities and thus mental disorders. Such reversals of fundamental meanings arise, above all, by attitudes that make a claim to absoluteness that excludes other attitudes. `Isms´ or ideologies are typical examples of this.95 If by that a Relative is absolutized then it becomes a strange Absolute 92 The term "metapsychiatry" is used in American English with other connotation. This meaning is hardly used in German. "Metapsychiatry" is a term there for spiritual teaching and form of psychotherapy developed by the psychiatrist Thomas Hora (1914-1995) → https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metapsychiatry . As a psychotherapeutic method, however, this is not the same as the metapsychiatry I described here, but the approach of Thomas Hora, who tries to apply psychotherapy to spiritual, religious, is also helpful. However, I have significant differences to his opinions, as he introduced them in his well-known book "Beyond the Dream". 93 I also use the Classification in these chapters as I have presented it in part `Metapsychology and Psychology´. (Look if necessary there). 94 `Fundamental´ means that all (and not only certain) the psychical Relevants are recorded in their basic and most important meaning. 95 • I use the terms 'ideologies' or 'isms' as terms for all attitudes with claim to absoluteness, not only for social but also for the doctrinaire and the like attitudes in families and individuals. Or, in simpler terms, ideologies are absolutized attitudes. • I will discuss the role of the negative Absolute (‒A) later. 77 (sA), and an actual Absolute becomes strange Nothingness (s0). The strange Absolute and the strange Nothingness are connected and constitute a new, dominant entity that I call 'It'. 96 These `Its´ produce strange (second-rate) realities - which form the basis of mental disorders. (e.g., „It makes me sick!").97 Inversions and their effects may appear in an individual as well as in societies. While it is obvious that both spheres are interconnected, showing similar characteristics and dynamics, this study will primarily investigate the personal area, since this publication, our focus is on mental disorders. Mental disorders emerge whenever a complex in a person (a combination of personal Its) has reached particular characteristics and extents. Of course, complexes found in society or individuals environment may cause mental illness as well - however, to do so, they need first to be internalized and personalized. Following the logic of this argumentation, primary causes of pr changes/ disorders and thus also mental disorders will ultimately (!) need to be sought in an Absolute. All other causes are necessarily second-rank - these are causes that are results of other causes. Therefore, the pathogenesis of mental disorders originally begins mostly with the patient's attitude to an Absolute and finally leads to disorders, of which some are mental disorders. This is a very interesting and complicated process that will be discussed only briefly now. The usual inversion has two parts, which are inextricably linked: 1) The absolutization of a Relative (R) 2) The negation of an actual Absolute (A¹). To 1) Note: For the sake of simplicity, the `Relative´ stands in this publication for everything, which is not an Absolute. By an inversion, something Relative is made absolute and can establish a strange Absolute (sA). Instead of the primacy of the Absolute and the subordination of the Relative (R), the Relative wins by the inversion the upper hand about the Absolute. As sA, the newly absolutized Relative displays very different characteristics than that which was originally purely Relative: on the one hand, it is inherently relative, on the other hand, it has some absolute traits since it is absolutized. Thereby, a strange new entity is created within reality or a person which is autonomous and dominant. In the next step, this new sA constitutes a system of domination. As a new Absolute, it has the power to subdue other Relatives. It cut them off the influence of the actual A. Thus it forms a system as a new strange Absolute (sA) with subordinated Relatives. Regarding the person: The new sA subordinates and changed the person in the area in which it prevails. We shall see later that this dominance of the sA about the person is not purely negative but 96 Notes: 1. The It is always in three parts but may appear predominantly in two parts or one part. Therefore, I do not always speak of the whole It, but sometimes only of its parts: the strange Absolutes (sA), All and Nothing, etc., if their characteristics are in the foreground. 2. The abbreviations are also made clear in this Graphic or you can find All abbreviations in the appendix. 97 1. These preliminary statements are further elaborated in the course of work. 2. As said - this `It´ is not identical to S. Freud´s `Id´. 78 also positive. This fact plays an important role in understanding mental disorders. To 2) The establishment of this sA-system is accompanied by a negation of these three actual Absolutes: 1. The + A, 2. the ‒A, 3. the personal `absolute attitude'. (More on that later.) Thus, the corresponding actual world/reality/personality is lost. Thereby, however, the process is not completed. Since every new sA also becomes an opposite to an actual A (or to another sA), the Absolutes enter into a struggle for supremacy in the respective spheres of reality or person. This means that we are often exposed to very diverse contradictions and tensions, which are based on various Absolutes. Sometimes a sA may be fighting another sA but, sometimes it is making pacts with others sA, too - however, every sA will fall into opposition and contradiction to the actual Absolutes. At the same time, every sA or It is divided within itself into opposite parts. So long as the inversions persist, these will persist. It is for this reason that the world/ the person is unable to find peace and is prone to develop mental disorders. We return to the hypothesis that a great number of different inner and outer worlds/realities exist: an actual world and many, strange, second-rate worlds 98 and we find that all these worlds have absolute and relative (AR-) dimensions and consist of the 4 main aspects (BLQC) resp. of 23 individual aspects regarding the `Differentiations´. These different worlds are determined by their respective Absolutes, which form center and basis for the relative areas dependent on them. How we live, whether we are healthy or sick, will depend on such external and internal worlds/realities. But since an A always governs these worlds/realities, one might say that, first and foremost, our lives depend on these A. For an individual, the Absolutes in his/ her inner world have a direct, definitive influence, while the external world (environment) has a more indirect influence on the person. In this respect, the question is important how the person can shield their internal world against a pathogenic environment. Fortunately, the first-rate world is stronger than the strange worlds/ realities in the long term. As said: While the first-rate world is guided by A, the strange worlds are dominated by strange Absolutes. We will see below that the restoration (`religio´) of the dominant position of the actual A is an essential objective of therapy. Acquiring an understanding of the causes and nature of mental disorders may be difficult for the following reasons: • The person is embedded in relationships and contexts and that´s why illness may have causes that are exterior to the individual. • Causes of illness can have impacts for other people and not for the polluter himself. 98 1. The actual absolutely Negative (‒A) is not at issue here. 2. The terms strange and second rate (or ²) in this script have the same meaning. Sometimes I will use the one, sometimes the other term, to add interest for the reader. Synonyms are also the terms actual and first-rate; while `ns' stands for` new, strange´; BLQC for being, life, quality, connections. For more detail, please see the section `Metapsychology´. 79 • Inversions can cause many, not just mental disorders. • The causes of mental disorders are often hidden, indirect and very complex. • The affected is often not aware of the actual causes of mental disorders. • Every inversion diversifies resp. spreads in such a way that it can cause many different disorders, and on the other hand one disorder can be generated by many different inversions. • The negative may not have only negative impacts, and the positive may have negative impacts. That´s why the positive can also be a cause of mental disorders. • Often, subjective experience and objective facts are not identical: This means that disorders might be experienced positive and health negative. But in an objective view, too, illnesses are also not absolutely negative and health not absolutely positive. • Disorders or their causes may also be considered to be positive by society and therefore encouraged (e.g. workaholism). The most commonly used terms and abbreviations here A = The Absolute R = The Relative WPI = World resp. reality; Person and I sA = strange Absolute sS = strange Self  = strange All 0 = Nothingness It = complex of strange All and 0 (`dyad') or of pro and contra and 0 part (`triad') in the core. These abbreviations are also made clear in this Graphic. Now I will exactly explain in the following paragraphs: 1. The `inversion´. 2. I describe how the inversion creates the strange, dominant entity that I call `It´ and how this `It´ changes reality and people. 3. I show how these `Its´ unite to form bigger complexes and which role they have concerning the pathogenesis of mental disorders. 80 INVERSION - CONFUSION OF FUNDAMENTAL MEANINGS "There are things of the first order and things of the lowest order. ... By exceeding the permissible space, things feel abused ... the things of the first order that have been pushed into the last place are dying of exhaustion. Conversely, however ... it happens that things that have been pushed into the first place do not thrive but dry up and shatter." José Ortega y Gasset.99 Definitions By `inversion' I mean confusion of fundamental meanings. 100 This can lead to formation of strange, dominating entities (`It'), which produce strange, "inverted" realities (W²), like mental illnesses. Similar definitions - Inversion = ideologizations/ Isms which are dominant in the affected person and connected with a negation of the actual Absolute. - In religious terms: Inversions arise because God and the Self are replaced by something other. To some terms Inversion = Confusion of fundamental meanings. Reversals = Results of inversions. Examples: subject-object-reversal, person-thing-reversal, etc. See all reversals in Summary table column U. Special reversals: Reversal into the opposite Reaction formation = Reversal into the opposite as a defense. Note: I´m sorry, in some places I do not exactly differentiate between inversions and reversals. Causes of Inversions The story of creation in the Bible is a typical example of the emergence of the aforementioned strange realities, the `world´. The snake claims: “You will be like God.” 101 This idea tempts us to doubt God. It twists / inverts his message. To me, this is the basic structure of all inversions. This basic pattern can generally be found in the most diverse ideologies, specifically in temptations by populist leaders, drug use, prostitution, and, quite unremarkable, in many everyday situations.102 Those who seduce us offering a free bait so that we enthrone that which appears to be the Absolute, which will, however, eventually come to dominate us. Thus, in the very beginning, before the inversion occurs, there is almost always a seductive idea of a strange positive Absolute - or a threat through a strange negative Absolute, too. 99 1. José Ortega y Gasset in "Triumph des Augenblicks - Glanz der Dauer", DVA Stuttgart, 1983. 2. Similar from a religious point of view H.R. Niebuhr (https://thinkingreed.wordpress.com/2012/01/27/h-r-niebuhrs-principles/ ), P. Tillich and W. Daim. `Fundamental´ means that all (and not only certain) the psychical Relevants are recorded in their basic and most important meaning. Here exemplary the confusion of the Absolute (A) and the Relative (R) which serve as guiding 100 concepts. According to M. Lurker, the snake symbolizes an ambivalent principle in numerous myths and traditions. 102 In this publication, the term `ideology´ is a keyword for all inverting attitudes. 101 81 Can we not all of us relate to this story? Is not every one of us similar to Adam and Eve? Do we not all eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge every day, constructing ideologies which, for a short while, seem reasonable or beneficial to us but will, in the long term, prove harmful? (See also Theodicy). Even after psychoanalysis, situations of temptation and failure are very important. Distinctions Major and Daily Inversions It is not only about universal topics of humanity but also daily topics - worries such as illnesses, problems with our partners or children, success and failure, money or no money all these subjects may invade the absolute-sphere and therefore acquire existential relevance. The range of possible inversion is nearly unlimited. I shall systematize them in a later section. Inversions may be quickly changed, or they may last for a lifetime like a mindset that may be found in societies or families for several generations. The common denominator of all these behavior patterns (or rather, of their underlying attitudes) is the affected person's subordination to a strange Absolute and their negation of that which is the actual Absolute. Inversion and Behavior Existential attitudes, opinions, and beliefs are generally “located” in the absolute sphere of the person. Concrete behaviors depend upon them and are therefore relative in comparison to them. Thus, it is not possible to draw completely safe conclusions of concrete behaviors about primary attitudes. In association with that topic, I also want to show the difference of a relative trait and an absolutized trait: A relative one is relativized by a higher positive Absolute (+A, God) Example: I can be scrupled, without it determining me - an absolutized relative trait not. Inversion and Sin On the distinction between inversion and sin, I would briefly like to say that inversion is more comprehensive than sin and the affected is often unaware of its presence. Sin is commonly understood with an act of conscious, free will, as a violation of the Ten Commandments. It is possible to have inversions without sinning. Objectively, sin, as well as inversion, are of relative importance; subjectively, however, they are frequently of absolute importance. Inversion is by no means the negative or even evil, rather something strange and second-rate which often acts as an emergency solution despite all the disadvantages. Inversion and Repression (Freud) Freud’s concept of repression corresponds, in part, to the concept of inversion, provided `repression´ means a repression of the Absolute (resp. its synonyms) by a Relative (resp. its 82 synonyms). According to the psychoanalytic conception, the repressed Absolute would then recede to the subconscious. A more extensive discussion of differences between Freud´s theory of repression and my analysis can be found in the unabridged German version. Inversion and 'Contra-inversion' The absolutization of something/someone is always automatically accompanied by an absolutization of the opposite and a negation - often only existing latently. I call the complexes thus formed 'It', which will be discussed later (→ It). Every inversion may lead not only to the genesis of opposites but also to dilemmas and paradoxes. (See e.g., Ambivalent and paradoxical reactions.) The emergence of opposites also goes hand in hand with the emergence of fusions (mergers) and negation. Likewise, fusions generate opposites and negations as well as negations promoting opposites and fusions. (See e.g., Overview of possible interactions in W²). In my opinion, the literature of this theme looks only at the dynamics of opposites and not at the simultaneous emergence of fusions and negations. Individual and Societal Inversions a) Individual inversions: the inversions or ideologizations first arise in the absolute spiritual sphere of a person but their effects can be found everywhere: in the spiritual and psychological sphere as well as in material and somatic spheres. The material and somatic changes can be secondary causes for further changes. However, the primacy of spiritual causation cannot better be proved than the primacy of material causation. b) Societal inversions: the inversions affect not only individuals but also groups or whole societies. Here, they can be found, above all, as different ideologies or `isms´, as well as in countless attitudes and convictions which exist in small groups such as families. Globally, they are in social strata and societies, in successive generations, in the mainstream as much as in more marginal worldviews and ideologies. In the following chapters, the character of ideologies, their `Its´ and effects will be described. These ideologies are not only negative and have positive sides however, in the long term, they always prove more or less oppressive, require sacrifices, exclude others and are potentially pathogenic. Symbolic Images of Inversions A R A R A R A R a A R b c d e The graphics illustrate inversions concerning different aspects of the dimensions involved. In essence, it is the same 83 process that is portrayed in diverse ways.103 From left to right: a) To the left, we can see how A loses its position in the center, while the Relative takes this place in the center. b) A Relative becomes dominant over the Absolute. In the sphere of a person: R becomes superior to P. c) The Absolute is no longer regarded to be fundamental, while the Relative is regarded to be fundamental. d) The Absolute is no longer thought to be first-rate but second-rate, while the Relative becomes first-rate. e) The Absolute is no longer believed to be comprehensive, while the Relative is deemed to be comprehensive. Everywhere there are "displacements" of the center and "breakages" between the first-rate starting point and the new strange situation. Inversions and their Effects from the Perspective of Linguistic Analogies Grammatical and syntactical analogies remind us of the hypothesis that aspects of an individual's psyche are revealed by that which is represented in nouns, verbs and adjectives 104 - i.e. "structures" (forms), "movement" and "qualities "; while psychical interconnections are expressed by syntax, by that which subjects and predicates represent. One can examine the changes in the "structures" (forms), "movement", "qualities" and interconnections are caused by the inversions. Translating the steps previously mentioned into these linguistic analogies, one might say: In a first step, a person who is a primary subject, makes with inversion an object (the Relative) to a primary subject; thereby becoming himself an object. As an object, the affected person can merely act as a secondary or second-rate subject (syntactic analysis). Another analogy to grammar lies in the fact that the subject forces the object into a certain form by the aid of a verb as predicate. “The verb dominates the object.“ (W. Jung). 105 The `Summary table´ essentially follows this classification. For a more detailed analysis, please see the unabridged German version. How are Inversions Expressed? (Linguistic Analysis) Often, inversions are not immediately recognized in every-day life, particularly since they might appear in different forms and modes of expression. Inversions emerge from certain attitudes and are expressed in very diverse ways: in specific patterns of behavior, ways of thinking and speaking, etc. Most clearly, inversions express themselves in the language which is employed in communication. Since inversions invariably affect the absolute sphere, they can be revealed in the inadequate use of following absolute words or absolute statements, like: • Absolute nouns: God, devil, idol, saints and the sacred, or nominalized absolute adjectives. • Absolute verbs of action like: to swear, adore, idolize, hate, curse, dogmatize, ideologize, etc. • Absolute auxiliary verbs e.g., (absolute) must, want to do, must not. • Absolute Adjectives: e.g., absolute and its synonyms, by oneself, actual, categorical, definite, primary, independent, total, surreal, irrelevant. • Superlatives. • Absolute adverbs (= circumstances) e.g., always, forever, never, impossible, unbelievable, definitely 103 `A´ and `R´ stand as guiding terms for corresponding dimensions. More precisely, it is, of course, only the words that are relevant to man. 105 W. Jung: `Grammatik der deutschen Sprache´, p 46. 104 84 not, in no way, obvious, entirely clear, first-rank, certainly, etc. • Absolute prefixes and suffixes e.g., un-, -less, etc. • Universal-statements = sentences that include absolute words, proverbs or universal statements. Systematization: Possibilities of Inversions (optional) I limit myself here in regard to the multiplicity of possible inversions to known ideologies. Besides, there are, as mentioned, countless other "private", nameless, dogmatized attitudes. [Notes: ↔ means inversion.] I will discuss aspects one by one: Inversions of the dimensions, inversions of the differentiations and the units. (For all inversions / reversals see `Summary table´ column F). Inversions of the 7 Aspects of Dimensions 0 absolute self actual whole unconditional primary independent relative different possible partial conditional secondary dependent • a1) (Key aspect) Absolute and Relative are mixed up /confused (↔) Relative (R) becomes strange Absolute (sA) and the actual Absolute (+A, ‒A and `absolute attitude´) becomes nothing (0). (KW `Rule of the Relative over the Absolute´). Source: all ideologies, some worldviews. • a2) The Self ↔ the other. A strange other is seen as an actual Self, as actual identity, as identical to itself and the actual Self is seen as strange or irrelevant. e.g., Determinism, operationalism, some philosophies of identity. (KW `Rule of the strange over the self´). • a3) The actual ↔ the possible. The possible, artificial, fake, surreal will be denoted as actual, real, etc. and the first-rate realities/ truths will be seen as irrelevant. e.g., Realism, objectivism, positivism, antirealism, idealism, relativism, formalism. (KW `Rule of the beautiful image´). • a4) Uniform ↔ partial. Parts are treated as a whole - and the whole as a part. e.g., Monism, holism, universalism, integralism, totalitarianism, expansionism. • a5) Unconditional ↔ conditional. Conditional becomes unconditional and vice versa. e.g., Dogmatism, determinism, fatalism, partly skepticism. • a6) First-rate ↔ second-rate. Second-rate becomes first-rate and vice versa, e.g., If one makes a main thing to a minor matter and a minor matter to the main thing. Further: radicalism, extremism. (KW `Rule of a second over the first´). (KW `The rule of the second over the first´, or `Rule of the form over the content´). •a7) Independent ↔ dependent. Dependent things become autonomous - and the independent things are seen as dependent or irrelevant. e.g., Autopoiesis, evolutionism, philosophy of immanence. 85 Inversion of the Main Differentiations • I. Being (spirit ↔ matter). F.e: idealism, immaterialism, ontologism, spiritualism / materialism, naturalism, formalism, structuralism. (KW `Rule of the matter over the spirit´). • II. Live ↔ function. e.g., Hylozoism, dynamism, energetics, functionalism, partly philosophies of life, vitalism. (KW `Rule of the function and the functionairs over the life´). • III. Absolute ↔ relative qualities. e.g., Perfectionism, positivism, idealism / negativism. • IV. Subject ↔ object- connections. Relative connections are treated like absolute connections and vice versa. Objects are treated like subjects and vice versa. e.g., subjectivism, objectivism, relationism, epiphenomenalism. (KW `Rule of the objects over the subject´). Inversion of the Units • On 1. Everything ↔ something. Something is seen as everything - and everything is seen as nothing. • On 2. Transcendence (God, heaven, spirit) ↔ immanence (world, matter, partly humanity). • On 3. People ↔ things. Things are seen as people and vice versa. (KW `Rule of the things over the human´). • On 4. IA ↔ IR and I ↔ others. Others/people or the own I are absolutized - and the own or strange Absolute is being negated. 'Ego' as a common term for an absolutized I. (→ The special case: `The Ego as strange Absolute´) • On 5. Spirit ↔ soul, body of a person. The human body (or parts of the body) or functions such as look, physical capability, or well-being are absolutized - and the actual Absolute spirit, such as the unconditional dignity of the person is relativized or negated. Additional aspects such as ownership, morality, ability, etc: see unabridged German version. Importance of Inversions for the Development of Mental Disorders (interim result) I am convinced that inversions, besides the ‒A, are the most common and primary (!) cause for mental disorders. On the other hand, the connection between inversions and mental disorders is never definite, because: - Every inversion also has positive effects! Therefore, inversion is definitely not the bad or evil but more like an emergency solution. - Also, the +A can have negative results/ consequences, comparable to the pain we have to bear at the dentist. - The decisive factor for the pathogenesis of mental disorders is not some kind of mistake or confusion per se but that those are connected to the Absolute. Confusions of the Relative are ubiquitous. Everything 'earthly', our every-day-life, our communication, our way of thinking and our perception is more or less alienated, paradoxical, senseless, traumatizing, etc. without us getting ill automatically. Only if something becomes of absolute relevance, it dominates over us and if it is not compensated by something other, mental disorders may occur. 86 IT - A STRANGE DOMINANT ENTITY Note: Readers who do not want to delve into this general topic in detail can skip this chapter and continue reading with the more specific chapter 'The personal It and the strange Self´. Introduction In this chapter, I will discuss in more detail the effects of Inversions. From inversions of psychically relevant dimensions, a new entity can arise that dominates us and forms new, strange realities and personal parts. In the following I will call this new, strange entity 'It'. Thus inversions lead to the formation of something new, strange, which has materialized and become independent. A formation has emerged that represents the inversion of fundamental meanings and has inverting effects, too.106 Something has emerged that has detached itself from its creator and is no longer his object but a new, strange, independent subject and develops its own effect on its own. In this subject role, it dominates us humans, which now become objects. This 'it' has its own characteristics, which I will describe afterwards. The It in General Why Did I Choose the Term 'It'? The term `it' denotes an unspecified cause of an occurrence.107 W. Jung: "The pronoun (it) is only a formal, empty subject [Wahrig: 'seeming subject'] associated with ... impersonal verbs ... but also with verbs of physical or mental sensations, verbs of lack or necessity ...". 108 It is therefore very well suited to designate the most general denominator of as yet undetermined causes of any psychically relevant events, which can be further differentiated as required. I distinguish between a `little it' and a `big It´. The `little it' is subjugated to the I-self 109 - but the `big It´ that is at issue here dominates the Ego. Therefore the term 'It' is used here to describe an 'it' with absolute importance. It is created by inversion, which causes a `little it'/ something to be absolutized and to become a `big dominating It´. Then I do no longer own it but It owns me. Therefore, this It is the cause for an event within a person that the person cannot directly control or influence. In every-day language, we also often use the term It to describe that something (usually something unknown) controls us: “It kills me on the inside.”, “It makes me sick.”, “It confuses me.” and so on. Other than the term I, It also indicates indeterminacy and subconsciousness. 106 Therefore one could also call the It `Invertant´. Duden 1973, KZ 1148. 108 W. Jung, p. 337. 109 Even if it unconsciously steers the I - at least to its advantage. Above all, this includes many functions and other sensible unconscious behavioral patterns. 107 87 All these characteristics match very well with the 'It' described in this publication. These Its play a special role in the emergence of mental disorders. (See later more). `It' with similar meaning by other authors • The It described by S. Freud applies to one of the three instances besides I and superego.110 • G. Groddeck describes the It in a similar way. As far as I know, he mentioned the important role of the It within our inner life in “Book of the It”, even before Freud did. 111 • Paul Auster: “What that 'it' referred to Quinn has never known. A generalized condition of things as they were, perhaps; the state of `it-ness´ that was the ground on which the happenings of the world took place.” (New-York Trilogy, p. 135). • Georg Büchner in 'Danton's Death': “What is it in us that lies, steals and murders? We are puppets and unknown powers pull the strings; ... we are not ourselves!” (Act 2, Scene 5). • Thomas Wolfe wrote about “... that something that lived and wove in the dark, while the people slept, which happened secretly, rejoicing and victorious all over the country ...”.112 • A. J. Cronin: "The stuff is in my body. It's myself… I am the It itself.”113 • In the book LTI, Victor Klemperer describes the language of the Third Reich. I think language and spirit of the Third Reich are also the language and spirit of a special It (or −A). His description of a Nazi-march in LTI is an example of two typical characteristics of the It: hyper-identity and juxtaposition of lifelessness and 'hyper-vitality'. • The features that Stefan Zweig gives the 'daemon' in his book 'The Struggle with the Daemon' essentially correspond to an 'It'. • It is typical, that also a horror film (by Stephen King) is called 'It'. Further Characterization and Definition of the It It = a strange dominating subject. More precisely: It = special entity, originated by inversions, which became independent and dominates and changes WPI.114 It is a complicated formation with the most varied of effects. It is the fundamental basis for mental disorders. However, the It is not “the evil” or solely negative because it also contains positive sides, which are very important for its persistence and penetrance. It is - among many other characteristics - strange and divided. 110 Freud called the German `Es´ in Latin `Id´. The term `It' used by me includes the Freudian Id, but it is however much broader. 111 Georg Groddeck, The Book of the It, Vision Press (1979 ed), 112 In: `Death, the Proud Brother´. 113 A.J. Cronin in `The Adventure of a Black Bag´. 114 WPI = world, person and I. 88 An It consists of three opposite parts: a pro-sA, a contra-sA, and s0-part 115 (“triad”), although it may also appear as a one-part or two-part ("monad" or "dyad"). Each of these parts of the It, in turn, has three sides - a main and two backsides. In this section, for the sake of simplicity, I will initially only describe the It and its parts. (More on that later →The Emergence of the Three Sides of any It-part). Why does an It always consist of three parts? In other words, why does an inversion always create three opposites? Example: I idealize one matter. Every matter, however, as a Relative, has apart from the positive, also a negative and a neutral part, and these two parts are also absolutized. (More about this in `The Emergence of the Parts of the It´). At the beginning of absolutization, the It often appears one-partite (like a 'monad'), later often bipartite (like a 'dyad'), although in reality, it has three parts. Rarely one experiences the It with all three parts as `triad' because mostly one part dominates. As one part, like a monad, the It appears when one of its parts (pro-part, contra-part or 0 part) is activated and the other two are repressed or displaced. For example, if I absolutize my strength, then I must negate my weaknesses and everything else that contradicts strength. But the repressed or negated parts remain latent. Bipartite (like a 'dyad') one experiences the It when two of its parts are simultaneously "activated", e.g., everything and nothing, pro and contra, pro and nothing, contra and nothing. In this way, the It has many opposites and different effects, depending on which part dominates. (I will explain these processes in more detail later.) ALL contra-sA pro-sA NOTHING The figure shows the different designations of It-parts and how they relate to each other. The parts of the It, on the one hand, opposing each other but are interdependent on the other. In this way, the It has many contradictions, depending on which parts dominate. [The terms `dyad´ and` triad´ seem to describe well what is meant here. One could designate the It as a 'dyad' as a 'WPI-determining binary or dual unit' (1 and 0) and interpret the increasing digitization as an attempt to divide the world and people into as many 1s and 0s ('It-parts') which threatens to dominate us despite all progress and even tries to digitize psyche and spirit.116 The 'triad' also has a parallel in data processing in the form of 'trinary' encryption, which allows the states 0, 1 and -1.] I repeat: In the absolute sphere, prevail other laws and characteristics as in the relative sphere. 1. Synonym used: pro = +, contra = ‒. 2. sA = strange Absolute 3. I also count to the pro-sA the asA = absolutistic sA (also hyper-A); To contra-sA, I also count the rsA = relativistic sA (= strange relativistic one), which I will discuss later. 116 Similar: according to Nietzsche, 'reason is the cause of a senseless division of the world'. 115 89 If something Relative has penetrated into the absolute sphere and is taken absolutely, although it is not an Absolute, then a very peculiar structure arises, a hermaphrodite, a strange, which is inherent but not identical with the actual original relative being, that has its own characteristics and dynamics, which partly agree with those of the actual being but partly oppose them. The greater the distance between a sA and the +A, the smaller the accordance. The personal It (pIt) has strange characteristics, esp. those of a strange absolute Self. As such, it is no longer primarily the actual spiritual and the living, but, above all, strange material or thing and functional. The materialization also means that it is no longer directly available and changeable but only to change in the long term by new attitudes. (Detailed representation of the character of the It see in `Summary table´, column H.) That is also, the more the It is removed from the influence of the +A, the less exist the laws of life or the living spirit but a sort of mechanical laws, since now it is less about spirit but about materialized being and its functions. In parallel, chaos arises. The Its are like parasites that became part of the host organism (WPI), although they still remain strange and dominant; Although both, the parasites and the host organism, entered into a dependency in which both have advantages and disadvantages, it is more beneficial for the parasites (the Its) and contains dangers for the host (e.g., to become ill).117 The It dominates certain spheres of reality, so also the person and sometimes submits under them (but ultimately to its own advantage). The It creates and binds its own Relatives and forms with them a separate unit (like nucleus and cytoplasm of the cell). The It tries to expand itself and to dominate other It. The It forms further Co- or Contra- or 0-forms, which act similar or in opposition to the primary forms. The It forms bigger complexes and second-rate units, systems, personalities - all of which together form second-rate realities/ worlds. Possible synonyms for the It in general: Dyad, triad, parasite, symbiont, paper tiger, chimera, delusion, fool's paradise, phantom, a figment of imagination, bastard, miscarriage, new strange, self-deceit. Symbol of It in equilibrium: ☯. The Emergence of the It Introduction I repeat: The inversion of fundamental meanings like the absolutization of a Relative or the negation of an actual Absolute can be the beginning of the emergence of the It. It does not matter, whether it started with a break-in of the Relative into the absolute-sphere, which caused a loss of A, or if it started with a negation of an actual A, which enabled the R to break into that “empty space” of the absolute-sphere. The absolutized R and the negated A become sA and s0 and form together a new, strange instance: the It. As said, the It differentiates and dimensionates itself by the (+ or ‒) all-or-nothing principle. 117 No wonder we become confused or even paranoid when we are "infested" by them. 90 The new strange Absolutes (resp. `All´) and 0 become centers of new, strange personal or impersonal realities/worlds, which they dominate. The inversions are like acts of creation that enable to establish a variety of new strange worlds/realities. These second-rate realities have their own characteristics and rules that we want to get to know better in the following paragraphs. They live or die depending on their centers - the Its. Although these processes are very complex and run side-byside in many spheres, I have to divide them into separate steps for the sake of comprehension before I present an overall view. The different steps become understandable when remembering the hypotheses, that every reality is AR dimensioned and BLQC differentiated. In the following section, the emergence of all possible It-parts and their sides will be presented. At first, I will discuss the emergence of a two-part It (dyad) to then discuss the emergence of a threepart It (triad) an finally their different sides. The Emergence of the Parts of the It Depending on the kind of inversion, the It may appear as dyadic It (all or nothing), or as triadic It (pro-sA, contra-sA and 0 resp. asA, rsA and 0). All-and-Nothing Emergence In the following paragraph, I will describe how inversions originate a dyad (`dyadic/ binary It´) in the form of `All and Nothing´. These two parts of the It are created by the basic mechanism of the inversion: By totalization and by negation = all-or-nothing mechanism. The following illustration will make it easier to understand that process. The graphic shows the emergence of the new dimensions of the It, referring to the all-ornothing concept: From an absolutized Relative¹ or totalized All¹ emerge strange All² and a negated All¹; and something Relative¹ become strange Nothing (0). The underlying inversion is illustrated by using a gray color. All¹ All² (∀) binary It (Dyad) Some/ R¹ Nothing (0) This all-or-nothing is a main characteristic of any It. Both parts of the dyad are connected with each other closely. They are basically two sides of the same thing, of the It. Although they are as if they were welded together, they are also separated from each other and are opposites. They are friends and enemies at the same time. They depend on each other and destroy each other. However, they coincide in their shared opposition against the first-rate AR¹ resp. reality¹. There are no nuances between all-or-nothing. Because the 'all' () is either a positive or a negative strange Absolute (+sA or ‒sA), I deal with the emergence of these two sides of the 'all' there in the next section. But because on the other hand in the comparison to 'nothing' the term 'all' is common, I use it in this sense (`all or nothing´), too. All/ Everything abbreviations: ∀, All² (or only All). (On the Emergence of nothingness see later.) 91 Emergence of the Strange Absolute (sA) “The Egyptians created Gods out of the things they were scared of, and out of the things they wished for.“ Egyptian tour guide. Strange Absolutes (sA) are being developed if Relatives are taken as absolute.118 Everything that is relative can be absolutized. That applies to things, people and especially to experiences in childhood. Those experiences may seem to be positive in the sense of temptations, negative in the sense of traumatizations, or the third main-group, which is a negation of the child or its existential needs. Then, those people were not able to build basic trust as a child. Something else happened instead: Trust in something, that is really only of relative worth, too much mistrust towards a relative negative, or no trust at all. At a certain point, it does not matter anymore if something is misabsolutized positively or negatively. They are two sides of the same medal, as contrary as they might appear. There is the French proverb "Les extrêmes se touchent." - "The opposites are touching each other." In the common western society as an achievement-orientated society, deeds and successes (asp. 15) are probably absolutized the most. Also, sexuality (asp. 6), ownership (asp. 9), other people as role models (asp. 3) and some other aspects are playing a big role in our society. The church is probably most endangered to absolutize morality or itself as an institution (asp. 12 and 3). The rationalism absolutizes mind (asp. 16) and the romantic absolutizes emotions (asp. 7) etc. It is also about certain, nameless attitudes that are dominant and internalized in families. Internalized I will call them strange Selves. Many absolutizations or “craziness” in society or families are viewed as the right conducts of life and are therefore being encouraged. They are an important cause of mental disorders. I agree with M. Siirala, who talks about direct relations between schizophrenia of the individual and `schizophrenia´ of the generality. I will also try to show here connections between the different familiar and social ideologies and their inversions on the one side, and the different illnesses of the individual on the other side. Types of the sA: +sA (= pro-sA), ‒sA (= contra-sA); asA and rsA. With nothingness, they are parts of a triad. Symbol: ☯ Yin-Yang. Positive strange Absolute (+sA/pro-sA) Synonyms: False Gods, ideals, love-objects, 'drugs', glorified objects, wrong centering, etc. As strange Absolutes they represent above all: strange or substitute sense, strange or substitute identity, -truth, -reality, -unity, -safety, -reason, -autonomy and -freedom. Compared to the +A, the +sA appear more fascinating, more direct and more provable. Emergence Something Relative is viewed as absolutely positive/right, without being it. Typical examples for +sA are: Money, power, health, youth, sex, achievement, performance, 118 Similar to Freud's concept of fixation. 92 the relative good and right, morality, fidelity, knowledge, wisdom, control, the human itself, especially idealized people, the own person, “saints” or other earthly matters.119 rel. + +sA The graphic illustrates, how a part of the absolute-area is being conquered by a relative positive. Therefore that absolutized area adapts to the characteristics of the strange positive Absolute. The affected defines him-/herself now by the absolutized ideal and therefore gives up his/her own first-rate definition and identity! Because the established ideals and their increased requirements cannot be fulfilled in the long run, therefore, they start to promote their opposites. (See also Reversal into the opposite) | The +sA becomes the most important in two different ways: it becomes the best (subjective) and the most expensive (objective). The +sA does not only imitate the +A but exceeds it in its positive effects. Therefore, it is very tempting. However, these hyper-positive effects are connected to bigger disadvantages that appear later. Negative strange Absolute (‒sA /contra-sA) Synonyms: false friends, false objects of hate, false deadly sins, false demonization. Emergence: Relatives, that are taken absolutely negative as absolutely bad/evil. Typical examples: immorality, fault, illness, weakness, inferiority, impotence, failure, sorrow, death, conflicts, problems, aggression, the evil, 120 loneliness, traumas, certain people. ‒sA are also often recognizable when using “I must not...”, “I am not allowed…”. For example: „I must not be angry!", “I must not become like my dad!”. ‒sA rel. ‒ The graphic illustrates how a relative negative breaks into the absolutearea (or how a lack in the absolute-area is being replaced by the relative negative). With that absolutization, it gains the characteristics of a strange negative Absolute. +Absolutizing of Relative Negative and ‒ Absolutizing of Relative Positive Whenever a positive Relative is absolutized positively, the impacts will be much lower, than if a positive Relative is absolutized negatively or a negative Relative is absolutized positively. (Also see: Ambivalent, paradoxical reactions, Inverted, paradoxical world.) +sA and ‒sA: Greatest Enemies and Best Friends +sA and ‒sA depend on each other and exclude each other at the same time. They fight each other or promote each other. ("Evil never thrives better than when an ideal precedes it." 119 120 The positive misabsolutization is always a partial denial of the actual reality because its negative parts are omitted! I.e.every evil except the −A. 93 Karl Kraus). They are opposites and nevertheless the same. Like a reflection in a mirror, where the opposites are however the same. The devil is then only a co-player of the false God in the same game. The phrases “Les extrêmes se touchent” (The opposites are touching”) or: “The extremes are equal”, “Extremes are often together”, “The extraordinary is equal” and so on, express the same statement. Every It carries potentially its own enemy and its nothing in itself and is so doomed to fail in the long run. Life and Death as sA Because in our time many people no longer believe in God and eternal life, earthly life and death are absolutized. Earthly life is then the most important positive sA and accordingly death is the worst sA.121 One would have to speak exactly of (second-rate) death² and life², because in my opinion it is not about real death and real life, but about absolutizing earthly forms of existence. Both condition each other: the greater our greed for life, the greater our fear of death. And the greater our fear of death, the greater our greed for life. But also from a certain point, you find the opposite (→ Reversal into the opposite): the greater our fear of death, the sooner we want to die. And the more we live greedily, the less fear we have before death because we then repress it. (All possibilities can also coexist at the same time.) This possibility that death and life can mutually reinforce, although they are completely opposite, is a characteristic of their second-rate reality. For me, this possibility is also a sign that this is not the last issue. Only complete death (after Rev. 20: 6, the "second death") and eternal life are completely incompatible and mutually exclusive. Absolutistic sA (asA) and Relativistic sA (rsA) The following graphic illustrates the creation of asA and rsA detailed. This graphic illustrates the emergence of asA and rsA. A without R The Absolute without the Relative becomes all / many R* absolutistic (= hyper-absolute) asA and many or all absolutized Relatives become relativistic (= hyper-relative) rsA. There is a contrary opposition between asA and rsA. asA is absolutistic, hyper-absolute rsA is relativistic, hyper-relative (contra) • asA = the absolutistic sA is a strange Absolute, that is without or totally separated from any Relative. (In contrast to that, the actual A 'surrounds' the Relative). The asA are superelevated distant conceptions of God, or idealized humans (idols, rulers), that have no connection to reality. • rsA = relativistic sA = the totalized Relative. That refers to the point of view of relativism, that everything is only relative and that there is no absolute truth. That means that we are not dealing with a single (or a few) strange Absolutes (as with pro- and contra-sA) but we are 121 One could also understand all other sA as a consequence of these absolutizations. 94 facing a variety of Relatives, that determine WPI. Examples for rsA: - The every-day life (or whatever is relevant at this situation) dominates P. - The present media world with its excessive distractions. - The digital era if it creates a digital world without a superior Absolute. Hints: 1. Although the asA and rsA are special absolutizations, they are principally not different from the other sA, that´s why I subsume them there. 2. The asA and rsA are described and differentiated more detailed in the unabridged German version. Strange `Absolute Attitude´ In itself, the `absolute attitude´ is absolutely free in the choice of +A or ‒A. However, if relative choices are absolutized, strange 'choice absolutes' are created. (See also `absolute Attitude´ of the I.) Emergence of the Nothingness Synonyms: Zero, nothing, vacuum, emptiness, deficiency. Abbreviations: s0, 0² or mostly 0. I have already mentioned, that parallel to the absolutization of a Relative, there will be a negation of actual A., As a result, a defect in the absolute-sphere, an empty space, a nothingness emerges. That nothingness itself is not actual but a second-rate (²), a pseudonothingness but something that will be experienced as total nothingness. It has three sides: a positive, a negative, and an own, empty side that will be discussed below. With the choice of the nothingness, a person also chooses the opposite strange All or sA.122 Therefore, negation creates contradicting opposites. 123 Negation means: A is negated, ignored, superfluous, deselected, not considered, repressed, excluded etc. Personally, that usually means the negation/ devaluation of a person´s actual Self. What are the Absolutes that are negated? = the three actual A: +A, ‒A and the personal `absolute attitude´. • Negation of +A What is +A? Believable assurances to a person, such as formulated by religion, human rights, or love. (Here categorized by the 7 aspects of dimension). 1 – The unconditional love of God, i.e. every person is loved by God for its own sake. 2 – The unconditional personal identity, the Self. 3 – The uniqueness of a person. 122 Example Mephisto to Faust: Nothing you will see in eternally empty distance, not hear the step you are doing, find nothing solid where you rest. Faust: In your Nothingness, I hope, the All I will recover. (Goethes Faust Part 2, Act 1) 123 The vulnerability-stress model (which for the purposes of this paper describes the impact of adverse sA) must complement the one hand by an availability-seduction model (the impact of positive sA group) and on the other by a quasi negationability-negation-model (which indicates the impact of s0). 95 4 – The integrity of a person. 5 – The unconditional right to exist of a person. 6 – The unconditional dignity of a person. 7 – The right to self-determination of a person. 124 The person leaves his/her inner paradise an inverts him-/herself if he rejects such absolute assurances. One could also say: Inversion also happens, when a person does not believe to be unique, unconditionally loveable, equal, free, etc. • Negation of ‒A Attention to the negation of the -A¹ is also important because by its negation another negative, which in itself is only relative, takes its place and gains absolute significance for us. That means, that something that only worries us in a relative way and only appears to be a relative problem, becomes now unbearable and seems to be insoluble. Now, the person is scared of something, that is only relative fearsome at all. • Negation of the `absolute attitude´: As said: In itself, the `absolute attitude´ is absolutely free in the choice of + A or ‒A. Ideologies, however, either negate this choice ("man has no free will") or exaggerate it ("man is completely free"). Examples of the Emergence of the three It-parts • Example: + / ‒/ 0 Concerning the quality, every Relative is only more or less positive, negative or neutral. In the case of an absolutization that changes: the fluent transitions of more or less positive and negative (good and bad) become polarized and totally disconnected. Now, certain things or people are categorized as `absolutely good´, `absolutely evil´, `black or white´ or similar, although they are not. The affected experiences specific relative things in an absolutely good or bad (...) way or that was taught to him/her that way in the past. Because of that, he/she now only sees the world/ the things that (extreme) way. Like looking at it with a magnifying glass, everything seems to be bigger/ more extreme than it actually is. There is nothing (0) between these opposites. It is important to say that because of this view, this person often has certain advantages first and then mainly disadvantages later on. 124 Absolute promises are not: health, material possessions, success, etc. 96 The graphic shows how something Relative changes after an inversion. It is polarized, compressed and finally divided into +sA, ‒sA and 0. The original unit is basically torn into the different, opposite parts. On the other hand, those parts are connected with each other very closely. (Symbol on the right). • Example: strength/ weakness other weakness strength pro-sA contra-sA 0 This illustration shows how an inversion creates by absolutizing of Relatives certain It-parts: a pro-sA out of strength, a contra-sA out of weakness and a nothingness (0) out of others (and out of through the absolutization negated Relatives itself). The following differentiation can be made then: A first part, that I will call pro-sA , here strength*, a contrary opposite part, which is the contra-sA, here weakness* and a contradictory opposite part, the zero-part (s0), the nothingness*.125 I want to explain the origin of the three It-parts by means of this example: (partly repetition). Two Relatives, here 'strength' and 'weakness' are relative opposites. We can see, that both terms (and their meaning) are not separated sharply of each other but into each other go over. The curve of the `strength´ reaches in the area of the `weakness´ and vice versa. That means both terms are not representing anything absolute. Neither the strength is absolute, otherwise, it would be almighty, nor the weakness is absolute, otherwise, it would be impotent. Instead, strength contains some of the weakness and weakness contains some of the strength. Strength and weakness, therefore, create a polar couple. They are on opposite sides but do not exclude each other. They are part of something bigger, something whole (+A). They are part of that bigger unit, without being identical. Besides them, there is something other with that they are also connected. It is not called strength nor weakness but they are also a part of it, without losing its own identity. Strength and weakness have a relative relation to this other, just like they have a relative relation with themselves. How is that situation changed due to an inversion? Now, strength is not understood as relative but as absolute, as almighty. Weakness is seen as powerlessness that has to be avoided (‒sA contrary to +sA). That also means that this 125 The * should make the absolutization clear again. 97 absolutized strength (strength*) excludes weakness or anything similar - such as other absolutized parts exclude their opposites. With that, the opponents are not only relative opposites but absolute opposites now. There is now a contrary and a contradictory opposite for every part. However, they also depend on each other and are strongly connected to each other. The Emergence of the Three Sides of any It-part So far, we established how inversion can create three parts (`triad´). The further hypothesis is now that each of these three parts has in turn three sides and thus represent a `nine-sided triad´. How can this be explained? In explaining the origin of the three parts of the It, we assumed that each Relative normally has two counterparts, which are also absolutized and in the case of absolutization thus form a triad. Now, In addition, I assume that each of the three parts of the triad has three sides. Put in other words: On the one hand, one can recognize a side on each part (quasi the main side) which gives the side its name but besides that there are also two sides: one that represents its counter-side and another that represents others. In the case of absolutization, not only the main side but also the opposite sides are also absolutized. As a result, each part of the It, the pro-sA, the contra-sA and the 0 part has threet siedes: the main side and two opposite sides (which are mostly suppressed). Example: strength/weakness Everything else − weakness + strength 0* -* +* pro-sA 0* contra-sA +* -* 0* Using the example of the absolutization of strength and weakness, this illustration shows how the three sides of each It-part are formed. Since strength usually also `contains´ some weakness, the inversion causes that side to be absolutized as well and represents a negative side of the pro-sA 'strength'. Finally, strength does contain not only some weakness but also something else (others), which becomes 0-side of the pro-sA. The same applies to the two other parts, contra-sA and 0. The * should emphasize again that these are absolutizations. 98 Examples of Different sA with their 3 Sides: • The 3 sides of the + * 1. The main side of the + *: e.g., correct decisions / successes / strength ... are great. 2. The negative side of the + * or from the bad of the good '(P. Watzlawick), e.g., the agony of choice, compulsion to succeed, ↑ effort for + *. Too much of a good thing is bad. The more + *, the greater the height of fall. Goethe: "Nothing is more difficult to bear than a series of good days." 3. The 0-side of the + *: e.g., the + I do not care, resignation, etc. • The 3 sides of the ‒ * 1. The main side of the ‒ *: e.g., poverty, war, murder, immorality, illness ... are bad. 2. The positive side of the ‒ *: e.g., morbid gain, ↓"fall height", emergency lie, tyrant murder, sweet sin, sweet revenge. (→ Fascination of the negative and the evil). 3. The 0-side of the ‒ *: e.g., the ‒ I do not care, repression. • The 3 sides of the Nothing² 1. The main side of nothingness: e.g., strange emptiness, nothing. 2. The positive side of nothingness: e.g., Nirvana, belle indifference, the advantage of repression. If I have nothing, I cannot lose anything. 126 It is easier to dispense completely with everything than half. 3. The negative side of nothingness: e.g., horror vacui, one is burned out, desolate, abandoned, lost, left alone, godforsaken. The nothing stares at a desolate one from empty eyes (caves). Death, hell - the great nothingness? J.P. Sartre: “Behind closed doors”). The contradictory main and reverse sides correspond to paradoxes. (→ Emergence of paradoxes). Each It can have 9 Different Connotations The graphic shows how each It can appear differently, depending on which of the 9 ‒ It 0 ‒ 0 + sides dominates. The pro sA part of the It is drawn without a pattern, the contra part gray and the zero part dotted. The individual sides of the parts are marked with +, - and 0. Example: It represents any x * Pro part: if its + side dominates: x * is great if its ‒ side dominates: x * is exhausting if its 0 side dominates: x * does not matter, (has become) worthless. R. M. Rilke: “And we, animals of the soul, confused by everything in us, not yet ready for nothing; we grazing souls: do we not implore the Allotter by night to grant us the not-face which belongs with our darkness?“ Das Karussell, Reclam, p24. Translated in: http://hilobrow.com/2011/11/23/early-60s-horror-4/ 126 99 Contra-part: if its ‒ side dominates: x * is bad if its + side dominates: x * is liberating if its 0 side dominates: x * is suppressed 0 part: if its 0 side dominates: x * is nothing if its ‒ side dominates: x * was lost if its + side dominates: P has nothing more to lose. Hints: • Every It, even an opposite one, can generate all of these 9 basic patterns (although different in structure and content depending on the It). (See also `Spreading and Compression´). • The change from one part or side to another occurs abruptly and not fluidly (similar to the quantum leap of an electron). • If one is looking for interpretations for a phenomenon, then this triad model is well suited. Example: If I feel good, then this well-being can come from a pro, contra or 0 part. E.g. I feel good because I was moral (+ from the pro part) or because the immorality was seductive (+ from the contra part) or I experience it as liberating to place myself beyond morality or immorality (+ from the 0 part ). This also means that every event (such as a symptom) can come from every It, but also from + or ‒A (which I will come back to) - but with a diverse probability.127 The sides with the same connotations form groups/ pacts even if they come from different parts or Its, but because of their backsides they are enemies. So superficial love² can quickly turn into hate or vice versa. (More on that later). The It as a Nine-Sided Triad-model explains many contradictions The model of the It as a triad can explain contradicting phenomena well: • Contradicting causes can have the same effects and similar causes can have completely contradicting effects. And vice versa: The same effects (e.g. symptoms) can have similar but also different causes. And different effects (e.g. symptoms) can have different but also similar causes. This also means that every event (such as a symptom) can come from any It (but also from + or ‒A). • With regard to the sides, this also means: Each of these sides can come from any of the main parts. As said before, the It is like a chameleon: it can appear and act as monade, dyad or triad. And the appearance depends on which of the sides of the different It-parts dominate.128 127 However, the quality of the same connotations is also different and alienated, only in the first-rank systems is it real and adequate. 128 This probably also means that there are three main interpretations and nine more specific interpretations of every situation in WPI². 100 In comparison to +A¹ and ‒A¹, that are not divided and have no backsides. Therefore, the characteristics and dynamics in W² are very different from W¹. • The transformation of the It into its opposites - such as the behavior or feeling of a person, which is dominated by an It, can suddenly and unexpectedly change into its opposite.129 (See also Reversal into the opposite) • The model explains how people (or WPI as a whole) who interact with one another are first best friends, but then, mostly surprisingly and unexpectedly, can become enemies or completely indifferent to one another. (Possibilities of Interactions) • The model explains how paradoxes can arise. (See also overview of `Most important links regarding opposites´) The Different Valences of the It • Considering the orientation of valences, the following differentiation can be made: 1. The opposites („hostilities”) a) contrary opposites b) contradictory opposites 2. The `pacts´ / fusions 3. The `nothings´ (nothingnesses) • Considering the localization of the valences: 1. Inner powers / valences inside the It. 2. Power / valences of the It to the outside. There are similarities to the theories of valence in language.130 (See also `Overview of all It-valences´ below). 129 130 Especially impressive in manic-depressive patients.. See if necessary in the unabridged German version. 101 Overview of all It-Valences ALL Copro pro contra 0 NOTHING Pacts arise by the same parts / sides with the same connotations and by the opposites with contrary connotations. Shown by continuous lines → Parts/ sides have the same effect. Opposites/ contradictions/ enmities arise by equals with contrary connotations, and by opposites with the same connotations. Shown by dashed lines → Parts / sides have opposite effects. Neutralizations, annulments arise by the same ones, in which the 0-side is activated at the same time, and by contradictory ones with activated 0-sides. Shown by dotted lines → Effects of the parts / sides cancel each other out.131 The graphic also helps to understand the main paradoxes. (→ Emergence of paradoxes). Originally in W¹, i.e. non-absolutized, those phenomena do not create pacts (equals), enmities (opposites) or neutrals. They only became such because of inversion. 131 The connection between `Co-pro' and` pro' symbolizes a pact between a pro-form and a co-form (`co' = together with). 102 Opposites, Fusions and Negations As well too opposing Its (fig. left) as too same Its ( fig. right) as too void Its can, like their `carrier´ (WPI, a. fight each other or b. make pacts / reinforce / merge with c. neutralize, dissolve each other or d. turn into their opposite - depending on which of their sides are "activated"! In terms of the consequences, this means that new opposites or pacts or negations may have arisen from opposing or too similar or dissolving dynamics. This illustration presents how two (or more) Its interact with each other, using their different sides comparable with gear-wheels. The pro-sA -part of the It is illustrated without a pattern, the Contrapart is gray and the zero-part is illustrated with dots. They agree in the fight against W¹. As soon as another enemy is in sight, they create a pact. As soon as the enemy is defeated, they ruin their own fellow campaigners. That already shows the fundamental characteristics of disorders in society and also within an individual. The Opposites and their Dynamics Here, it is about pr opposites and their general dynamics of the It, world, people and the I or their parts. I distinguish • An absolute opposite: between +A and ‒A. • Relative 'opposites' (= polarities) between different Relatives. • Strange absolute opposites (that's what it's all about here): contrary opposites between Pro/+sA and Contra/‒sA, 132 contradictory opposites between All and nothing resp. sA and nothing. [Hints: I use Pro and + as well as Contra and ‒ synonymously; * indicates the absolutization. For Pro/+ you can use: idol, ideal*, love*, luck*, etc. For Contra/‒sA you can use: `devil', taboo*, hate*, etc., Yin-Yang  is a symbol of the It opposites in balance.] I mentioned: If a Relative is absolutized, its opposite is absolutized as well. I.e. with the strange `All´ we also choose the strange `nothingness '. With the strange positive Absolute In everyday language opposites are known in the form of the expressions “black or white” or “friend or enemy”. 132 103 (resp. pro-sA) we also choose the strange negative Absolute (resp. contra-sA) and vice versa; and the strange 'nothingness' with them. Thus every uncorrected inversion creates a dyad (all-or-nothing) or a triad (pro-sA, contra-sA and 0). In other words: a false God gives birth to a devil and vice versa, an ideal* creates a taboo* and vice versa, love* creates hatred* and ever nothingness too, etc. The It is defined by the fact, that the mentioned parts are contradicting and too similar at the same time. The parts are facing each other like a reflection in a mirror. They are like contrary twins (dyad) or triplets (triad). 133 An It excludes the others but at the same time, it includes/ binds or negates them. That´s why one finds, that opposites attract, or fight or negate each other. And the same with fusions and negations. One can also say that opposites are never only contrary but also the same. Similarly, pacts also contain opposites and both negations (0). Second-rate realities and personal parts are at the same time too contrary (contradictory) as too equal and too null. The mentioned statement that the extremes are touching themselves (“Les extrêmes se touchent”) marks also the situation very well, they are extremely apart from each other as well as they are chained at the same time. A picture and its reflection also represent the double-character of such pro- and contra-forms. One may say: Nothing is as similar and as dissimilar at the same time as its reflection. Depending on the situation, any of the three It-parts can be dominant. That means that the It can be very different, contradicting and crazy but also uniform and neutral. It seems to be the same at first, then the opposite to finally disappear in the nothingness. As I said, the opposite can a. fight each other or b. make pacts / reinforce / merge with each other or c. neutralize, dissolve each other or d. also turn into the opposite - depending on which of their sides are "activated"! (See graphic above). The Opposites in the Realities In the first-rate reality (W¹) there is only one absolute opposite: The opposite between +A and ‒A. All the other opposites in W¹ are only relative. Therefore, it makes sense, to talk only about differences or polarities when it comes to those spheres. There are R¹ that are polar opposites of another R¹ and are therefore representing relative opposites. Both of them create certain opposites-pairs or antipole-pairs, that could also be named “dipoles”, or “tripoles”. In W¹, the relative single parts are permeated and embraced by +A. They show fluent passages and no harsh limits. Here is variety and no homogeneity. You could also say: Since no R¹ is absolutely limited from another one, they are all connected to each other (through the +A). Every part contains some of the other parts as well. 133 Similarly 'Oxymora' as a rhetorical device. 104 Humans, however, have to put the different parts into words to communicate with each other. Those words are separate from each other. They indicate the specific irrelevant pole of the meaning of something, without mentioning all the other meanings along with it. Whenever we describe an opposite or difference in our every-day language, it usually does not indicate whether it is a relative or an absolute opposite - unless it is specifically expressed. However, for the understanding of our topic, that difference (relative, absolute or pseudo-absolute) is of great importance. In the second-rate realities, especially in their centers, the Its, those differences are not perceived as relative but as absolute - but in reality, they are pseudo-absolute. With that, the named opposites do not only represent opposites in general but also paradoxes, splittings and contradictions. (More → `The personal It´ or in in the unabridged German version.) Analogies in physics and cybernetics • Physics: - "For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction." (Newton: 3rd mechanical law). - One could also interpret nuclear fission, nuclear fusion and radioactivity (decay) as special dynamics of second-rate realities. • Color generates a complementary color. • The pursuit of balance, KW self-regulation, and feedback. (For details see unabridged version). 105 Links regarding opposites in this publication Note: I have arranged the links to the corresponding sections chronologically in such a way that I first list the emergence of the opposites and their becoming independent in the It, then their connection to fusions and negations, and finally I describe the opposites and their dynamics in realities in general and in/between persons specifically. 1. Inversion and Contra-Inversion (There I describe how opposites arise in the first place and how they oppose each other as +sA and ‒sA: greatest enemies and best friends 2. The Emergence of the Parts of the It (There I describe how opposites manifest themselves and become independent as part of the It.) 3. Opposites, Fusions and Negations (See above). (There I describe how opposites, fusions, and negations are related.) 4. The Opposites and their Dynamics (See above). (There I describe the opposites, their characteristics and their dynamics). 5. The Opposites in the Realities (See above). (There I mainly describe the contrast between first-rate reality and second-rate realities.) 6. Overview of all It-Valences (There you can find a graphic showing all possible valences of an It as a triad with respective Coforms). 7. Interactions in second-rate Realities (There I make statements about the dynamics of the opposites in W² in general.) 8. Complex Personal Dynamics and Relationship-Disorders (There I make statements about the dynamics of opposites between people.) 9. About the Emergence of Paradoxes (There you will find a short description and a graphic of how paradoxes can arise.) 10. Inverted, Paradoxical World (There I mainly describe how and why our world/reality is so contradictory). 11. Ambivalent, paradoxical Behavior (There you will find statements about how and why we behave ambivalently or paradoxically). 12. Reversal into the Opposite (There you will find a brief description of how a system can tip over into its opposites.) 13. Anticathexis (in `remedies of defense´) (There I describe how a defense can take place through opposites.) 14. Opposites in Schizophrenia and their Dynamics (There one finds explanations of the frequent contradictions and oppositions in schizophrenic psychoses). 15. Solution of the opposites (There you will find explanations about first-rate solutions - including solutions to opposites.) The Fusions (Pacts) In parallel to the opposites one can differentiate: • An absolute connection between the + A / God and the person with + absolute attitude. • Relative connections • Fusions, mergers, pacts as seemingly absolute connections. Like opposites, they can a. strengthen each other or further merge and make more pacts 106 b. fight each other c. neutralize, dissolve, negate each other or d. turn into their opposite. depending on which side of the underlying It is activated. (See figure above). For more on contradictions, packages and cancellations, see the unabridged version. The negations See above or e.g. All-or-nothing relationships. Which Its Correspond to Which Ideologies? Ideologies as examples for collective Its Ideologies (`Ism´) are dogmatized worldviews, which means that they are determined by strange Absolutes. Ideologies, as collective It, are the main representatives of the It. The person as the cause of such ideologies becomes the last authority. As mentioned I see in ideologies (`official´ like `private´) essential causes for mental disorders. Trial to allocate ideologies in the sense of this publication. Idea* → Inversion, Ideologisation ↓ `It´ → Ideology `Ideologism´ Absolutization Negation pro strange ALL (*) → Totalism strange NOTHING (0*) → Nihilism conta Absolutization to A* Absolutization to R* pro conta strange Absolute (sA) → “Absolutism” E.g. Idealism Materialism strange R* (sR*) → esp. Relativism The double arrows (↔) are intended to make it clear that the opposing ideologies, such as their underlying Its, are dependent on one another and can weaken or strengthen one another or tip over into the opposite form. For further assignments, relating to all aspects, see `Summary table´ column E. Hypothesis: The dynamics and interactions between the Its and the ideologies are the 107 same. 134 (→ Opposites, fusions and negations). Like the Its all ideologies would have both: misabsolutization and negation. An ideology, or sA, cannot integrate its opposite ideology but must fight it, although at the same time it owes its existence to its opposite. And one can conclude that all ideologies are potentially pathogenic - and even more so the more unlike they are to the positive Absolute (+A), or in other words, the less love they impart. 134 Note: As I have mentioned, I mean with `ideology´ not only the well-known political ideologies but also ideologized familial and individual attitudes. 108 The personal It and the Strange Self “If there is a dark power, that is evil and treacherous enough, to insert a thread in our inside and to pull it tight and to drag us down dangerous and mischievous ways..., then it has to adjust itself to us and has to become like we are; only that way we believe in it and make the room for it that it desires to fulfill its mysterious work.” E.T.A. Hoffmann, `The Sandman´. Explanation of Key Terms: sS = strange Self = strange personal Absolute. Qualitatively further distinguished in: +sS = the positive strange Self. Here equated with pro-sS. ‒sS = the negative strange Self. Here equated with contra-sS. [asS = absolutistic sS (also hyper-Self) and rsS = relativistic sS are not dealt with further in this abstract.] p = pAll = personal absolutized All. [Quantitative description of a strange Self. Mostly used in the contrast to the non-Self, p0 = personal nothingness.] p It = personal It: complex, that controls that person (P) and that contains two (all and nothing) or three (pro-, contra-sS and 0) parts as a dyad or triad. Hints: Where the difference between `p It 'and `sS' does not matter, I use both terms synonymously. Since this chapter is only about personal topics, I omit often the abbreviation `p' for the sake of simplicity. Synonyms and Characteristic Terms for p It - Strange-, pseudo-, spare-, help-, emergency-, substitute-, compensation-, false-, divided center/ Self of a person. - 'homunculus', demon, parasite, devil, false friend, inner tyrant. Also: It as the dominant unconscious. Introduction and Overview Everything that was described concerning the Emergence of the Itl in genral also applies to the personal It. 135 Analogical to the general It-description one can say: Due to an inversion, something Relative will be taken as absolute and the actual personal Absolute, the Self, is being negated. The absolutized Relative may be of the person himself, or he may have an external origin. In both cases, something new, strange and personal is created with its own characteristics and dynamics. I.e. a strange, second-rate Absolute, the strange Self, is created in the personal absolute-sphere after a misabsolutization. With this misabsolutization, the person also negates a part of his/her Self, so that there is not only a strange Self in the center of the person but also a “non-Self”. Those new, strange, central powers within the person are called the personal It in this publication. The personal It embodies a new and strange, controlling power, that exists along with the original first-rate power. Initially, P has had dominance but loses its power continuously and becomes the loser in this 135 Since I assume that some readers only read the one or the other section, I have repeated here the most important. 109 situation. A very important fact is, that the individual is convinced that the strange Self and not the actual Self is the right one. P is convinced to get major advantages from the choice of the strange Self. That fact is also a reason for holding on to the illness and therefore refusing to become healthy again. (Also see later: Freud's morbid gain and the Resistance). The new strange personal feature appears like a kind of strange person within us. Of course, no real new person is being created but features, that imitate the actual person, take a certain spot within a person or are taken instead of the actual person. Later on, we will discuss how the new strange personal parts can “talk” to us in the shape of acoustic hallucinations, or do many other things with us. The comparison with a homunculus as some kind of false person, within us, is apparent and is used as a model for the described personal It in the following sections. Firstly, it is important to remember, that strange Self and non-Self, like a kind of homunculus within a person, are both dimensioned and differentiated in a characteristic way, which affects P in its psychical center. That becomes apparent in what I will call the Subject-objectreversal. That means, that wherever the sS/resp. It is in control, the person loses its subjectrole, and now becomes the It as subject and which determines the person as its object. With that, the person does not live first-rate anymore but second-rate, only functioning through the certain It. The second major result is a personalization of the It and a reification of the person. Things are seen as something personal and a part of the person becomes a kind of thing. Looking at the dynamics (verbs or predicates), the focus of the beginning of the emergence of p It is: The It becomes independent, changes and lives by itself. That process affects all of the seven aspects of dimension and the connected differentiations of the It. Mutation and Adaption of the It to the Person, and vice versa Depending on where the p It is established, two main changes can be discovered: 1. The It changes P in its sense, according to its pattern resp. the person adapts to the It. But also: 2. The It adapts to the person. It becomes more like the person, such as a parasite that is adapted to the host organism.| Brief Overview of Origins and Structure of the Personal It and the Second-rate Personal (P²) 1st step (inversion) was: P inverts R and A (that was discussed on top). 2nd step (realization): the absolutized R (R*) becomes sS = strange Self and the actual Self becomes non-Self. Both are building the core of p It. 3rd step: simultaneous differentiation BLQC (Being, Life, Qualities, Connections become strange). 4th step: The p It subjects further Relatives and forms new strange personal (P²). That is, an absolutized something with originally relative dimensions and differentiations changes into a new strange personal "unity" (P²) with new strange dimensions, 110 differentiations, and connections, and the actual Self and personal are lost at this sphere. (The emergence of the p It can also be found in the `Summary table´, column G.) R R S S S S This graphic illustrates the development of the personal It (left to right). On the very left, there is a person with a healthy self- and relative-sphere. Rightwards, the inversion of a Relative and the Self is symbolized. After that, the creation of an It-center (as Yin-Yang symbol) is being illustrated, which finally creates its own relative- sphere, as shown in the picture on the very right. You can also see, that the p It controls a part of P but the other part of P still contains the actual Self and has a first-rate relative-sphere, too. Structure of the Personal It Parallel to the structure of the general It, this is about the structure of the personal It. Every p It, such as every other p unit, has three main dimensions: personal strange Absolute resp. strange Self, its relative sphere and nothingness and four main differentiations: strange personal BLQC. Appearances of the Personal It The personal It is per se a 'triad' and built of three parts (pro +, contra ‒ and 0). However, it may appear different: - as monad (with only one direction of action) - as dyad (like binary split ) - as triad The emergence of the personal It as a nine-sided triad happens analogously to the generally described creation of the nine-sided triad and is therefore not described again (See here). Symbols • Personal It as a nine-sided triad: contra-sS pro-sS non -self These symbols represent the personal It as nine-sided triad. Both graphics also illustrate how a person² is caught within the triad. • Yin-Yang  is a symbol of the It opposites in balance. 111 Comparison to Similar Terms • Freud's 'Id' (see general part). • Self- and object-representations: I think: - Everything relative may be a self- or object-representation (interior or exterior). - The Its are special representations because they are dominating. Here, they are described also with the terms of their parts: strange Self and non-Self. Main Characteristics of the Personal It The personal It (p It) has the same main characteristics as the It in general. I want to address only briefly how they concern the person. The p It has strange characteristics, especially those of a strange Absolute and of a strange nothing. It bonds its own Relatives, differentiates itself and therefore creates its own, independent and personal unit. It controls the specific spheres of a person. It tries to expand or it conquers other Its. It builds complexes and second-rate, personal systems. Altogether, they form a second-rate, personal reality. It is no longer freely available for P² but able to be voted out by P¹, however, it still does not disappear right away. The further p It moves away from +A, the more do mechanical and physical rules apply instead of the rules of life or of the living spirit since the It is more materialized than the spirit.136 How Can You Recognize the Personal It? Terms such as “always”, “never”, “absolute”, “definitely”, “no way” “for sure” and so on, indicate an absolutization. Common phrases are: “I hate you”, “I love that more than life”, “You are my all” or similar. Also very typical: “I have absolutely to do that.” Everyday It and Lifelong It Such as described in the section of the general Its, the p Its may be very fugitive but also may stay for an entire life. A thought, that only lasts and dominates for a short time would be equivalent to a fugitive It. A traumatizing experience in early childhood is an example for a lifelong It. “Choice” of the p It The decision of which strange Absolutes (sA) resp. Its is going to be established, often depends on the initial conditions. If a child lives in a disturbed family, it will probably adapt to the sA of the parents (mainly unknowingly). Or the child tries to compensate these 136 Parallel to this, a chaotization, takes place. 112 disadvantages with the opposites: if the child is overwhelmed with arguments and aggression, it will probably absolutize harmony and peacefulness as a reactive response, to protect itself. Or, if disorientation, confusion and follies dominate a family's life, a possible defense mechanism would be protecting itself by focusing on prudence and regulation. With that said, misabsolutizations are often results of unconscious defense mechanisms of childhood that appear to be a relief of unbearable situations. To put in other words: Many times, misabsolutizations are the results of our inner protection, which eventually becomes more of prison or too costly. (See also: Mental disorders from biographical perspective). As adults, we adapt at such Absolutes (partly passive, partly active) usually because of shortterm advantage. More about the different forces and connections in the personal It, see the corresponding remarks in the general chapter. Dimensions of the Personal It The strange Self (the strange personal Absolute) Terms I repeat: The strange Self (sS) corresponds to the strange Absolute within a person. I call it the strange Self to differentiate it from the general strange Absolute and because the term 'self' is more personal and less general. The terms `strange Self' and `personal It´ I usually use synonymous unless I distinguish it differently. 137 Typical Examples for the Strange Self as +*: achievements, idols, the ego, health, knowledge, status; as ‒*: traumas, failure, impotence, illness, death; But all Relatives are also possible as sS. “False Self” and Other Terms “Thanks to Winnicott, we know about the concept of the true and the false self, whereby the false self adjusts to the needs of an insufficient environment and the true self stays concealed and split off.” 138 Janov uses the term 'unreal self´ and R.D. Laing uses the term 'divided self´. Any of the terms mentioned above describes only a certain aspect of the strange Self but does not include all aspects at once, which would hard to do. The term 'strange Self' emphasizes the alienation of the person, 'spare-self' emphasizes the replaceability, 'conditional self' emphasizes that I only feel myself if I fulfill certain conditions, and so on. 137 The equality of the strange Self and the personal It is all the more justified if one also regards the non-Self as a kind of strange Self. 138 Wöller, Wolfgang und Johannes Kruse: Tiefenpsychologisch fundierte Psychotherapie. Schattauer, Stuttgart, 2005. Or in: Reifungsprozesse und fördernde Umwelt, Fischer-V., Frankfurt a.M. 1985. 113 Taking all the different psychical aspects into consideration, different terms might be found that are also good suitable. To me, the term 'strange Self' seems to be best. The term 'false self' appears one-sided negative because the sS also contains positive sides and no human is free of it and the term "divided self" does not call the possibility of fusions. Structure of the Strange Self Classified by: strange-Self (sS) DIMENSIONS: A strange Self core-strange-Self R relative strange Self = R² pro/+ pro/+ strange Self contra/− contra/‒ strange Self 0 victim (0-part) DIFFERENTIATION: B Being of the strange Self L Life of the strange Self Q Qualities of the strange Self C Connections of the strange Self I with strange Self as subject I with strange Self as object 23 single aspects According to the Summary table´ column H Such as the actual Self, the strange Self contains a core, the core-strange-Self, and connected, second-rate, strange Relatives, that are BLQC differentiated. Hint: Whenever I speak of the strange Self, I am referring to the entire strange Self (and not only the core), unless I specify it differently. Emergence of the Strange Self Because of the importance: partial repetition. How is the emergence of the strange Self (sS)? It is originated after the same principles than a general It/sA : After an absolutization of R, or a negation of A¹, which where not corrected, a new and strange (ns) center is being established and differentiated within a person, a strange Self, which is experienced as the actual Self. With that, some kind of a dominant strange object is developed within us. Unlike other internalizations or introjections, that 'personal strange object' takes over the role of the Self including all its characteristics. Thus, a new personal reality is created, which will determine us. That is different than characteristics or personality traits that are created within us if those are only of relative importance. Later on, we will see how the strange Self negates the actual Self. The strange Self behaves like the actual Self resp. personal Absolute and tries to adjust its features. Therefore, the affected person experiences it with those absolute features and accepts it as his/her own Absolute. Although the sS is not able to ever fully replace the actual Self, it achieves a partial success: It partly represents the Self and becomes very similar to it. That causes a typical situation for mental disorders to occur: The strange Self is being experienced as the own Self and the own Self is being experienced as strange (or 114 as nothing). That´s why the affected person has feelings of alienation most of the time. If the identification with a strange Self is far progressed, the identity feeling can properly turn round itself: Then the person can have subjectively a good identity sensation, although he/she is objectively very alienated - and he/she can feel vice versa strong alienation, although he/she is objectively selfdetermined. Examples: Obligation and Possession as Strange Selves (sS) 23 24 1 2 22 3 I 21 4 20 5 19 II 18 6 7 SELF 8 17 9 16 15 10 14 13 12 11 The graphic illustrates the emergence of two strange Selves* (dotted lines) with two new Egos (= strangeIs), besides the first-rate I in the middle, which is based on an actual Self. 1. Left: A Relative (here obligation, aspect 12) is being absolutized and invades into the self-area. A strange Self is created in the self-area, from which an Ego is now operating. That causes a partial self-loss and a division of the self-area and the Ego. 2. Right: Another illustration of the emergence of a strange Self and Ego: The I leaves the center and establish itself in the relative edge area (here possession, aspect 9). Possession is becoming the new strange center, from which the Ego is now operating. I want to explain the resulting situation more detailed by using the graphic from above. Let us assume that a person views the performance of his/her obligations as absolute (aspect 12). The performance of obligations is then superior to the Self. The self (-confidence, esteem, -determination) is now mainly made conditional on the performance of obligations. As long as the performance of obligations is subordinated to the I, the I-self dominated, remained the boss in his own house and could handle adequately from this position with an offense against obligation, i.e. relaxed and free enough. Then I-self "knows" that my Self is the more important, first-rate, more valuable etc. and that the fulfillment of obligations in contrast to it has a relative meaning. However, if the performance of obligations became a strange Self, it now claims the same characteristics as the ones that are only supposed to be owned by the actual Self. But now the Ego cannot simply with willpower get rid of the strange Self because it is materialized and personalized in the meantime. The terms `strange Self´ and 'It' describes very well, that something strange has been created, that takes its effect by itself and that determines me (e.g., It tears me apart, It depresses me, and so on). With that, they already show the main characteristics of mental disorders. The strange Self owns entelechy and its own dynamics in that position. New, strange dynamics and rules also determine the person in his/her center. They appear to be personal and some sort of self-propelling. As mentioned before, in the beginning, the person has some short-term, subjective advantages by installing a strange Self, although later on, the disadvantages will increase. All inverted parts of a person are as if they are put into new roles. However, the original, actual Self will always exist along, although it is weakened. With the inversion to a strange Self, the absolutized Relative is subjectively more absolute, more unconditional, more primarily (too important), more independent, more 115 lively, more personal, more real and more similar to the Self than it was before. Fortunately, it is impossible for the sS to become exactly like the Self. Besides the strange Self, the partial negation of the actual Self also causes a non-Self to be developed, which I discuss below. + and – Strange-Selves (Note: +sS and ‒sS are synonymous with pro-sS and contra-sS). Such as we differentiated the strange-Absolute as +sA and ‒sA, we can also distinguish the strange Self as +sS and ‒sS. +sS and ‒sS of the same aspect belong together. Per se, they are two relatively contrary poles of one aspect but now separated due to an absolutization, although rigidly connected also to each other. Absolutized opposites are depended and separated from each other at the same time. They are the opposite and the same simultaneously. Such as a reflection in a mirror is the same but yet converse. They depend on each other and exclude each other at the same time. They coincide and are different in addition. Superficially, they are enemies but when it comes to fighting a third person (object), they are accomplices. + Strange-Self (+sS) Synonym: pro-Self or super-Self. Personal as false God, golden calf, crutch, corset, also fixed or false ideals/objects of love/ glorified; 'drugs' (otherwise see +sA). ‒ Strange Self (‒sS) Synonym: against- or contra- or anti-Self, personal as: false enemies, or objects of hate, false demonization, traumas (otherwise see ‒sA). Strange-Self as Dyad with Reverse Sides +sS (in pro-position) + other side (advantage) of ‒sS neg. side of +sS (disadvantage of the +sS) −sS (in contra-position) Using the Yin-Yang symbol, the illustration shows a +sS and a ‒sS in pro- and contra-position with its contrary reverse sides. (The non-Self and the 0-sides of +sS and ‒sS are not shown here). 116 About the meaning of the reverse sides of the sS: We are about to discuss a very important aspect, that illustrates parallels to S. Freud's term of morbid gain. Neither the strange Absolute nor the strange Self is solely negative (such as the Relative). Although they are generally unfavorably, they also have positive sides, that are determining in individual cases, whether an sS can be established and stay for a long time. More specific: By using specific strange Selves, the affected person can stabilize or to restore his/her inner balance. The strange Self gives and takes. It replaces Absolutes with similar Relatives. The strange Self is neither an enemy within us, that has to be defeated nor the God, which has to be glorified. Difference between Strange Selves and Traits or Personality Signs The strange Self is always of absolute importance for the affected person. Character traits can be of absolute or relative importance for a certain person, while a strange Self is always of absolute importance. In the everyday language, it remains uncertain if for instance, such as the need for harmony is of relative or of absolute importance for a person. However, in psychodynamics, the difference is important. The absolute position of the trait will cause all results of a strange Self, which still closer to be discussed. This is not in the case of a trait with relative meaning in such a way. Then the effects of the trait will have only relative results. The person, for example, will not be able to be split by them. The situation is comparable with somebody, with pleasure alcohol drinks (personality trait) and another who is dependent on alcohol. The Non-Self Shortcuts and synonyms for the non-Self: p0², p0, not-Self, personal nothingness. Emergence: The emergence of the non-Self is equal to that of the general It, the all-or-nothing-principle by sacrificing the actual Self.139 (See if necessary `All-and-nothing emergence´ in general). The non-Self includes, regarding the dimensions above all absence or loss of sense, identity, reality, unity, safety, freedom, personal foundation, and autonomy. The non-Self includes, regarding the differentiations above all absence or loss of the first-rate personality, vitality, qualities, subject-role and connections. Origins: above all nihilism and materialism. The 7 aspects of the dimension of the Personal It (Similar to the general It. For more detail, see unabridged German version). 139 E.g. • M. Foucault: "No truth about the self is without the sacrifice of the self." p 324 • F. Nietzsche: “I love all who are like heavy drops falling one by one out of the dark cloud that lowers over man: they herald the coming of the lightning and succumb as heralds.” Cit. `Thus Spoke Zarathustra´; Ch. 5. 117 Differentiation of the Personal It Differentiation of the personal It/ strange Self by140 1. Structuring (here above all personalization) 2. Vitalization 3. Qualification 4. Contextualization, subjectivization The personal It or strange Self is established in a person at the border of spirit and body initially, in the shape of a spiritual misabsolutization, that crosses the border to the physical, which then becomes a new form of strange being and life with specific connections. In this form as a personal It, it dominates the person and becomes an essential cause for mental disorders. It personalizes itself, becomes alive, specially qualifies itself and creates new, strange connections. Therefore it becomes a new strange personal being, life, quality and subject with a new context. This personal It corresponds in the organic sphere probably certain centers (I think not only in the brain) with particular functions that are connected again with other relevant structures functionally and organically with each other. The structures and functions have strange, in particular, all-or-nothing or pro-contra-or-nothing characteristics. Especially to 4. The p It becomes a new strange determining subject. The main influence on the person is: The It makes P to its object. Here, another additional characteristic of the strange Self/ It becomes visible: The strange Self takes the position of a personal, vivid subject, whereas P or the I take the position of an object. 141 While the I-self as the subject was based on solid ground before, that unit is being disturbed: An sS becomes a new and strange basis for the I-parts and turns them into being its object, instrumentalizes and functionalizes them - a situation that is prototypical for mental disorders. It may be referred to as Subject-object-reversal because whatever is supposed to be the object is now the subject and vice versa. As further consequences in this aspect one can also name subject-object-split and fusion or identification, which will be discussed later. In contrast, there is in the first-rate reality only a sort of difference between the actual subject (God or I-self) and the objects (inner and outer reality) but there is no splitting. A real splitting only takes place between +A and ‒A. Analysis of speech/language see unabridged German version. 140 Personal It and strange Self are named synonymously here too. A strange I-self forms, figuratively speaking, a kind of new strange person or homunculus. Is it any wonder if, people hear voices or feel obsessed, for example in this situation? 141 118 Kinds of Personal It (overview) Such as the It is in general, the p It also can be differentiated by: • origin and kind • localization • appearance.142 Origin and Kind See mainly: 'The It in general'. Individual personal Its For individual aspects see Summary table column H. Examples: Obligation and Possession as Strange Selves, Illustration of a Single Second-Rate Personal Part, Adult-Ego and Child-I . The different ideologies as personal ids see → Which Its correspond to which ideologies. In a humorous way (and in the style of Freud) the specific p Its could be labeled as following: All² = Totalo +* = Libido, Eros, (Drives²) –* = Destrudo, Aggresso, Thanatos (death drive) 0² = Nullo, Nego, Nihilo rsA = Relativo (and so on). And the mental disorders that are caused by them could be jocularly called: absolutitis or totalitis libidinitis destructivitis nihilitis relativitis (more examples: moralitis, collectivitis, individualitis, rationalitis - and all of them can be `contagious´ if one does not pay attention.) About 'Libido' and 'death drive' “In classical Freudian psychoanalytic theory, the death drive (German: `Todestrieb´) is the drive towards death, self-destruction and the return to the inorganic chemistry.”143 “The death drive opposes to Eros as the tendency toward survival, propagation, sex, and other creative, life-producing drives … Usually, there is a mixture of the death drive and Eros, such as there is always some sort of aggressive parts in a healthy intimate relationship, which helps to satisfy a person with himself. The loss of balance of the two tendencies leads to mental disorders.” 144 If you focus on Freud's extended understanding of the term 'Libido', it becomes obvious, that it is very similar to the discussed positive absolutization. (However, Freud's Libido does not refer to the actual positive Absolute but more to the absolutized Relative.) In this publication, I have almost equated `love' with the first-rate Absolute (God) but love will The changes are so experienced without to be so. In fact, the strange-Self is only similar to the Self but it is experienced as if the strange-Self is the actual Self. 143 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_drive, 2016 144 Ibid, 2016 142 119 nevertheless, without God, become a +sA as Libido, as it is presented in certain publications145 but it is overstraining the human being. A similar parallel can be found between Freud's 'Destrudo' and the strange Nothing (0²) and the ‒sA. (See also `Life and Death as sA´.) Special Cases The Ego as strange Self If P makes himself absolute, then there is a special case. The person concerned does not absolutize something strange or attributes of himself (like appearance, intelligence, status etc.) but the core of his person, his Self. It is a self-absolutization. “I am absolutely above everything!” is the attitude. This is different from the absolute attitude described, because it extends the absolute range of P to the entire Self.146 This creates a very special situation. The person concerned makes himself his own center. P crowns himself. P dominates over himself. P makes himself (more precisely his Self) quasi the ruler over himself. He himself becomes the It that represents him. P becomes the perpetrator and his own victim at the same time. P exaggerates and at the same time submits to the exaggerated, inthronized self. In spite of the absolutization of P's own Self, submission and dependence on the strange Self and It predominate in the long term. Fortunately, the true self is not lost, it is only suppressed. That also means: P splits, but never loses its deeper, original wholeness. P identifies with the It and alienates itself, too - but never loses its original identity. P personalizes and individualizes It and depersonalizes and de-individualizes itself, too - but never loses its deeper, original personality and individuality. P makes It the subject and himself its functionary and object - but never loses its original subject role. P is thus a primary subject and a kind of secondary subject (“Sobject”) at the same time. P is still his own ruler but also his foreign ruler and the subordinate at the same time. The `You' as It See `Complex Personal Dynamics and Relationship Disorders´. The `One' as It E.g. one does not do that - and so you have to make it, too. (Normativism). 145 Examples: Directions in Humanism, Anthroposophy, The Work of Byron Katie, etc. The terms 'ego ideal' and 'narcissism' go in a similar direction. Martin Luther: "homo incurvatus in se ipsum" ("the man bent back in himself"). 146 120 By Localization I believe that the p Its cannot be localized in a specific sphere of the brain but they are psychical complexes that have been materialized and are dominating the person. Like a web, they are spread throughout multiple spheres of the brain and the body and have specific “second-rate” impacts that will be discussed further later on. Where can the Its arise? In all realities. If in a person = personal It; Otherwise, as group-It, society-It, and so on. Appearances of the Personal It The pers. It is in itself a 'triad' and consists of three parts (pro +, contra ‒ and 0). However, it can differently appear as follows: - as a monad (with only one effective direction) - as dyad [`duality']. - as triad [`trinity'] Even if the p It appears as a monad or dyad, it is `really´ always a triad because the hidden, latent parts have not disappeared and can be activated at any time. Monovalent sS/p It (Monad) The personal It appears as a monad, one-sided, monovalent and monistic if: 1- only one part of the personal It is activated for example the all or the nothingness, one ‒sS or one +sS, etc. 2- two or more parts of the It, or their sides are participating with each other and only have one effect. Also representatives of different ideologies often act monadic. For instance, they pretend to own the one and overarching truth. Whoever is not on their side, is against them. So with that, they appear to be all and all else is nothing. Ambivalent sS/ p It (Dyad, Hermaphrodite) (Also see `Strange-Self as dyad´ with Yin-Yang-symbol). This is about the ambivalent personal strange Self, or It, that is playing an important part in the psychopathology. It specifically stands for divisiveness, ambivalence, contrast, contradiction and conflicts. It partly stands for paradoxes and follies, as well. The contradictions, divisiveness, or paradoxes may exist: 1 – In a strange Self or non-Self. 2 – Between different parts of a personal It. 3 – Between two or more sS or Its. 4 – Between an sS or It and an actual Absolute. About the Ambivalence of the p Its: The p Its are not only structured by the all-or-nothing-principle but the 'all', the 'totally' is at least potentially - a divided unit, split in two (or more) connected opposites. On the 121 opposite of this split unit (split into pro-sS and contra-sS), there isGeben Sie hier eine Formel ein., on the other hand, the strange nothingness, so that arises like a triangle (triad) after which p It is primarily structured and in which a corresponding dynamism takes place. As mentioned before, the choice of an absolutized ideal also includes the (unknowingly) choice of the specific opposite (an anti-ideal) and the deselection of the ideal also includes the deletion of the anti-ideal - and the other way around. The p Its, such as the It in general, are very contradicting in their characteristics. The ambivalence (or trivalence) of the p Its does not only explain their complicated dynamics but also explains the paradoxes and the follies, that can be found in many mental disorders. Similar conclusions can be found in the psychoanalysis. I am thinking of the so-called mixture of drives in S. Freud´s theory, who believed that the sexual drive and the death drive are mixed regularly. Alike, Lacan, who said that the death drive can be found in every other drive.147 Those points of view are very similar to that of mine, although I believe, that the mixtures are not only about the drives but about every kind of Relatives (which includes the drives). That becomes clear when looking at absolutizations of Relatives because both poles of them fused together (according to the drive-mixture) but also stand in opposite position (which probably corresponds of Freud's "drive-segregation"). Analogy: Characteristics of the It and the Mental Disorders One can compare mental disorders with similar characteristics as the sS resp. p Its: they are of an independent, "active" and of quasi-personal nature. I think that with mental disorders, always the Self is affected. In contrast to changes in the relative sphere, where you find only easy disturbances. 147 Literature in Mertens, Peters and under keyword "mixed drives". 122 EMERGENCE OF STRANGE, SECOND-RATE REALITIES "This reality is nothing for me!" (A patient) Optional chapter. If the reader only is interested in the Emergence of the strange, second-rate personal, see there. [An overview about the second-rate realiteis can be found in the Summary table columns L-N] Introduction This chapter is about the general effects of the Its on different realities: worlds/ persons and I (WPI). 148 The Its create second-rate realities² (WPI²). These take a part of the first-rate reality¹ (WPI¹). Therefore, they are connected with a loss of first-rate reality. Relative realities become (pseudo)first-rate and the first-rate reality becomes irrelevant (or subordinate). But first-rate reality can only temporarily be superseded by second-rate realities in spheres where the It/sA are active. 149 Since the first-rate reality is stronger than the second-rate realities, the first-rate reality is never fully gone/lost, so that there are always first-rate and second-rate spheres of reality existing side by side. The second-rate realities are dominated by one, more, or many Its, that force their traits on them. One It generates WPI² in its whole domain, which is about all 23 aspects away with the main effect which the It itself represents. (For details, see later). In this chapter, the emergence of second-rate realities should be discussed generally. As said, specifics of the personal changes you find in the next chapter. Terms Regarding the Second-rate Realities/ Worlds (W²) I often take as a synonym for second-rate realities = second-rate worlds = W².150 The second-rate realities include WPI² = [World, Person, I]² 151 I am writing first-rate reality deliberately in the singular and second-rate realities in the plural because these exist so. Overview of the Phases The different phases of emergence of the second-rate realities can be categorized as follows: 1st phase: Inversion and emergence of the It as described. Now: 2nd phase: It produces WPI². 148 For the sake of simplicity, I take `W' alone as a collective term for WPI. To offer some variety, I sometimes speak only of It and sometimes of It/sA resp It/sS if I want to emphasize the role of an It-part in a person. 150 - The terms `reality' and `world' are often used synonymously and abbreviated `W'. Otherwise, the concept of reality is superior to that of the world. I could not abbreviate reality with `R' because that abbreviation stands for the Relative. - Second-rate is not equivalent to the meaning of a first-rate Relative. - The terms `reality' and` world' also include whole societies, their cultures and the environment. 151 As I read after the conception of this publication, C. G. Jung also speaks of different realities, whereby his concept of a "second reality" resembles the concept of the "first-rate reality" used here, and vice versa, his concept of "first reality" resembles the concept of "second-rate realities" used here. (See also B. Staehelin: `Trust and Second Reality'). Also, the term of the second worlds used in general language usage says the same thing. 149 123 Overview of all It-effects on WPI, see unabridged German version or in the `Summary table´. Emergence of the Different Spheres of W² So far, we described the It as new strange dominant, which core is made out of All² (pro/contra) and Nothingness². Now we will see, how the It expands and how It causes new strange realities (WPI²). ALL² totalistic pro-sA contra-sA ALL pro-sA contra-sA Nothing The It with its parts world¹ world² people¹ people² I¹ I² NOTHING² negativistic This graphic shows how the It (including all It-parts) irrupts in the first-rate reality and what is created by that: 1st The created second-rate reality (here: world, people, I) is being dominated by the It-parts. 2nd WPI are put in a suppressed, relativized position (illustrated by the gray shade). They are also changed in the sense of the respective It - they become `it-similar'. On the other hand, you can see that WPI is sometimes able to get something positive from pro-sA-parts (`hyperforms´) because the It incorporates those parts as well. 3rd The It-parts are in italics to show that they too are changing. They adapt to the new strange reality, too. 4th The dashed line shows the loss of first-class reality. 5th The inner splittings of the It and also the WPI are indicated by the solid lines. The It works in the same way how it is. It is totally pro or totally contra or totally 0 and causes WPI also to become too pro, contra or 0. Therefore, one can speak of a "principle of creation of a too equal, an opposite and nothingness" in the second-rate realities caused by the Its. The It determines the specific reality, changes the reality and makes it similar to the It. The difference, however, is that the action described occurs at the expense of the units affected since this process is associated with a loss of prime reality, even though it seduces the oppressed person with greater benefit in the beginning. Different Its determine in the form of the prevailing zeitgeist various groups or societies or generations. The following spheres of these second-rate realities (WPI²) shall be distinguished: 1. The It (as dominant center). 2. The sphere dominated by the It, which can be subdivided into: Pro-sphere (= + hyper-forms with Co-forms, participants, functionaries, followers, accomplices). Contra-sphere (with opponents). 0 sphere, negated or sacrificed sphere. The individual spheres overlap. 124 [Basic possibilities of deviation from the optimal probably reflect a similar classification: too much (= pro-forms or hyper-forms), false (= contra-forms) and 0 (nothing). Incidentally, I think that the mental disorders discussed later have similar patterns, too.] Chronological sequence: At the beginning, there is a pro-dynamic: The It first forms a prosphere (+ hyper-forms) in WPI - but at the cost of first-rate reality. Its loss causes the formation of the + hyper-forms, which finally become so expensive that the system² tips over to the opposite (contra or 0 forms). (→ Reversal into the opposite) Generally formulated: pairs of opposites* exist at the expense of first-rate reality. If a pole* is too expensive, it turns into an opposite (or vice versa). The system² can oscillate between two extremes until it dies or finds an emergency solution or the actual solution. Examples, see in `Personal Relationship Disorders´. Important: 1. All Its require sacrifices. 2. The sacrificial-sphere of WPI is getting bigger throughout the process because the Its are using WPI to stay alive and to stay dominant. Roles of the It(s) in W² as Dictators, Parasites and Offenders In the second-rate realities, the Its are like dictators with their helpers, that dominate everything else in their territory. They also can be compared to parasites/ viruses/ demons depending on their respective properties. The Its force their programs onto the realities, usually by using the principle of all-ornothing. Just as the examples demonstrate, they act in various ways. Sometimes their actions are paradoxical or contradicting, but they are never solely negatively. Especially in the beginning, their effects appear to be very positive. In the long run, however, they become disturbing and pathogenic. Everything is subordinated to them: the truth, the freedom, the reality, other people and finally the affected reality resp. person itself. Although the person seems to be heightened in the beginning, he/she ends up being degraded. (It as offender and the Person as victim see below). Hierarchies in W² There are rigid hierarchies from It/sA to its R, as well from It/sA to other It/sA. (Typical for W²). Second-rate systems of our inside can be compared to Totalitarian states: There is a central, powerful It that dominates everything, such as a dictator. One level below that, there are contributors/ participants/ functionaries, and on the bottom are powerless people, who are receiving the orders. The system is very sensitive: If only one of the participants is being questioned or attacked, the whole system is endangered. Therefore it reacts accordingly hard and merciless but it also sacrifices its own contributors if necessary. The It subjugates its own Relatives like subjects. Although it gives them a second-rate center/sense/support, it takes away their independence. The new strange Relatives have to sacrifice themselves for the It if there is any kind of hazard. An It, however, will never sacrifice itself for its own members. However, in the end, the It is also 125 powerless if it is without its Relatives, its subordinates. It can be compared to dictators who are quite helpless without their people. Thus, the Its are overpowering as well as powerless, (pseudo)absolute and irrelevant at the same time. (Compare to Therapeutic hierarchies in the first-rate reality). Hypotheses about the It-effects • The Its affect not only the individual but also entire societies - ultimately our world as a whole. (More later.) • The Its change WPI in their sense. That WPI becomes `It-similar. (Just as the other hand, It adapts to WPI). • The It-effects are not total, but they are all the stronger and pathogenic, the larger the difference is between the sA and +A. • The Its work beyond their own aspect. All Its cause changes in all of the 7 aspects of dimension and in all of the 4 main aspects of differentiation. The It of a certain aspect also causes the main changes/defaults in its specific aspect, while It causes side effects but also facultative effects in all the other aspects. Example: Absolutization of truth has a special impact concerning the question true or false but it also has an impact on all the other aspects. Suppose a family has absolutized truth, then the family is subjected to the dictates of unconditioned truth-telling. This sA truth* will then also determine certain spheres of being, life, the qualities and relationships (BLQC) of the family. Also, two opposite poles, which can be called "lie" and "indifference” arise. (See the section `Spreading and compression´). • All Its can have all results - also positive ones All Its are principally able to cause any kind of second-rate forms. All Its have all kinds of results, negative and positive results. I.e. a ‒It may cause +² and a +It may cause ‒². Therefore, the reverse side of a ‒It can have positive effects and the reverse side of a +It can have negative effects. For example: I am not allowed to feel good, I am not allowed to accept love, love is negative; If I am being hated it is positive. Or illness* is giving identity² or sense² and so on. Also: Every It may cause illness, as well as health. Although the It usually causes illness. The contradicting effects of the Its are important for understanding the paradoxes and certain psychopathologies. The juxtaposition of contradictions Contradictory, strangeness, split and 'craziness' appear to be particularly striking as Iteffects. Here, I mainly use very general and basic terms that change when used in specific spheres. Splitting of a married couple would be called divorce or breakup, a splitting of the inner Self would be referred to as split personality or schizophrenia. However, I believe that the basic principles of the emergence of those so-called second-rate realities and their characteristics, are very similar and are connected with each other. 126 The new, strange, second-rate realities lost the actual Absolute and are therefore not unequivocal, unique (etc.) but ambiguous, paradoxical, contradicting (etc). This contradicts our usual thinking and talking. We speak possibly of the fact that this or that person is chaotic, another richly, a third haughty. Or that the environment is either way etc. I.e. we often see only the superficial, "activated" pole of something. But in fact, the second-rate reality or the person also carries the corresponding opposite and a 0-part in itself. Therefore we have per se to do with doubly or triply split units, so for instance with `finite infinity´, `dead life´, `poor wealth´, `empty fullness´, `strange Self´, `sweet revenge´, `liberating illness´ and so on, but that's not what you say.152 Therefore, sometimes the “normally” right can be wrong, or the “normally” logical can be incorrect or illogical, or the good can be bad or the otherwise moral immoral. Or it may be smarter to lie than to tell the truth, or better to be sick than healthy, etc. These situations then appear paradoxical. 152 This ambiguity of our existence has been portrayed authoritatively by H. v. Hofmannsthal (for example, in his "Chandos Brief"), Novalis, and more recently P. Auster. 127 It-effects on the Dimensions of WPI About a1: Disturbance of the Absolute “I am the spirit of always saying no ...” Mephisto in Faust With regard to the It-effect in this aspect, one can formulate: It negates, disturbs or hyper-absolutizes WPI. About a2: Disturbance of Identity Referring to the It-effects in this aspect, one can formulate: It alienates, uniforms or hyper-identifies the spheres of reality in which it penetrates. (More in `Disorder of the person's identity´). About a3: Disturbance of Reality Referring to the It-effects in this aspect, one can formulate: It derealizes, falsifies or over-realizes the spheres of reality that are dominated by It. Hypotheses: Not only the It in this aspect but also all the Its of the other aspects cause some sort of loss or falsification of reality. Artificial realities are being created and the actual reality will be experienced as falsified or negated. On the other side, a part of reality can become one-sided or unambiguous (`hyper-reality´) due to hyper-realization. About a4: Disturbance of Unity Referring to the It-effects in this aspect, one can formulate: It chaotisizes or splits or fuses subordinated spheres of reality. (More in `Disorder of the person's unity´). About a5: Disturbance of the Unconditioned The Its in this aspect unsettle, misprogram or determine and fix. Thus, the corresponding Its generate fixations, cause unconditionals, provide preconditions, urge, admit no exception - and on the other hand: Its release and forsake WPI. About a6: Disturbance of the Priorities The Its in this aspect uproot, dislocate or make extremes. Its make actual priorities as second-rate or negate them. They also generate "hyper-centers" and "hyper-causes" (e.g., in the form of false causes). Also: Results will become causes/ and causes become results or nothing. (Further, see `Causes and Results´ in Metapsychology). The It/sA are often like exponents: They potentiate a negative or a positive situation. The Its of this aspect also have effects of Its of the other dimension aspects. All Its also lead to more or less great loss of overview meta-level/ "horizon".153 153 Parallel in the literature: "The lost horizon" by James Hilton. 128 About a7: Disturbance of Independence WPI become due to the Its more or false dependent or -independent and the Its dominate and automatize WPI-parts. Changes of Differentiation The 4 Main Spheres of Differentiation Overview of changes: Being Life Qualities Connections Subj./Obj. Sacrificial-sphere It destroys It kills It disqualifies It decontextualizes It desubjectivizes Disturbance-sphere It materializes It functionalizes only It misqualifies It miscontextualizes It instrumentalizes Hyperforms, participants, functionaries154 It ideologizes It hyper-vitalizes or hyper-functionalizes It hyper-qualifies It hyper-contextualizes It hyper-subjectivizes About I. Disturbance and Reversal of Being „It always happens the same in history: An ideal, an elevated idea coarsens itself, is materialized.“ (B. Pasternak) The Its disturb and mistake matter and spirit. The Its destroy, materialize (reification) or ideologize WPI That means that mechanical or physical laws and patterns often are foregrounded and dominate the spirit in the second-rate realities that are determined by Its. It also means, that the second-rate being is mainly too material, objective and tangible and that the realities are more monotonous and mechanized. People who are so constituted come close to robots and machines, and have corresponding dynamics (↑ functions) - or it is a being full of `strange spirits' or it is both, side by side. (See also corresponding experience in a psychosis, for example, later on). About II. Disturbance and Reversal of Life The Its disturb and confuse life and functions. The basic impacts in this aspect are: The Its gain life and vitality and WPI only function or die. (Reversal of life and functioning). Only in the role of a participant, WPI will be hyper-vitalized. About III. Disturbance and Reversal of Qualities The Its disturb and confuse the qualities. The Its in this aspect have gained absolute quality, while WPI only receives a relative quality or no quality at all. 154 They have, as already mentioned, the characteristics of the Its, too. 129 They disqualify or misqualify WPI. The misqualification may also contain that they put WPI in the role of a participant and functionary and then WPI will be of oversized, quasi-absolute importance. That importance can be positively or negatively connoted. The effects of the Its can also be a reversal of qualities: they revert negative or positive qualities: a positive becomes negative (too much of a good becomes bad!) and a negative becomes positive. (→ Fascination of the negative and the evil). About IV: Disturbance and Reversal of Subjects, Objects and Contexts The Its disturb and confuse subjects and objects. Due to inversion, the Its as original objects became subjects and cause now original subjects (especially persons) to become objects. The person is no longer the master in its own house. This will be discussed more when talking about the It-effects on a person (Subject-objectreversal). The Its in this aspect also cause mistakes of the connections: Relative connections become unconditional, absolute connections (e.g., guilt - punishment) and relative disconnections become absolute. That causes misconnections and misseparations to appear. I will deal with these topics in more detail later in → The Its Change P as Subject, the Objects and the Personal Connections. Change of units 1. Negation (All or Nothing) “Since Copernicus, man seems to have got himself on an inclined plane now he is slipping faster and faster away from the center into - what? into nothingness?” F. Nietzsche The main effect in this aspect is: the Its negate and destroy. More specifically: They create All² but especially nothing². As ideologies, they mainly appear in the shape of totalitarianism, reductionism, agnosticism and nihilism. They alter WPI especially in a nihilistic, total and reductionistic way, so that WPI is being negated, destroyed, isolated, or (as a participant) totalized. This mainly causes a loss of first-rate all and individual. Therefore, the reality appears to be emptied, isolated or totalized. The splitting can be called 'all-or-nothing-splitting'. The It 'claims' all* or nothing*. An example of that would be the digitization of the world, of life with all its advantages and disadvantages. If objects are digitized, it has rather advantages but the digitalization of the person originates considerable disadvantages because the living is lost. 2. Profanation The main effect in this aspect is: the Its profane. The Its as ideologies, especially in the shape of superstition, spirituality, secularism and atheism profane, demonize or idolize WPI. WPI thereby loses above all first-rate the positive Absolute (God, love, sense) and thereby there originates a state of godlessness, lovelessness and futility or strange gods. 130 3. Reification and False Personification The main effect in this aspect is: the Its (especially personal Its) reify the personal and personalize themselves155 or other things. (Further, see the Disorder of person and things.) 4. Deindividualization The main effect in this aspect is: the Its de- / misindividualize or hyper-individualize. 5. Despiritualization The main effect in this aspect is: The Its causes soullessness and spiritlessness and somatize (themselves or something). The Its negate or even kill actual spiritual, mental or psychical areas or change them. Spiritlessness and soullessness are being created in certain systems (e.g., something becomes senseless, spiritless or is being ideologized.) It-effects of this aspect can be found in all of the ideologies. Especially they can be found in the spiritual sphere as a consequence of spiritualism, in the psychical sphere as a consequence of psychologism, and in the physical sphere as a consequence of the so-called healthism. Detailed representation concerning the person, see chapter `Emergence of the strange, second-rate Personal´. Illustration of different strange realities Generally speaking, I believe that the Its affect our world as a whole. This creates a juxtaposition of first and second-rate realities. (→ `The juxtaposition of different realities') Here are concrete examples. Different Social Systems Many social systems show some of the features of the named It-effects. For example: splittings in poor and rich; powerful and powerless; alive and killed and so on, or in the shape of contrary social orders like communism/capitalism; or in the form of deadly ideologies that may cause consequences like the Holocaust, genocides, racism, nationalism and so on. They are also made up like the all-or-nothing-principle resp. pro- or contra-principle and can be divided into disturbingsphere, participant-sphere and sacrificial-sphere. As mentioned before, all of the second-rate realities show the named characteristics and this the more, the more a negative became positively absolutized or a positive negatively absolutized. Otherwise put: In a society, where brutality, contempt of mankind, aggression, war (and so on) is viewed positively and opposite trends are suppressed at the same time, the negative characteristics of the second-rate reality will be seen more and more. A society, where humanity and peace (etc.) are being valued, and that therefore is very similar to an actual positive world, is less divided and less disturbed. However, here on earth, no society can be formed that is perfect and without the named second-rate characteristics. 155 Keyword `homunculus´. 131 Different Environments It/sA and their consequences can also be found outside of the person in different environments. Example: Ecological damage, armories (etc.), as results of the It/sA and with effect on the person. Concerning families see later in `Personal system and relationship Disorders´. Virtual Worlds The virtual worlds, that are gaining importance, also belong here if they dominate the person. Ideologies Important mindsets, ideologies, or religions belong here if they dominate the person. They are not the bad/evil themselves because they also have positive parts. They are determined by collective strange Absolutes. They should not be fought but criticized and a person should pay attention to them and should try to integrate the positive aspects. In human history, there were many misabsolutizations. Usually, they can be recognized as the named ideologies including their advantages and disadvantages. They are forms and aspects that are always created in new ways that are still the same eventually and that are all representing the same or similar 'games'. The most important ideologies have already been mentioned. (See `Summary table´´ column E and Correspondence with Its). Especially the social sciences, mostly the social psychiatry and the systematic therapies focus on these topics. In contrast to them, I will try to present known problems from a new perspective. I repeat that I am convinced that the mentioned second-rate forms and their dynamics cannot just be found in a general form (environment etc.) but also within the person (and they are both connected to each other). Here as well as there they are essential foundations for diseases and just as one can speak of sick people, one can also speak of sick (and disease-causing) societies and environments. Summary The general It-effects can be summarized as following: They create new strange realities, which are called second-rate realities, too. Those second-rate realities are structured according to all-or-nothing-pattern: The suppressed reality-sphere is either being adapted to the certain It completely, or it is seen as contrary/hostile or is being negated and liquidated. Considering the different dimensions (a1-a7), the Its mainly cause the following changes: Negation and relativization; homogenization and alienation; derealization and falsification; conglomeration and splitting (and merging); destabilization and malprogramming; dislocation and displacement; dependence and suppression of different realities (WPI). Considering the 4 main differentiation, the Its mainly cause the following changes: Destruction and materializing; killing and functionalization; dis- and false qualification; desubjectivization and instrumentalization; disbanding or defective connections. Considering the pr units: Destruction and isolation; negation and profanization; depersonalization 132 and reification; deindividualization and massification; despiritualization and somatization; castration and disorder of love. The listed terms are meant to be understood as keywords - More can be gathered from the following chapters about the person or the `Summary table´´. 133 EMERGENCE OF THE STRANGE, SECOND-RATE PERSONAL [An overview on the second-rate personal can be found in the Summary table´ columns Q-S] Introduction So far, we briefly discussed the emergence and the general effects of the Its. Now, the effects of the Its on the person (P) will be illustrated more detailed because it´s for our topic most important. Note: For the sake of variety, I sometimes only speak of one It, sometimes of the Its in the plural or of three I-parts (pro +, contra ‒, 0). Comparison of the It-effects on the Reality in General and the Person Specifically The effects of the Its on the person are very similar to the effects of the Its on reality in general. The main difference is that the person has direct access to the absolute-sphere. That means that P has an absolute choice. In contrast to that, non-personal subjects do not have the choice to accept nor to reject an inversion. Only the choice and/or the identification with an inversion can lead to the emergence of a personal It. In essence, then something becomes personal and personal becomes like something. Transference of Its from Other Realities The Its can originate from the person himself or can also be transferred to P by other systems. That transference happens over the systems A-spheres. Disorders in society, such as splittings can cause disorders (splittings) within the individual people. The transference of disorders does not occur one to one, i.e. the disorder within the person does not have to be the same as the disorder in society. Due to the fact, that the opposites are very close to each other, the individual is often affected by one of the contrary disorder! Person-It-Reversal As well as the It changes parts of the Person¹ It reality after his picture, as described on absolute relative top, it also changes parts of the person self strange actual, real seemingly after his picture. In this chapter, we will whole, unit divided discuss how the It forces its characteristics unconditional conditional onto the person. first-rate second-rate I will call this general change person-Itindependent dependent Reversal. The It gets quasi-personal pers. being thing, matter characteristics and becomes like a person life exist, function and forces its characteristics onto the qualities strange qualities person. Those changed personal spheres subject object will be called second-rate personal = P². But besides these changed, strange personal spheres, there will always be 'healthy' P¹ parts remaining, which is very important for the therapy. 134 The It and the person switch roles.156 Considering the 7 DM-aspects:157 The It becomes similar to the first-rate personal: pseudo-absolute, pseudo-self, pseudo-real, pseudo-uniform, pseudo-autonomous, pseudoindividual and pseudo-spiritual. On the other side, actual personal aspects are changed by the It and become: too relative resp. irrelevant, strange, non-actual, divided, heteronomous, materialistic and apersonal. With that, the person becomes like the original It. Considering the DF-aspects: The person exchanges (lively) being with only existing, life with functioning, heavenly luck with earthly thrill and the subject role with an object role. Now, the person is an object and dominated by the It as a strange subject.158 Besides, the person exchanges individuality with egocentricity or uniformity, freedom with distance or constriction, reality with unreality or `hyper-reality´, security with defenselessness or armor, and so on. (See also Subject-object-reversal and Person-thing-reversal). 156 For the person-thing-inversion, see later. → DM aspects: the 7 dimension aspects are meant. 158 Instead of the rule of the It over the person, one can also speak of the rule of the objects * (of the absolutized objects) over the person as subject. (See later). Also Th.W. Adorno has dealt with this. "Objects" can also mean the rule of the material over the spiritual. So also the rule of the actually dependent over the independent. 157 135 All Parts of the P² (Overview) - Concerning the spheres, P² consists of the strange Self in the absolute-sphere and its relative spheres. (As mentioned, the strange Self is only apparently absolute but it is absolutely experienced by the person concerned.) - Concerning the rank, P² is of secondrate or 0. - Concerning the orientation, we find three P²-parts: 1. pro- resp. +part (hyper-forms/ participants/ functionaries) 2. contra- resp. ‒part 3. sacrificial-part (P0) There are also (still) first-rate parts = residual-P¹. Division into DIMENSION sphere A R 0 rank 2. 0 orientation + − P² = the strange-personal strange Self (sS) pers. participants/ functionaries/ clan pers. contra-and disturbed parts non-Self and sacrificial-part P² P° +P² with front-, reverse-, 0-side ‒P² with front-, reverse-, 0-side victim-sphere 0 with front- and 2 reverse-sides. DIFFERENTIATION B strange being of P² L strange life of P² Q strange qualities of P² strange connections of P² P² as strange subject C strange objects of P²/ P as a strange object UNITS W strange world-view of P² P strange things of others in P² my strange I / my ego I e.g., strange possessions, strange further works, strange information of P². aspects Further, → `Summary table´ column O-S.159 The strange person (P²) is multiply divided: On one side the person is similar the It, and on the other side he/she is mainly their victim; On one side the person is his/her own master and on the other side he/she is his/her own slave; On one side the person is his/her own God/idol and on the other side his/her own devil/enemy; On one side the It of P became personal and on the other side the person became like a thing; On one side the It of P became strange subject and on the other side P became strange object. The introduced classification of the second-rate personal and the different parts of p It are arbitrary. It mainly shows the negative nature of the Its. The It-core in its role as a second-rate subject mainly acts as the offender. In its further sphere, there are the most damaged or sacrificed parts. However, we must relativize this point of view because the Its also have positive aspects for the person (especially at the beginning) in form of + hyper-forms of which the person participates (as participants and functionaries). 159 In this table, `strange' is only a keyword for all possible second-rate characteristics. 136 Because it is important, I repeat that P² has not only disadvantages but also hyper-positive aspects such as hyper-self, hyper-identity, hyper-security, hyper-well-being, hyper-activity, hyper-vitality, too much love and so on. Is the Strange It Some Kind of Homunculus within Us? • The It in this publication is very similar to what is understood when using the term homunculus. I mentioned it already. The It and homunculus are similar when it comes to the idea of something being created within us that has personal characteristics, especially a certain autonomy, that cannot be directly willingly influenced by the person. • The similarity of an It, or of a homunculus to a person is the greatest when the It represents a real person, e.g., when another person was idealized by the affected person. (Also see: causes for Delusion and hallucinations). Depending on how useful or harmful the homunculus is within us, it effects like a dictator and tyrant, a virus or a parasite. But the best-case scenario is that it lives within us as a symbiont. In that case, it is neither the good nor the bad. • The `homunculus´ usually has a complicated structure formed of different Its that operate jointly on the one hand and fight and hinder each other on the other hand. Changes of the Personal Dimension Spheres Every It/sA disturbs more or less all 7 dimension aspects (DM) of the person. They disturb above all the right of self-determination, the identity, the authenticity, the uniqueness, the unity, the unconditional dignity, the right to live, the independence and the freedom. It can be compared to disorders of general human rights. a1 Disorder of the Absolute Area of a Person The Its, which affect this aspect, have a nihilistic or relativistic or absolutistic character. That means: - they negate the personal Absolute, or - they relativize and disturb the personal Absolute, which will also be alienated, divided, suppressed, falsified, twisted and reversed, or - they may also hyper-absolutize the absolute-sphere of a person. For example by the idolization of a certain part of the person. The main effect of the Its on people is their negation. With that, the person loses the firstrate personality, the Self and other connected characteristics on the territory of an It. P has only a relative center. P Loses More than He/She Gains An It was created as follows: mainly too pro (hyper) too strange resp. contrary, less 0. The impacts of the Its on P are the other way around: The focus is on the negation of P, then there is the alienation and creation of opposites, and then there is a little bit of proparticipation. That means that the It mostly steals parts of the person and only gives back a 137 little part. Therefore, the It is mainly acting as an offender and the person is mainly the victim. The Loss of one Aspect also Means the Loss of Other Aspects. For example: The loss of identity is also a loss of security, reality, unity of a person, their priority and basis, their independence; and also means the loss of the first-rate spirit, live, quality, subjectivity and so on - but also first-rate relative spheres are being lost. a2 Disorder of the Person's Identity The Its of this aspect mostly cause P to become too uniform, alienated, or over-identified. Ideologies of this aspect would be uniformism, determinism, selfism and philosophies of identity. Everyday examples are sentences like “you are just like your mother”, “you are a blighter”, “you are the greatest” (and similar).160 In this aspect, I also discuss the following topics because they are essentially related to identity: 1. Transformation and alienation 2. The emergence of paradoxes. (→ Person-It-Reversal and all other personal reversals that also disrupt identity.) 1. Transformation and Alienation In our life, we are confronted with the phenomenon that everything that is psychically relevant can be transformed. In a passive direction, from outside to inside: For example: consequences of other people's actions can be internalized. In the active direction, from the inside out: Physical or psychical things are expressed in actions and functions. There are many changes on the way from outside to inside or vice versa. We can also find analogous changes in the language. I want to give a specific example of that. Suppose someone is raised in a chaotic family, then he can become chaotic. If we analyze the process, we will find out that there are four steps. 1st step: The parents confuse the affected person. 2nd step: The person is getting confused. 3rd step: The person is confused. 4th step: The person is chaotic. Let us also consider the additional following steps: 5th step: The strange Self (sS) (here: the confusion*) acts in him: It disorders and dissolves him and 6th step: a) P disintegrates and b) and his actions become more disordered and irregular. What happened? To answer that in a very basic way, one could say that the parent's behavior causes something to emerge within the affected person. Something, that acts by itself and causes the person to malfunction and act false. The analysis of language shows the change in a similar way: A verb (to confuse) becomes 160 Thus W. Brandenburg understood schizophrenia as the result of the 'loss of the natural self-evidence' of the person. 138 substantive (the confusion) which makes a verb again. More specifically: 1st step: verb (to confuse) → 2nd: processual passive (getting confused) → 3rd: participle (is confused) → 4th: adjective (chaotic) and a new substantive (the confusion) → 5th step: The strange Self (sS) (here: the confusion*) acts in him: it disorders and chaotizises him and 6th: a) processual verbs (the person disintegrates) with b) new adverb (actions and procedures become more disordered and irregular). The sequence illustrates how in the person concerned strange-new can originate, which affects by itself (!) and changes our actions and functions. The actions also get a too functional character because they don’t come from the real I-self, like the first-rate actions but from strange Selves resp. strange-Egos. Broadly speaking: The I-self lives above all but the strange-Ego functions or reacts more. Just as a quick reminder, I believe that the described changes are only possible if the absolute sphere of the person is disturbed. An actual Absolute compensates such disturbances. Disturbances are caused seldom by one sA only but more often by many sA with corresponding mainly negative actions. Example: One cannot only be confused because he/she has been confused by others but also because the person has become disoriented, oppressed, disenfranchised, devalued, infantilized, etc. outside of P P outside of P sS sS P sS a) From the inside towards the outside: The behavior of a person is alienated by strange-Selves in the person (P). sS b) Exterior signals are being alienated by strange-Selves of a person, too. 2. To the Emergence of Paradoxes I saw various things that looked the same and same things that looked different and I searched for the reason. Hypotheses Paradoxes may occur: 1. Due to inversion, when first-rate aspects become second-rate or when second-rate aspects become first-rate.161 2. If sA change their characteristics, 161 That, as is known, paradoxes can arise through the confusion of object and meta-level, says something similar. 139 a) if one or more equal sA become contrary,162 b) if one or more contrary sA become equally. This Fig. is intended to show that one sA has three parts that are quite oppositely connoted, and that the 3 opposing sA can have the same connotation if a backside is activated. That paradoxically, one can experience the same sA quite opposite, and a contra-sA just like a pro-sA, if its backside is activated. Or you can also experience a pro-sA and a contra-sA as 0. (See also `Paradoxes and Schizophrenia´ and `Inverted, paradoxical world´). a3 Disorder of Personal Reality The It that mainly affects this aspect comes from ideologies like realism, objectivism and positivism. It is hyper-realistic, false and deceptive or unreal. It effects on P or parts of him: 1- It derealizes a person. 2. It distorts and inverses a person´s reality and causes a contradiction between different realities. 3. It hyper-realizes a person. P often has a compensatory-profit then, by a new personal reality that appears to be positive in the beginning. An It paradoxically causes the affected person to view unreal aspects of him/herself as real and real aspects as unreal. a4 Disorder of the Person's Unity Main effects: 1. It splits the person. 2. It creates new strange split personal parts that contradict each other or fuses personal parts or 3. It creates new strange personal hyper-units by fusing. Possible ideologies: Monism, syncretism, structuralism, pluralism, atomism, reductionism. Paradox: The person experiences the actual personal unity now as dissolved or split or other personal parts fused. An additional paradox is that the same personal part may be experienced in different ways. (See also: Splittings and fusions in schizophrenia). 162 See also `Reversal into the opposite´. 140 About Fusions “If I do not have it, I fall apart” - a patient. The It fuses with parts of the person or fuses different parts with each other. It is, as if parts of the person are being compressed and merged. That may cause a feeling of being a compact wholeness that saves the person from being divided. Although this may be the case temporarily, splittings are encouraged in the long term by the fusions. Fusions and splittings occur side by side or alternately. What can be split (see the section below) can also be fused by the It. (E.g., subject-object-fusion, fusion of different objects, etc.) About Splittings (This topic reappears when discussing Schizophrenia). Inversions can lead to splittings in all known spheres: This means that there can be divisions in all aspects of the dimensions and differentiations. (e.g., subject-object-split, matter-spirit-split or soul-body-split). Like a single person, so a whole group of people, a society (like any system) can be split (and also fused, suppressed, scared, etc.). Double messages, paradoxes, contradictions (or similar) are caused by splittings. Messages that are too one-sided or too general are caused by fusions. The main splittings, or breaking points within P: ALL* P² pro contra P¹ The main splittings in P²: 1. between the first-rate P¹ and the second-rate P². 2. between the all and the nothingness of P². 3. between the pro- and contra-parts of all. Additional splittings are possible between all parts of P². NOTHING* Briefly about Subject-Object-Splittings Due to an inversion, a first-rate subject becomes an object. Or it may only function as a secondrate subject, as strange-I and also loses the connection to its original first-rate objects. That causes a splitting within the subject-sphere into a first-rate and a second-rate subject, as well as a splitting of the strange subject and a first-rate object. Between a first-rate subject and second-rate objects emerge only relative contradictions because the first-rate subject can tolerate second-rate objects. Briefly about the Emergence of Opposites Inversions cause opposites: 163 Consequence: Side by side of opposites: 163 But also pacts, see elsewhere. 141 narcissism # self-hate fear # lust hate # love² too much proximity # too much distance etc. (You can read the possible opposites in all aspects in the Summary table´ in column N. They are marked there on the one hand by  and on the other hand by. Otherwise see all Links regarding opposites. a5 Disorder of the Person's Safety and Freedom 1.This It makes the person insecure. It causes a loss of safety and freedom. 2. It misprograms the person. It sets up demands on P. It forces, compels and does not allow exceptions. 3. It causes hyper-safety and hyper-freedoms. Its are like golden cages within our soul. Possible ideologies: Dogmatism, determinism, partly skepticism, libertinism. a6 Disorder of Personal Bases and Levels 1. The It uproots and levels P. It steals the person´s actual basis. 2. It twists and falsifies the personal basis: what used to be peripheral, will be the basis and what used to be the original basis will be the new strange periphery. On the one hand, the It uproots and undermines the personal base and causes a displacement of P on the periphery. On the other hand, It establishes many new centers. It results in a mix-up of center and periphery. 3. It forms also personal hyper-centers. The person has compensatory-profit with such new strange personal centers. Possible ideologies: fundamentalism, radicalism, extremism, eccentricity. Always there is a loss or a disorder of the first-rate personal center/ base. Also: All inversions resp. It/sA cause more or less of a loss of “height”/ overview/ meta level/ horizon.164 About the Reversal of Causes (Problem Shifting) The Its shift causes and problems. Then we don´t ask, for example, anymore for the real causes of our illnesses but only for secondary causes. (Further, see `Causes and Results´ in Metapsychology). a7: Disorder of the Person's Independence and Ties 1. The Its cause the person to be dependent. They steal the person's autonomy as well as good ties. Or 2. The Its inverse and alienate the personal autonomy and ties. Or 3. The Its form hyper-autonomous centers (keyword: "self-running") and form new independent spheres. 164 An important symptom in schizophrenia, see there. E.g., pictures of schizophrenic artists are usually without horizon. 142 The person has a substitute gain by this new strange autonomy - or P has the expensive advantage that he/she no autonomy must venture, no responsibility must take over. Possible ideologies: determinism, evolutionism, philosophy of immanence. In general, there will be a loss/ disorder of the person´s autonomy and tie. Changes of the Personal Differentiation Spheres Main Differentiations I. The Its Change the Personal Being Main disorders: 1. The Its destroy the personal being, or 2. The Its cause a disorder, inversion or alienation of the personal being. They create new strange personal being. They change the personal being in their sense. Then the personal being is similar to the being of the Its. 3. The Its create personal hyper-forms. II. The Its Change the Person's Life (Dynamics) 1. The Its kill, or reduce life, or 2. The Its disturb, twist and falsify our life. That life is similar to the life of the Its. They replace living with functioning and role behavior. 3. The Its cause above all at the beginning hyper-vitality, "hyper-life", hyper-activities. The person appears especially as an automat, machine, official, apparatchik, role player and or life seems dead and dead things appear alive.165 III. The Its Change Personal Qualities 1. The Its disqualify the person. The result is a loss of primary personal qualities. 2. The Its change the qualities of the person, above all because they falsify these, twist and disturb. 3. The Its can cause personal hyper-qualities - as a rule, linked with accordingly raised emotions. Paradoxes due to the Inversion of Qualities The sensations of various qualities of P² do not match the actual qualities. In this way, something negative can be perceived and handled positively and something positive negatively. For example: Illness is better than health, the object-role is better than the subject-role, matter is more important than soul, things/objects are more important than people. Too much of a good is bad. 165 Schizophrenic people experience often like that. 143 Two Kinds of Luck (and Misfortune) in Two Kinds of Realities "First I make you happy," says the ideal, "but then I will kill you!" In the first reality rules the `holy spirit´. In the second-rate realities, something rules what one could call „ (un) holy substance". The „holy spirit" is God, is love. What, however, would be the „ (un) holy substance" after which we often thirst more than after the Holy Spirit? These are our +Its which are like drugs or symbionts in us, on which we are dependent because they give us something that we believe to need absolutely. It is known, that endorphin and dopamine are being released in certain moments of joy. Those hormones can be compared to the substance that we can receive from our Its. What do the two kinds of luck look like? 1. the actual luck: has no costs, comparable to luck through love. 2. strange 'luck' such as libido, ecstasy, rush, high, flow and thrill is addicting and therefore there is a cost. That kind of luck is dependent on different substances, situations or people. They promise “speed” and “power”, they “boost”. The dynamics are marked with all-or-nothing, with a highly increasing +² curve, that is soon to be decreasing and to drop into the negative if there is no new “stuff” being given. I believe that anything that is positively absolutized can cause an addiction. Especially the non-substance addictions are underestimated! 166 Only the actual +A has no potential to be addicting and even gives heavenly luck. P² can perceive happiness as misfortune or misfortune as happiness, as 'black happiness' (Victor Hugo) when the misfortune affects others. Two Kinds of Misfortune: In parallel, I am convinced that there are also two kinds of misfortune: the actual and the strange. By that, I mean that we regard relative misfortune as absolute misfortune when we are dominated by a -sA / It. An example would be the loss of the mentioned (pseudo-) absolute happiness. In itself, P¹ would not have to fear earthly misfortune. The absolute misfortune is only the negative Absolute (‒A). IV. The Its Change P as Subject, the Objects and the Personal Connections 1. - The Its desubjectivize, which means that P loses his/her first-rate subject-role. - The Its deobjective. That means not only the people's focus on the objects is reduced, but the objects themselves are reduced (KW environmental destruction). - The Its destroy personal connections. 2. - The Its inverse, alienate and disorder P in his/her role as subject: They turn P into an object. (→ Subject-object-reversal). P² appears as object. - - The objects themselves are not only changed in a subject-like manner, but also in other ways. This means that they not only change the human view of the objects, but also the 166 I heard again and again from job addicts that their job is their hobby and their fun. What could be wrong with that? 144 objects themselves, e.g. alienated etc. The Its make personal misconnections: Incoherent topics become coherent and vice versa. 3. - The Its create personal hyper-subjects and function as such. - Likewise hyper objects - Likewise hyper-connections, like chains. The Subject-Object-Reversal Here, an important characteristic of the It/sA, or the strange Self is represented. They now take the position of a quasi-personal, living subject and P/I, on the other side, takes the position of an object - a situation that is typical for mental disorders.167 This process can be referred to as subject-object-reversal because whatever is usually the object, became subject and whatever is usually the subject, became an object.168 It is the ”victory” of the object over the subject or the dictatorship of the objects.169 Who is actually acting, when someone says “I” am acting? Is it the I or is it an It? The subject-object-reversal also causes a change of the characteristics of the new subject and the new object: The original object does not become a "real" subject but a kind of subject, a second-rate subject. It plays the role of a subject but is not a real subject and can therefore be termed a "subjectoid" or "sobject" (meaning a pseudo-subject). Or the original object becomes a false object, a kind of "objectoid". The same applies to the original subject, who can neither be a real subject nor a real object but becomes a second-class subject or object. Both are hermaphrodites. As a rule, a second-rate subject (subjectoid) is an object of one's own (or other people's) ideals. Such a second-rate subject can only see objects in other subjects and handles them as such. A second-rate personal / ego is usually the object of his own (or other people's) ideals. So a second-rate personal / ego sees only objects in other people and handles them like these. Due to the subject-object-reversal, the original first-rate connection of subject-object is lost and a subject-object-splitting applies. Besides the subject-object-splitting, there are subject-object-fusions, since the Its resp. strange-Selves cause splittings as well as fusions. In relationships, the It mainly acts in the role of a (pseudo-)first-rate subject. That means that the It can directly cause processes, without P being able to influence it. In addition to dysfunctions, behavioral disorders are the result: behavior that is not (or only partially) influenced by P, so that the person feels powerless and controlled by extraneous power (especially in schizophrenia). There is a parallel between subject-object splitting and God-world-splitting. 167 1. It is therefore not surprising that some people hear voices because the strange Ego represents a kind of new strange person or homunculus in the affected person. 2. A one-sidedly science-oriented psychology / psychiatry is especially in danger of making the man like an 'object' of his investigations and therapy. 168 Likewise, one can also speak of a reversal of the living and the unliving or the personal and the non-personal with similar consequences. This includes also the perpetrator-victim reversal - i.e. the victim is considered the perpetrator and the perpetrator as the victim. 169 Luckily only a seeming victory. 145 Disorder and reversal of Bonding and Separation “The It misconnects, replaces, and separates.” With that, there are disorders of connections/relations, etc. on the one side, and separation, splitting, etc. on the other side. There are new, strange connections/relations. (e.g., there are new problems at places where they do not belong, solutions are brought up where there are no possible solutions, etc.) Wherever lines are overlapping, wrong connections have been created. Loose relations become weldings, knots, chains: The Its create connections that are too stiff and automatic in shape of processes, procedures, automatisms etc. Examples: order and obedience; mistake and punishment; interpersonal: “tit-for-tat”, etc. There are also determinant connections that seem to be similar, such as it is described as a chain of associations in psychoanalysis. (Relative) separations, differences become absolute splittings or unrelatednesses. Where there was a connection/relation, there is now separation. Where there were splitting and difference there is now fusion/welding. The associated symptoms play a major role in neurosis and psychosis ("craziness"). The "atypical connectivity" in autism could also arise in this way. 146 Single Differentiations In the following paragraphs, I want to discuss some single aspects more detailed. Aspect 1: Personal Area of “All and Nothing” 1. The Its destroy. There is a loss of first-rate personal all and nothing. (→ Nihilism). The It also isolates. 2. The Its inverse and alienate everything personal. 3. It can also totalize (generalize) P-parts. That means Its can create "hyper-everything" (→ relativism). About 1: The It wants everything for itself. It wants the whole person. If the person refuses, the It threatens P with the nothing. The It claims the right of exclusiveness. Motto: “Whoever is not with me, is against me.” The all says to Ego: “You are super good or bad.” And the Nothing says: “You are a nothing if you are not all!” Aspect 2: Worldview and View of God. 1. The Its profane. They negate and replace God and love. They cause a loss of transcendence, of God, love and sense. C. G. Jung was convinced that the “loss of soul” was the main problem of the modern world. According to him, about one-third of his clients were affected by the “pointlessness and lack of relevance of their life”. 2. The Its of this aspect pervert and falsify transcendence (God) and immanence (the “world”). On the other hand, earthly, worldly matters are being idolized or demonized. It is the “Victory of immanence over transcendence.” If we live in inverted roles or worlds, we are people without heaven, without transcendence, without God whose foundations are undermined, only because we trust the strange more than the real and have for it got false gods and false devils. Such as the subject-object-reversal, the God-world reversal is not only connected to negation and a change of God and world but also a God-world-splitting, or a God-world-fusion. 3. The Its may also cause an excessive and one-sided transcendence and immanence (→ asA). Aspect 3: The Person and the Things The P-changes, considering the three P²-spheres in this aspect can be illustrated as follows: 1. The Its depersonalize P. The result is a loss of first-rate personality. 2. The Its inverse and alienate the person and the things. Therefore the things will dominate the person. “Victory of the things over the person”, KW: “factual constraint”. 3. The Its may cause hyper-personal or hyper-things. About the Person-Thing-Reversal An original thing has been personalized, while the person has been depersonalized and reified. Therefore whatever used to be “thing” or “object”, is now personal and the other way around. 147 The person also feels like a thing (an instrument, machine, puppet etc.) and/or like a strange person (represented by the dominating It) and/or like a nobody. 170 The reversal leads to mechanization of the person and to a humanization of the machine = alienation of the original human/alienation of the original machine. Such as the subject-object-reversal, the person-thing- reversal does not only causes a negation and a change of person and thing and a person-thing-splitting, but it also causes a person-thing-fusion. (See more about `Person-It-reversal´ and Subject-object-reversal). Now, for reasons of space, I will only treat the following aspects briefly. In the `Summary table´´ all possible personal consequences are listed under "Personal Results" from columns O to S. I repeat: All Its change the personal aspects in three basic kinds of ways: 1. The Its negate the first-rate aspects. 2. The Its falsify (~) the aspects. 3. The Its cause specific hyper-forms. The main effects of It are negation and falsification of the person. Positive hyper-forms are especially found at the beginning of an inversion because they seduce the person. One-dimensional It-effects are very rare. The opposing forms are mutually dependent, often alternate or coexist at the same time! Note: The partly named ideologies stand for many, often still more important unnamed individual or familial ideologies! Aspect 4: I and Others The Its change the I and the others: P becomes de-individualized mis-individualized hyper-individualized loss and replacement ↓ I, individuality/community → loss of I, loss of you ~ strange I ↑ Ego (Super- or Hyper-Ego) Here one can find the Ego-other inversion: Through an inversion, the Ego becomes like others and others become like me. There is not only a negation and change of the Ego and the others, but also a split between the Ego and the others or the fusion of both. "Everyone is the other and nobody is himself" (M. Heidegger) For further personal consequences in this aspect, see Summary table´ columns O-S row 4. The main causes are the following ideologies or similar attitudes in question: egocentrism, individualism / collectivism / non- / conformism. 170 These characteristics, as also mentioned below, are found mainly in the schizophrenic psychoses. 148 Aspect 5: Spirit, Body, Mind The Its change spirit, body and mind: P becomes de-spiritualized, lifeless somatized, mis-inspirited ideologized loss and replacement ↓ spirit, body, mind → loss of spirit, body, mind ~ strange spirit, body, mind ↑ hyper-forms, ideologies There is not only a negation and change of mind, soul and body, but also their reversal, division and fusion. For further personal consequences in this aspect, see Summary table´ columns O-S row 5. The main causes are the following ideologies or similar attitudes in question: spiritism, psychologism, healthism, materialism, idealism. Aspect 6: Gender, Love, Sex The Its change gender, love and sex: P becomes neutered feminized, masculinized sexualized loss and replacement ↓ sex, love, gender → without sex, without love ~ sex, love, gender e.g., spare-sex, spare-love ↑ hyper-forms (e.g., excessive sex) The Its in this aspect represent above all new foreign determining "genders" or gender roles. The Its appear mainly castrating or sexisting. To be more precise: The It has a castrating and negligent effect or too masculinizing or too femininizing or too sexualizing. There is a loss of actual sexuality, love or sexuality. The person becomes too neutral, sterile, asexual or hypersexualized or too masculine, too feminine or too hermaphrodite. The resulting deficits are partly compensated by substitute sexuality or love, by inverted gender roles. There is not only a negation and change of the mentioned aspects, but also their reversal, division and fusion. For further personal consequences in this aspect, see Summary table´ columns O-S row 6. The main causes are the following ideologies or similar attitudes in question: macho / feminism / sexism / women- / men- hostile or absolutizing ideologies. (As a side effect possible through most ideologies). Aspect 7: Emotions The Its change our emotions/feelings: P becomes unsatisfied numbed, frightened doped loss and replacement ↓ conditions, emotions → apathy/ insensibility, sorrow ~ compensatory-conditions, -emotions, inversed fear ↑ hyper-forms like a thrill, kick, etc. The Its determine our feelings. They forbid us to be happy without them. The It says, “Only with me, only when you have me, you can be happy.” And we can't just instantly and directly abolish the tyranny of the It and feel like we actually do are. → kicks, mini-manias also in everyday life and the opposite: depression, anxiety. There is not only a negation and change of feelings, but also a reversal and their division and fusion. For further personal consequences in this aspect, see Summary table columns O-S row 7. 149 The main causes are the following ideologies or similar attitudes in question: hedonism, optimism / pessimism, materialism/ idealism esp. romanticism. Aspect 8: Will The Its change our will and motivations: P becomes demotivated mis-motivated hyper-motivated loss and replacement ↓ will, voluntariness, goal → abulia/ lack of will ~ mis-aspiration, false will, addiction ↑ hyper-forms e.g., hyperbulia, also addictions. Here is also the problem of voluntariness. There is not only a negation and change of the various forms of will and motivations, but also a reversal of them and their splitting and fusion. For further personal consequences in this aspect, see Summary table columns O-S row 8. The main causes are the following ideologies or similar attitudes in question: Voluntarism, partly Intentionalism / “no-go” ideologies, existential philosophies et al. Aspect 9: Ownership The Its change our possession, give and take: P becomes exploited indulged supersaturated loss and replacement ↓ ownership → lack, defaults ~ false owning ↑ hyper-forms: overloading, hyperphagia. Patient: “I am overwhelmed and buried again and again and have to dig my way out every day.” There is not only a negation and change of the various forms of ownership, but also their reversal, division and merger. For further personal consequences in this aspect, see Summary table columns O-S row 9. The main causes are the following ideologies or similar attitudes in question: capitalism, mercantilism, asceticism. See also Erich Fromm: Being and having. Aspect 10: Power and Abilities The Its change our power and abilities: P becomes weakened, overwhelmed mis-conditioned hyper-, mis-exponentiated loss and replacement ↓ possibility, power → powerlessness, weakness ~ mis-conditioning, false ability ↑ hyper-forms e.g., “omnipotence” There is not only a negation and change of the various forms, but also their reversal, splitting and fusion. For further personal consequences in this aspect, see Summary table columns O-S row 10. The main causes are the following ideologies or similar attitudes in question: imperialism, behaviorism, pacifism et al. 150 Aspect 11 Order, Necessity mozTocId92840 The Its change our order and necessities: P becomes disordered disorganized forced, compelled loss and replacement ↓ order, law → disorder, chaos ~ false order, laws, necessities ↑ hyper-forms e.g., determination, being fixed It is not only the negation and change of the various forms, but also to their reversal, splitting and merging. P² must maintain + fA and avoid −fA and nothing. If P² does not achieve this goal, she will have to work harder until she collapses. For further personal consequences in this aspect, see Summary table columns O-S row 11. The main causes are the following ideologies or similar attitudes in question: dogmatism, bureaucratism, technocracy / anarchism. Aspect 12: Obligations, Orientation The Its change our obligations and orientations: P becomes disorientated, distracted; mis-regulated, manipulated tempted loss and replacement ↓ direction → lack of direction ~ mis-direction ↑ hyper-forms e.g., moralism At present, a 'great distraction' through a wide variety of media plays a special role. Result: loss of orientation, overview, and disorientation; Or: one-sided, fixed orientations. There is not only a negation and change of the various forms, but also their reversal, splitting and fusion. For further personal consequences in this aspect, see Summary table columns O-S row 12. The main causes are the following ideologies or similar attitudes in question: moralism ("duty men"), legalism / anti-moralism et al. Aspect 13: Rights, Allowances The Its change our rights and allowances P becomes blocked, inhibited mis-regulated, -controlled un- / hypercontrolled loss and replacement ↓ rights, control, freedom → loss of control, inhibition ~ compensatory-freedom/ -control ↑ hyper-forms: hyper-freedom, hyper-control The resp. It inhibits, constricts / disengages, excessively exaggerates, does not regulate, it fails, also seduces, turns in circles. P² becomes uninhibited, uncontrolled / disenfranchised, restricted, inflexible, uptight, overcontrolled. External and internal totalitarian systems also create unlawful spaces. External systems: if, for example, someone in a totalitarian system opposed its ideology, he entered a lawless room, that is, he became disenfranchised. Inwardly / intrapersonally: if P² violates a sA / super-ego, then she no longer has the right to mercy and the also unreasonable punishment follows. 151 There is not only a negation and change of the various forms, but also their reversal, splitting and fusion. For further personal consequences in this aspect, see Summary table columns O-S row 13. The main causes are the following ideologies or similar attitudes into question: liberalism, laissezfaire views / restrictive ideologies. ~ Lenin: "Trust is good, control is better." Aspect 14: Creativity The Its change our creativity: P becomes sterilized falsely caused overgrown loss and replacement ↓ creativity → lack of creativity e.g., stereotypes ~ false creations, ghosts ↑ hyper-forms: over-production, excrescences There is not only a negation and change of the various forms, but also their reversal, splitting and fusion. For further personal consequences in this aspect, see Summary table columns O-S row 14. The main causes are the following ideologies or similar attitudes in question: creationism / conservatism, eclecticism. Aspect 15: Actions/ Behavior The Its change our actions and behavior: P becomes paralyzed, inactivated mistreated over-activated loss and replacement ↓ success, experience → inactivity ~ wrong doing and not doing, substitute behavior, fuss ↑ tension, hyper-forms e.g., hyper-activity, hyper-kinesis KW: damned to be successful. Example: P² in the hamster wheel. Here also: disturbed interplay of activity and passivity, work and rest or reversal of activity and passivity or of active and passive. Why? The sA do not let you calm down or paralyze you. For further personal consequences in this aspect, see Summary table columns O-S row 15. The main causes are the following ideologies or similar attitudes: activism, utilitarianism, pragmatism /partly consumism, hedonism, coolness. Aspect 16: Information Disorder of information, processing and emergence. P becomes not informed misinformed, lied to too sophisticated, precocious loss and replacement ↓ Information, certainty → defective vision ~ false information ↑ hyper-forms e.g., isolated knowledge, one-sided information If the It experiences no resistance or is not corrected, it transmits its information to the carrier. There is not only a negation and change of the various forms, but also their splitting, fusion, and reversal. Thus, for example, according to the "law of the formation of opposites", an absolutized rationality (including scientificity *) will generate irrationality. Being overwhelmed with information (hyperinformation) currently plays a major role. Result: counter-regulation with a call for the great 152 simplifiers. For further personal consequences in this aspect, see Summary table columns O-S row 16. The main causes are the following ideologies or similar attitudes in question: rationalism, scientism, gnosticism / skepticism, anti-rationalism. Aspect 17: Presentation, Expressions The Its change our presentations and expressions: P becomes suppressed, masked deceived too exposed loss and replacement ↓ expression, openness → mutism, reticence ~ false expressions, e.g., language, travesties, enemy images ↑ hyper-forms e.g., hyper-mime There is not only a negation and change of the various forms, but also their reversal, splitting and fusion. For further personal consequences in this aspect, see Summary table columns O-S row 17. The main causes are following ideologies or similar attitudes in question: exhibitionism, occultism, esotericism et al. Aspect 18: Meanings, Relevance The Its change our meanings and relevance: P becomes neglected misinterpreted, despised overrated loss and replacement ↓ Meanings, values, dignity → loss of them ~ disorder of self-esteem ↑ hyper-forms: e.g., overvalue, delusion There is not only a negation and change of the various forms, but also their reversal, splitting and fusion. For further personal consequences in this aspect, see Summary table columns O-S row 18. The main causes are the following ideologies or similar attitudes: Elitist thinking and behavior, society with wrong values (e.g. code of honor) / without values, egalitarianism et al. Aspect 19: Past The Its change our past and memory: P becomes infantilized mismarked conventionalized loss and replacement ↓ past → lack of experience, immaturity ~ false memories, false past ↑ hyper-forms e.g., isolated memories, hypermnesia The Its can act like `sleepers´ that are resting for decades until they become active all of a sudden. There is not only a negation and change of the various forms, but also their reversal, splitting and fusion. For further personal consequences in this aspect, see Summary table columns O-S row 19. Possible ideologies: conservatism, empiricism, traditionalism, also modernism. 153 Aspect 20: Present, Time The Its change our present and time: P becomes put off falsely calmed down rushed loss and replacement ↓ Time, calmness → loss of time, of calmness, of peace ~ false dealing/conceiving with time and present ↑ hyper-forms: compulsion, harassment There is not only a negation and change of the various forms, but also their reversal, splitting and fusion. Example: “All of humanity's problems stem from man's inability to sit quietly in a room alone ...There is nothing more unbearable for a human being than being in complete calmness, without distractions, business and tasks. Then the person can feel the nothingness, the forlornness, the dependence, the powerlessness, the emptiness.”(Blaise Pascal) 171 For further personal consequences in this aspect, see Summary table columns O-S row 20. Possible ideologies: Carpe-Diem-Ideology, modernism, actualism et al. Aspect 21: Future The Its change our future and hope: P becomes unprepared mis-prepared “utopianized” loss and replacement ↓ perspective → hopelessness ~ fear of future ↑ hyper-forms: Utopia There is not only a negation and change of the various forms, but also their reversal, splitting and fusion. E.g., self-fulfilling prophecy, progress trap. For further personal consequences in this aspect, see Summary table columns O-S row 21. Possible ideologies: Utopianism, progressivism /apocalypse, fatalistic ideologies. Aspect 22: Mistake The Its change our mistakes and correctnesses: P becomes loss and replacement uncorrected ↓ correction, compensation → loss of corrections/compensations mis-corrected ~ too much or false guilt condemned, over-corrected ↑ hyper-forms: over-correctness There is not only a negation and change of the various forms, but also their reversal, splitting and fusion. For further personal consequences in this aspect, see Summary table columns O-S row 22. Possible ideologies: Perfectionism, aestheticism, also: Laissez-faire-ideologies. 171 Blaise Pascal cit. by Lorenz Marti: Wie schnürt ein Mystiker seine Schuhe?; Herder 2006, p. 92. 154 Aspect 23: Protection, Defense The Its change our protection and defense: It is P becomes aggressive, sadistic falsely protecting unprotected traumatized, threatened pacifistic, masochistic armored loss and replacement ↓ protection, peace → loss of protection, vulnerability ~ many defense mechanisms ↑ hyper-forms: armoring For further personal consequences in this aspect, see Summary table columns O-S row 23. Possible ideologies: pacifism/militarism172. The disorder/weakness of personal defense is one of the main topics in psycho-analysis. Due to (almost) all the Its, the defense becomes either a) weakened or broken off or b) alienated, displaced, distorted or c) exaggerated such as an armor/hardening. Those disorders of defense happen in parts, where P does not experience unconditional love and acceptance. P will feel threatened by any person or situation that questions his/her sA because he/she has identified with this sA. Therefore P would take it personally if anything questions his/her sA. Further explanations, see in the segment 'Defense and anticathexis´ later. Disorders in the defense-system of the person: It is either too open or alienated and hardened. 173 172 Pacifism and militarism resp. excessively peacefulness and aggressiveness are typical opposites that do not weaken each other but, at a certain point, intensify or alternate (turning into the opposite). You experience that with couples, groups or also societies. 173 Thus Henri Maldiney understands psychosis as the result of a collapse of openness in the face of the event. (By (Samuel Thoma). 155 Illustration of a Single Second-Rate Personal Part (P²) 23 22 2 3 21 I 4 20 5 +sS 19 18 If there is (for example) a person, such as the father, who becomes +absolute for me, then there will be a new It within me, that is made up as follows: In the center there is the It “father”, symbolized by the Yin- 1 24 6 ‒sS II 7 III 17 8 9 16 15 10 14 13 12 11 Yang ☯ * - split into +sS on top [sS = strange Self] and repressed ‒sS below, both with their inverse sides. (0 part is not shown). That It has its own territory that has been created like a new strange system around the center “father”. Therefore, we have a new strange Absolute resp. Self, surrounded by spheres that are subordinated. We have already found that a new Absolute/ Self affects more or less all aspects of its sphere. IV Especially the ones that are the closest to “father” will be affected. On the other hand, every other differentiation aspect would also have to resonate. That means that whenever that It is activated it is always about “father” or the father image within me but also about all the other connected aspects. That, on the other hand, means: It is also about the past, the present, the future, gender, meanings, information, and so on - eventually about everything that was represented by “father”. To put in other words: All aspects that are dominated by the It will be changed more or less. Especially those aspects that are the most similar to It, will be changed the most. But there will also be the mentioned repressed ‒sS: repressed antipathy against the father (because the own Self is being neglected)! *In my opinion, the yin-yang symbol in the middle represents the characteristics of sS/It very well. Which Its Cause What and How? • All Its do not only change our being but along with that they also change our worldview and the way we experience the world. The person becomes primarily like his/her It/sA and is only secondarily itself. 174 They change P according to the all-or-nothing-principle, black-or-white, pro-or-contra, + or ‒. We saw that +sA, ‒sA and 0 are three parts of the same “thing”, the It. In the beginning, it mostly changes the person towards the strange positive. That means that the person feels subjectively very well, identical, strong, competent and so on, without actually being it. At the same time, the person is increasingly frightened and threatened by the contrary ‒ It/sA, without there being a threat that is actually so bad. • The +It (resp. the +sA part) may give the person an absolutely positive feeling: 174 Otherwise, P becomes to contrary, or to 0. See later too. 156 A feeling of absoluteness, self-awareness, self-assurance, total love, feeling of an actual positive being and life, sense, feeling of power, feeling of I-strength, freedom, wealth, health, eternity, the feeling of an exact orientation, clear differentiation of good and bad, precise knowledge of morals and values, exact differentiation of who is a friend and who is an enemy and so on - all to an extent which is not equal to reality but we would like to live with it. The +Its promise us what we long for in the depth of our soul without actually keeping the promise. They change our personality so that we see everything in their light, act in their name to receive what they promise. But they deceive us and we have to pay a price for that. On the other hand, they do not deceive us totally. That is because they are neither absolutely positive nor absolutely negative but ambivalent. • The ‒Its (resp. the ‒sA parts) threaten us with what we fear the most. Usually, that is the opposite of the +It-promises. They threaten us with death, sickness, powerlessness, loneliness, poverty, withdrawal of love, enemyship - without there being a corresponding reason for it. They present themselves as unbeatable enemies, as a devil, as ‒A. They also change our personality so that we become frightened, too careful, fearful and so on. Here, we also have to pay a high price, which becomes even higher the more the ‒It is actually relatively positive. But they help us against the disadvantages of +Its. • The 0 Its (resp. the 0 parts), that appear to be like an empty face compared to the other two It-parts, negate the personal aspects. Or they create a contrary false All/ everything. But they help us in the form of repression. (See also `All-and-nothing´ and `Sacrificial-dynamics'). We already realized that all Its have three parts and therefore act in many different (contradicting) ways. • Whenever contradicting Its are developed, they confuse us because they are paradoxical, tend to divide and cause double bonds. The person faces very different and contradicting information and signals given by the same It (person, situation). Looking at the arguments of two opposing P² (resp. their Its) from a second-rate perspective (from W²'s point of view), both are right in their arguments. That fact is the reason for many conflicts, such as the ones in marriage. Every marriage counselor can tell stories about how frustrating a discussion can be in that case - especially because both sides are right - but they are only relatively right, since most of the time, the higher, first-rate view is missing: the view that allows the person to understand the other person's position. | Examples for contradicting It-effects: Helpers* cause hyper-help or helplessness or indifference. Moralists* cause hyper-morality or immorality or indifference. Right-wing extremists* cause more right-wing extremists or left-wing extremists or indifferent people. Asceticism* causes more asceticism or gluttony or indifference. Altruism* causes/supports new exaggerated altruism or egoism or indifference. Self-centeredness* causes/supports new selfishness or altruism or indifference. Truth-fanaticism* causes new exaggerated truth-fanaticism or lies or indifference, etc.175 175 The * is to reiterate that it is absolutized. 157 ALL Fig. The main effects of three opposing Its and their parts on the person. (Dashed lines represent opposite effects, solid lines represent equal effects.). P is a cue ball of various It effects. The Its are each other´s enemies or friends but they stick together against P and ultimately exploit P. Method: carrot and stick. The ‒sA (right), for example, makes P much afraid and drives P into the arms of his opponent, the + sA (left). NICHTS This appears as a savior because it is the opposite of the ‒sA. P jumps out of the frying pan into the fire and must bleed everywhere. For more remarks, see: Opposites, Fusions and Negations, `The Opposites in the Realities´. Strange-I (Ego) Synonyms of strange I: Ego, second-rate I, I². The explication refers to the strange-I, as well as the strange you (you²) and strange we². In the following paragraphs, I want to discuss the emergence of I² under the influence of It/sA briefly. The effects of the It/sA on the I are the same as the ones on the person (as discussed above). If you transfer the main effects given onto the 'I', the following picture will be created: P causes a misabsolutization or adopts one from the outside (mostly unknowingly). With that, something becomes all or nothing, pro or contra, positive or negative in the absolute understanding. These parts create a strange I (Ego) but also a contra-strange-I (Anti-Ego) and a non-I. This process, which at first only took place on the mental-spiritual plane, is then "materialized", that is, to something material as an It. Now, the I is dominated by the It and therefore the I becomes more like the It - while the It becomes like the I. As I said, this process is usually not conscious since strange Absolutes resp. strange Selves have usually already established in childhood or, as I believe, even prenatal - and we are identified with them and they dominate and change us and generate strange Ego-spheres in us. Fortunately, those changes are only partial, which is an important fact for therapy. As mentioned multiple times before, it is also important to know that the strange Selves and their Egos are not solely negative but that they also have positive parts. They are more or less ambivalent, paradoxical and illogical. They are the main components of various mental disorders. (Differentiate: The Ego as a strange Absolute). 158 The Structure of the Strange-I (Ego) Classification: strange-I (I²/ Ego) DIMENSIONS A my strange Self (sS) my sS-cores my sS-exterior R my R² 0 Non-Ego > Not I anymore 7 DM-aspects strange 7 dimensions of I² pro/ + pro/+strange-I = +Ego, Hyper-Ego contra/ − contra/ ‒strange-I = ‒Ego, Anti-Ego 0 Non-Ego ('ego') my sacrificed parts Sides their front-, reversed-, and 0-sides DIFFERENTIATIONS B Being of I² (my strange being) L Life of the I² (my strange life) Q Qualities of the I² (my strange characteristics) C Connections of the I² (my strange contexts) I as strange subject my strange objects 23 Aspects e.g., I² own, I² work … resp. my property², my work², my situations², my possibilities², my belongings², my rules², my obligations², my values² and so on are strange. Notes: Here more about the used → Classification. For a change, I use `Ego´ or I² for the strange I. (² means second-rate). • Hyper-Ego = Ego, dominated by pro,+ sA. 176 • Anti-Ego = Ego, dominated by contra, ‒ sA. • Non-Ego (Non-I) = Ego, dominated by nothingness. 'Ego' means strange-I (I²). 'Ego' does not indicate an egoistic person but a person whose I is controlled by an It/sA and therefore lives in an unfavorable situation - especially under the pressure of being in charge of everything and not being able to rest. That I² is constantly switching positions between the three parts of the It ( , ‒, 0), what I also call `imprisoned in the psychical Bermuda Triangle´. However, it has only a relative role for the first-rate I-self. Summary of the Personal Changes With the establishment of strange Selves resp. Its, something becomes too absolute (absolutistic) and the person becomes relative or irrelevant; something becomes too unconditional and the person only conditional; something becomes too primary, too important and the person too secondary, too unimportant; something becomes too independent and the person becomes dependent; something becomes the center and the person becomes a minor role; something becomes a subject and the person its object; something controls the person and the person does not control something anymore; 176 Hyper-ego has a different meaning here than Freud´s Super-ego. 159 something becomes too real and the person is no longer real; something strange becomes personal and what is actually personal becomes material, less personal, dehumanized, dividable; something lifeless becomes alive and the affected person becomes lifeless, an object is humanized and the person becomes an object. One can also formulate: This is a “victory of the Relative over the Absolute”, a “victory of matter over spirit”, “victory of objects over subjects”, “victory of things over the person”, “victory of the strange over the Self ”, “victory of the splitting over the unity”, “victory of dependence over independence”, “victory of It over I”. (Fortunately, the “victories” are only partially and temporary.) Attentive readers have probably already realized that some of the mentioned changes represent basic patterns of mental disorders. Specially: The priority of the human towards the objects is lost. That means: many people did not grow up as subjects, as unique individuals but as objects that have to fulfill specific assignments and roles. Fortunately, the inversion of person and It is only relatively, even if the person experiences it as absolutely. 177 Concretely that indicates that the person never turns fully into the It, never becomes an object or a function (of the It) entirely. Vice versa, the internalized strange Absolute (resp. It) never fully becomes the person, subject nor comes truly alive. There will always be 'healthy parts' remaining within us that are too strong, even if we are very ill or manipulated. It is a philosophical or religious question, why it is that way. We will come back to that question at a later point. The Juxtaposition of Different Realities It is normal for our world that there are many, very different and contradicting realities. That also applies to the person and the psyche, although we usually expect that there is only one will, one mindset, one feeling (and so on) for a certain person regarding a certain topic. That juxtaposition of various, very different realities, has always awaked great interest of humanity. 178 - As an example, the doctrine of the two kingdoms by Luther. - Kierkegaard posited the human being to be a synthesis of opposing elements, of “the infinite and the finite, and the temporal and eternal, of freedom and necessity”. 179 - Boris Pasternak: “Everything that happens takes place, not only on earth, in which the dead are buried but somewhere else, that some call the Kingdom of God, others history, and still others something else again.” 180 As stated several times, I distinguish between a first-rate and many second-rate realities. Typical of the second-rate realities is the juxtaposition of opposites, which are experienced 177 Absolutely is only the confusion of + A and -A. For the sake of change, I use different terms for a situation. For example, The terms 'worlds', 'realities', or 'systems' are essentially synonymous. They can be personal or non-personal. 179 https://academyofideas.com/2015/05/introduction-to-kierkegaard-the-religious-solution/ , 2019. 180 Boris Pasternak: „Doctor Zhivago“. 178 160 as incompatible. Overall, WPI 181 does not consist of purely first-rate or purely second-rate realities but a mixture of both. Both forms of reality are relatively opposite. (There is only an absolute opposite between +A and ‒A). Therefore it is normal that a person experiences him-/herself and the existent reality as relatively strange.182 It would not be normal if a person experiences reality only as one actual reality because our world, as well as people, are also 'built' in strange structures. In this sense, there are double-worlds resp. plural-worlds. This applies to both personal and nonpersonal realities/worlds: e.g. Two (or several) different beings, two kinds of life, two happiness, two misfortunes, two different contexts, etc., which, as said, are not completely separated. Unambiguous are only +A and ‒A, although that is not provable. Everything else is relatively exact-inexact; only describable relatively, relationally or comparatively. (About the juxtaposition of opposite sA/It and their dynamic see Double-Bind Theory.) Comparison of First-Rate Reality (W¹) and Second-Rate Realities (W²)183 Note: The following characterization of the second-rate realities is ideal-typical, for these W² are always permeated by more or less 1st reality. An overview of the nature of second-rate realities can be found in the `Summary table´ in column N. For simplicity, I write sometimes instead of first-rate only first or ¹, and instead of second-rate only second or ². There are only the most important aspects presented in the following listing: • The second-rate realities are strange, non-actual and more unrealistic than W¹. W¹ is the realistic, actual reality. The first positive world can also be called heaven and the first negative world hell. • The second-rate worlds are intermediate worlds. They touch heaven on the one side and on the other side they touch hell. • W² is complicated, divided and also too homogeneous. W¹ is more an infinitely varied whole. • The second-rate worlds have three divided main dimensions: +*, ‒* and 0* resp. pro*, contra* and zero*. The +first world only has one determined main dimension, the +A¹. • The R-parts in W² have to function. Otherwise, they will be replaced immediately. The first world is undivided and integrates its relative-sphere, which is also undivided but varied. R will not be replaced if it does not work. It is integrated and protected in a bigger wholeness. 181 WPI means World, person and I. W. Blankenburg called the `loss of natural self-evidentness' as a sign of schizophrenia (1971), but that affects us all since we have lost the paradise and not just `schizophrenics´. As a sign of schizophrenia, one should only ascertain a predominant loss of natural self-evidentness (corresponding to a predominant loss of the first-rate Self in the sense of this work). 183 W is here also for WPI alltogether. W steht hier auch für WPI insgesamt. 182 161 • In W², everything has multiple meanings, is multicausal and so on. Only the first reality is definite, unambiguous and unicausal in the end. • In W² dependence reigns while W¹ is determined by freedom. • The It/sA of the second realities act mainly disturbingly and negatively. The +A of the first reality can be experienced as negatively now and then but always follows a positive goal. • The second realities, are each other´s enemies or false friends or do not care. In the first reality, the elements are friendly with each other although they can be critical. • In the second realities, the things and functionalities dominate. The first reality is dominated by a lively and voluntary spirit, also called the Holy Spirit. • In the second realities, there is much fear, jealousy and competition. They can be compared to armies, where orders are made that have to be followed or else there will be punishment. In the first reality love dominates. There are no commands but orientation. It is not made up in a strict nor in a hierarchic way. • The second realities mostly work like machines. Laws and rules are common, comparable to the ones in physics/mechanics (or there is chaos). The priority of the first reality is freedom, personality and creativity. • The second realities are opposed to the first and cannot integrate it. The first reality can integrate the second realities and tries to correct them without fighting them. The divine permeates all worldly things (except the ‒A), without being identical with it. E.g. Jesus has gone to the last corner of the world (W²), without being equal to it. • W² needs “food” and supplies because their sA are hungry. The sA, as centers of WPI² always want to have/receive. They are pseudo-autonomous but also hyper-dependent. +A (God, love) also gives without being asked and is autonomous. W¹ is satiated. • W² has reversed sides. W¹ has no reversed sides. • One symbol of the second worlds is the ellipse to indicate the unroundness. The yin-yang symbol  indicates a yet balanced center of second-rate realities. The first world can be symbolized with a circle or a sphere. There are fluent lines and every point on the sphere is a center. There is no front and no back. • The dynamics in W² are determined by strange Absolutes (sA). Those Absolutes tend to create short-term highs in the beginning, followed by long-term lows. The dynamics in W¹ are determined by +A. On transition to W¹, there is often a short down in the beginning, which usually cause some resistance, followed by a stable positive phase. • In W² there are only a few nuances, small ranges. Everything is determined by the all-ornothing-principle. In W¹, there is a coexistence of the relative-parts. There are a large number of nuances. W¹ integrates all relative-parts, also the sA. 162 R²-area +A R¹-area –A The first-rate reality, which ranges from +A to ‒A, represents a continuum with countless nuances. + sA – sA The relative-sphere in W² between a +sA and a ‒sA however, shows no continuum but only black and white, resp. all-or-nothing parts. About Terms and Language of Second-Rate Worlds Atheistic worldviews mainly describe second-rate worlds. For example: Freud, Marx, Darwin, Buddhism, partly even humanistic ideologies. They describe the world mainly as materialistic, mechanical, dialectic, or dualistic and deterministic. The focus is on the relativistic or the absolutistic. They no longer see the transcendence, the mysterious, the wonderful, the creative, the immeasurable, the spiritual because it is not to catch directly and is not provable. Max Weber called it the “demystification of the modern world”. Examples: Psychoanalysis understands the characteristics of a person only as the existence of second-rate realities, or second-rate personal aspects. The three main instances of Freud (Ego, Super-Ego and Id) are instances of an alienated or ill person. They are defined accordingly. S. Freud uses typically many mechanical terms such as the "psychical apparatus" and the human being as an "object". Further authors, who use that “language of the second-rate realities” are - as mentioned Marx (“The human being is a product of the social circumstances”) and other materialists or behavior therapists, that view the person mainly under the aspect of the stimulus-responsemodel. Language and terms of the first-rate reality are adequate and clear. However, as I said, our world is not only made out of the first-rate reality and is therefore not definitely definable. How Do I Recognize Second-Rate Realities? Usually, second-rate realities can be recognized by absolute obligations (`musts´), which gives us humans a temporary feeling of orientation and safety but overstraining in the long run. These obligations are usually caused by sA, that control and force us. Are not most of the tragedies based on the feeling of such obligations, the feeling that we definitely have to do a certain thing which leads us into radicalization, absolutization and greed? It can also be compared to a kind of blackmailing, as in: “You have to do that, otherwise I will take your +sA and replace it with a ‒sA.” Relative problems are then taken personally. Especially in conflicts or war, everything becomes extreme which makes the sA visible. There is a certain point where it is always about all-or-nothing, pro or contra. At that point, desertion is hardly possible for the person. The person does not have much of a choice anymore. The situation of a mentally ill person is similar. 163 "Advantages" of Second-Rate Realities due to Strange Selves - The strange Self (sS) can replace the Self in a certain kind and we seem to have direct access to that. - A strange Self can cause +hyper-effects, even if one must pay a very high price for that. - A strange Self promises an absolute power of control over the world, other people and the Absolute. - With a strange Self, the disadvantages of another strange Self can be balanced. “Disadvantages” of the First-Rate Reality due to the Actual Self In contrast to the advantages of the strange-Selves, the “disadvantages” of the actual Self are listed here: Although the first-rate reality includes a +Self without any cost, it also means that: - The Self cannot be increased any further, otherwise, it becomes an inflated strange Self. - Besides the possibility of actively choosing such Self, one does not have any other kind of control over the Self because it controls itself. The sS appears to be controllable even though it is really not. - The unconditional right of self-determination which is part of the Self also includes selfresponsibility. We like the first, the second is reluctant. - All people have this actual Self if they choose it. That means that no person has the right to higher themselves over another person. - The Self is part of transcendence, God and final subjects such as death. We like to repress that. - We must also say farewell to the idea that good deeds would have necessarily good consequences and bad deeds necessarily bad effects. Inverted, Paradoxical World All of us, healthy or ill, live in inverted inner and outer worlds full of paradoxes. The wife of the Russian author Lew Tolstoi writes in her diary on 10/25/1886: “It sounds strange but the last two months, when Lev Nikolaevich was ill, were the last happy time for me. I was fortunate to be able to nurture him day and night had a task whose meaning could not be doubted, the only one that I am capable of sacrificing myself for the loved one. I was all the happier the more burdensome I felt.” But that kind of luck could only be temporary and finally made room for depression and hate. The more Tolstroi's wife sacrificed herself for him, the more she had to hate him because through that kind of love she bled dry. That hate-love accompanied her for her entire life. When he was ill she could be happy for two reasons: First because she could fulfill her ideal of self-sacrifice. Second because her aggressive feelings towards him were satisfied by his illness. Such as Goethe, Hölderlin also complained, how hard it is to bear luck. Apostle Paul writes that he has badly acted even though he did not want to. L. Völker published a book entitled “Come, holy melancholy” with poems by various poets 164 that describe the advantages of sadness and depression.184 The contradiction of preferring the negative to the positive appears in many different variations. They range from everyday paradoxes and contradictions to severe self-torture and self-destruction that still seem positive. They always appear mysterious and shocking, fascinating and terrible at the same time. Although we promised to do better next time, we repeat our wrong behavior because of these strange inner powers. How does it happen that we prefer the negative over the positive? Why do we destroy something we love, or love something although we hate it? Why do we sometimes do the opposite of what we want to do? How can there be opposite feelings at the same time? Why do some people love others that are exploitative and humiliating? Why does a woman marry a drinker again, even though the first marriage was a martyrium? Why do we seek problems instead of being happy that there are presently no problems? Why do we even seek the sorrow and fear the luck? How come that people want to be sick than healthy, better dead than alive, dependent than independent? How do we understand that people feel pleasure when they are beaten? Why are there people that hold on to a craze that is obviously absurd? Hundreds of such questions could be asked. In the depth, they question all our Self resp. our absolutnesses and can only be answered there. A short answer: If the +A or the Self has a priority over the Relative, then there are no such contradictions. Only relative contradictions can exist which are resolved in the larger context of +A/Self. However, when the Relative replaces the Absolute or the Self, reverse and more or less paradoxical world is created. Positive things like health become negative and negative ones like illness become positive and so on. The Same in Different Second-Rate Systems (WPI²) One finds the same phenomena in second-rate general and second-rate personal spheres (P²). Here and there we find similarities: external and internal oppression, coercion, persecution, external and internal imprisonment, here dictatorship and there depression etc. The difference is that P² is his own offender and victim at the same time. Commanding voices and all other totalitarian characteristics can be found both in the person concerned and in a particular outside world. Many patients adapted such totalitarian instances from their environment. There is also a parallel between the thoughts of a mentally ill person and the language of a totalitarian system, as e.g., Victor Klemperer described in his book "LTI". 184 Edit. by Ludwig Völker: „Komm, heilige Melancholie“ Reclam, Stuttgart 1983. 165 DYNAMICS OF STRANGE REALITIES General Dynamics Principles • The first and the strange, second-rate realities (WPI¹ / WPI²) have very different dynamics.185 • The dynamics of WPI¹ or WPI² are determined by their Absolutes. • The structures and dynamics of the first-rate WPI are clear and uniquely. • The structures and dynamics of WPI² are ambiguous. WPI² has two main dynamics and two main results: all² or nothing². If we differentiate all² again, we will have three main dynamics with three main results (all) pro² / (all) contra² and 0². • So, in the second-rate dynamics, we can find 1. strengthening (amplification), 2. opposite, contradicting dynamics (similar Newton's third law: action = reaction) and 3. “0 dynamics” (standstill). • Pro-, Contra-, and 0 dynamics can change abruptly turn to the opposite (→ Reversal into the opposite) or "mix" (Similar "drive mix" by S. Freud). • One finds these dynamics in both social and individual processes. The paradoxical character of the Its makes it possible that multiple systems sometimes facing each other as enemies, sometimes act with each other and in a third case, annul each other. Autonomous Phases of the It (Timing) It/sA186 are (partly) autopoietic systems and have their own lives (such as parasites). They tend to decay. Alone they have only a temporary existence. They need a constant supply of the host to keep alive. Its/sA are based on the principle of all-or-nothing. If they cannot be the all, they will not work. At first, they try to be all the best for the host (system, human), to seduce them to live from them. That only lasts as long as the host plays along. But the host (usually us humans) believes not to be able to survive without the Its/sA - since they are of top priority for him. But in reality¹, the Its/sA are more dependent on the host/ the human than the human on the It/sA. If the hosting system does not “feed” an It/sA anymore, or frees itself from the It/sA, the It/sA is unfortunately not automatically dead. Since its survival is the priority, every It/sA sacrifices its own Relatives, its own “people”, ruthlessly like a dictator. The own “people” even sacrifice themselves for the It/sA since it is their Absolute. Those 185 Hints: 1. I use the terms `strange´ and 'second-rate' (²) synonymously. 2. Where it is clear that it is a second-rate issue, I leave away the label `²' frequently for the sake of simplicity. 186 sA and It I use synonymously here. I repeat: It consists of three opposing sA (+ sA, ‒sA and 0). I write `sA/ It´ if I want to emphasize the strange character of the Absolute and `It/sA´ if it does not matter. 166 mechanisms may appear within a society or within an individual. More details can be found in: `Symbiosis and parasitism between It and P²´, Phases of the Interaction of P² and It. Interactions in second-rate Realities Note: for second-rate world resp. reality stands W². General Principles • Like the second-rate dynamics in general, the interactions in W² are also determined by their respective Absolutes (sA /It). • The +A is always effective in the W², even if it does not dominate. +A and its +R¹ are related to the sA/It in relative opposition, so that, as in W² themselves, this also creates a latent long-term conflict (with continuous stress). Therefore it can come at any time to a "revolt" of the Relatives against their oppressive Absolutes. Examples: a rebellion of the oppressed against their oppressors (e.g. revolutions), a rebellion of the masses against elites, a rebellion of the truth against the lies, etc. (psychologically as well as socially). • Different sA or Its and their systems have the same, or opposite, or 0 direction of impact and may strengthen, fight or annul each other. • Larger complexes arise whenever two or many Its are connected. They usually occur as pacts, enmities or indifferent complexes. They are rigid but may turn into the opposite quickly. (→ Reversal into the opposite) • The interaction of the It/sA and the maintenance of their balance always requires sacrifices. Overview of Possible Interactions in W² Similar to the interaction possibilities between different It (→ Opposites, fusions and negations) all possible interactions between 2 W² resp. different systems² are shown in the following graphic. (Here I only give an overview, which I discuss in more detail regarding personal interactions in the section 'Complex personal dynamics and relationship disorders'. as well as in the unabridged version.) The figure shows the interaction-possibilities between two It dominated W² units. Each of the W² has 3 parts with 3 sides. Each of the W² has 3 parts with 3 sides, here represented by 3 triangles with 3 different connotations. (→ `It as nine-sided triad´).On the left, there are two opposing W², the valences of which are interlocked like gears and on the right two W², whose valences are commutated. In both cases, the two W² can form a pact, or opposites or annulments will arise as soon as the connotation of a part changes. 167 W² can be anything psychical relevant, determined by an It. These can be certain 'worlds', persons, I (WPI), or parts of them. As said, I will discuss the personal interactions later. I believe, however, that the interactions in larger systems follow the same principles. Example: Within certain societies, certain ideologies will complement and strengthen each other, or they may be in opposition to each other. This creates both pacts / alliances as well as hostilities / conflicts and both side by side in equilibrium, depending on how the corresponding parts are connoted. They are rigid and unstable at the same time, and can always form new constellations at any time, or even turn into their opposite. Pro-sA for `Absolutisms´ +|‒|0 Contra-sA for Relativism ‒|+|0 0 for Nihilism 0|‒|+ Based on this symbolic picture (Fig. 43), imagine how different ideologies can interfere with each other. If, for example, the disadvantages of an ideological trend (in this case of an absolutistic ideology) 187 become ever greater then they cause automatically a counter-direction, which than determines the zeitgeist and a society. (See also `Reversal into the opposite´.) Example: Interplay of opposing sA as ideologies Philosophical/ ideological trends alternate. Often, the opposite occurs. Deficits of old views become more and more clear and are offset by opposing ones or replaced by co-forms. (Ideology * → co- or counter-ideologies). Absolutisms are followed by relativistic and / or nihilistic trends and if these had been exhausted, they are replaced again by new opposing currents. Concrete example: Zarism → nihilism and anarchy → collectivism → new autocracy. Since all ideologies and philosophies have deficits, the game is endless. That is why whole societies are perishing like individuals. 187 `Absolutisms' functions here as a collective concept for ideologies that have absolutized an attitude. 168 Emergence of Complexes by Different Its and Their Systems In this publication, I distinguish: - One It = simplest complex. - Double or multiple complexes consisting of two or more Its. 188 - Hypercomplexes networks consisting of many Its. To location: - Complexes within a person. - Interpersonal complexes = “relationship-complexes” (→ 'Relationship disorders'). - Social complexes. I think that the structures of the different complexes are similar, despite very different contents. That means that individual or interpersonal (familiar, social) complexes are similar. C. G. Jung understood `complex' much like me as a “Group of largely repressed ideas, which are connected as a cohesive whole and influence the thinking, feeling and action of the individual by eliminating a conscious control.”189 Based on the idea of this publication, one can say: All Its can create such complexes with each other. They then lead to by C. G. Jung described and other consequences. Whenever personal (or other) Its and their systems react with each other, the following complexes can be created: • complex pacts (Syn.: symbioses, collusions, mergers, fusions) - with connections (bonds) that are too tight, • complex opponents (Syn.: enmities, collisions) - with splittings (divisions), • neutral complexes (Syn.: 0-complexes or liquidations) - with dissolution or repression of connections/ bonds, • mixed complexes. Other Similar Complexes In the unabridged German version you can find more details about the complexes of other specialties because there are further similarities with psychical complexes: e.g., with chemical complexes, chaos theory, analogies in physics. Characteristics of Psychical Relevant (pr) Complexes The pr complexes either show a stiff hierarchic structure, or they appear chaotic. Here examples for pacts: 188 In psychiatric terminology, a complex is often stated as consisting of 2 opposites, e.g. Father Son C. or whores-saint-C. etc. 189 Peters, Lexikon Psychiatrie…, see bibliographical references. 169 Pacts as chains. Horizontal with an opposite; Vertical with Co-form. Pacts as chains and conglomerations with opposites and Co-forms. ls Ketten und Konglomerate Pacts as chains of 0² forms. Its, or complexes, that are organized as pacts (have vectors with the same direction) stick together such as chains, which also explains certain chain-reactions and domino-effects in the second-rate realities. Notes about the Transference Transferences occur through the It/sA. Transference may occur from any pr unit to another pr unit. Example: Transference from W² to P², from P² to another P², or in P. Such as in psychoanalysis it can be differentiated between positive and negative transference. Relative transferences (= influences) have to be viewed separately. Two illustrations that show different aspects of transference. 1.P * This graphic illustrates a central It (black) within a complex that determines other Its as long as their parts interact with each other. (right side) However, small displacements may cause a collision (left side, arrow). “Cogwheel”: One person (1.) spins the wheel. Everyone else has to play along. The same people turn in the same direction and the opposites (black) turn in the opposite direction. Where it 'jammed' (*), someone may get sick. Summary We can find regarding the complexes: • Self-organization/ autopoiesis. • Processes: From order to chaos and from chaos to order. • Relativization of the principle of causality: “Equal causes cause equal effects.” • Low or fixed predictability. • Interior and exterior interactions. • A complex is never completely satisfied. There is always a tendency to expand at the expense of others, or it is "gorged" by others. • Complex-phases are just like It-phases. 170 Personal Dynamics Simple Personal Dynamics Introduction This chapter is based on knowledge of the previous sections. However, I will try to repeat the most important matters. This is now about the personal dynamics of second-rate parts of persons which I labeled with P² or only with P here.190 The It became part of the person, although it is something strange for the person at the same time. That makes it hard to understand the dynamics. The person can identify him/herself with the It and function as his/her It as well as be an opponent of the It as something strange. To be exact, P² does both: P² is always more or less identified with the It or faces it as an opponent. P² never has a definite identity. P² can never find peace in him/herself because the It or the complex that determines P² does not rest either. The It is unstable. It has to make sure that the interior powers are controlled and also guarantee that it steadily gains new input (“food”) from the outside to stay alive. Comparison of First- and Second-Rate Personal Dynamics • General characteristics of the P²-dynamics: They are more inadequate, heteronomous, “shifted”, disordered, unconscious, passive, functional, automatic, artificial, contradicting and paradoxical compared with the first-rate dynamics. • Their directions are: too pro, too contra or too 0. (See `Summary table´ column Q). • Instead of free life, P is now dominated by strange processes. As long as the person is dominated by the It, • P has to do whatever It determines. P has to act, think, realize, function the way It wants to. Although P still has some choice, P cannot destroy the It immediately by an act of will because It has been materialized. • The “primary processes” (Freud) are similar to the second-rate dynamics. • The first-rate dynamics are clear and unambiguously. • No person shows solely first-rate behavior because no person can behave absolutely definite and unambiguously. There are always P²-parts which also affect the behavior. P between +A and sA P stands between the advantages and disadvantages of the +A and the +sA. Short to advantages of +sA: Emergence of + hyper-forms. (E.g., see `Summary table column N, line ) Disadvantages see the last section. → P reacts with Defense mechanisms. Advantages of +A: + `Meta-help´ (redemption, salvation, etc.). Disadvantage: no + hyper-forms, withdrawal → P reacts with Resistance. 190 More exactly: The first-rate P I label with P¹, the second-rate often only with P or P² if the connotation is important. 171 Therapeutically important: The +A does not leave P alone when disturbed by the sA. F. Hölderlin: “But where the danger is, also grows the saving power." Self-/Others Damaging Dynamics Second-rate personal dynamics become damaging (self or others) in the long run. P² dynamics to the outside harm especially other people, P² dynamics in the person harm especially the person himself. Interaction with the It will be even more expensive for P, the stranger and dissimilar the strange Absolute is compared to the actual Absolute that is being replaced. | Symbiosis and Parasitism between It and P² In the beginning, there is a symbiosis between +It and P. Both sides give and take. Metaphorically, you can say: The Ps give their blood to the Its and in return, the +Its give P drugs and safety² against ‒sA, which were created by themselves. Both need each other. In reality, the Its depend on P; P however only depends on the It/sA mainly in a subjective way. (That fact is important for therapy). They are both connected with some sort of hate-love. They “love” each other with “libido”, as long as they give each other whatever the other one needs. P² needs It as compensatoryAbsolute because P² does not live from the actual Absolute. At the same time, the It needs P² as host. Enmity and hate appear, whenever one (or both) of them do not fulfill their symbiotic role anymore. The It will put P under pressure and tyrannize P when P does not function the way It expects, especially if P tries to become the master of the own house again. That is a typical situation for P to become ill. However, if P is able to free him-/herself from the It(s), the It dies, while P survives. On the other hand, P is subjectively so dependent on the Its that he/she often prefers to die him/herself instead of letting die the Its, since the Its became his/her new Absolutes. Then suicide is the last logical consequence of this situation. The interactions of It/sA and persons show noticeable parallels with symbiosis and parasitism. Almost every characteristic of a parasite also applies to the It. (More in the abridged German version). The following topics are discussed below: 1. P²-dynamics in identification with an It, or an It-part. 2. P²-dynamics towards an It or an It-part. 3. P²-dynamics that show P² in a victim role. Hints: I have listed, point 1 and 2 corresponding 'secondary reactions' in column 'P' in the `Summary table´. `The victim dynamics´ are listed in column O. All types of dynamics overlap! 172 Personal Dynamic as It Generally It-core Area outside of P Relative area of the It The graphic is meant to illustrate the direction of the dynamics: They come from the It-core of a person (or one of its parts) and go into the relative-sphere, or outside (left arrow), in an efferent way. This section is about dynamics that come from the absolute-sphere of the It, the core-It. That is especially the case in the very beginning. In this case, P is identified with the core-It and acts in its order. Here, P acts as It because P also became It, and the It is personalized and individualized. To be exact, P does not act as the It itself but as its functionary, participant and representative. As mentioned before, P is like subject² and object at the same time.Therefore P could be described as “sobject”. P in this role is first and foremost a perpetrator but always a victim of the dominant Its, too. Whenever P lives in the name of the It, then especially by the motto: all or nothing, black or white, top or bottom, win or loss, this or that, enemy or friend, hate or love and so on. People in this role are self-important self-important like a god or self-important like a devil. Common mottos are: "Whoever is not with me is against me." Instead of the connecting "and" dominates the "or". P is captured within the It and is only able to see the world from its specific point of view. We now live the life of the It: We only see what It sees. We act the way It wants us to. We only feel what It feels. We love and we hate what It loves and hates and so on. I² do what It tells me to do. I do what my inner “dictator” says. In the worst case, I sacrifice my life to It because the main goal of my life is the It, the parasite. It gives me what I believe is necessary for me. Only It lets me be I. Without It I do not exist. +It lets me be alive, ‒It kills me. Only +It gives me worth. I am abandoned from the It as soon as I stop bowing down to It. That can show in almost all dynamics (processes, behaviors etc.), even if they are contradictory. That is important for understanding behavioral disorders and paradoxical behaviors. That also means: P can primarily want something positive but does the opposite. Or P wants all but achieves nothing. As mentioned before, the It and therefore P too, also tries to expand to the outside. With that, P is also able to dominate other people through the It. Whatever It does to me, I do to others. I demand from other people to do what I think is right to do. People with other beliefs are being excluded or fought. P experiences doubt of his/her way of thinking or acting as questioning or attacking of the own person. Factual issues are taken personally. It has to be that way because P identified itself with the It and whenever the It is 173 being attacked, it has to be experienced as an attack on the own person. The Summary table shows in column `K´ across all aspects the character of P, if he has identified himself with It! P as It-part ALL pro-sA contra-sA +|‒|0 ‒|+|0 NOTHING 0|‒|+ The illustration shows from which It-parts P acts when P has identified him-/herself with the It. The inverse sides in the gray font are latent but can be activated at any time. pro-sA / + P² is identical to pro/+sA. I am +* (pro-sA and +sA are used synonymously). All pro/+sA determined actions are more or less variations of: P loves (absolutizes) something, him/herself or other people too much and hates (‒absolutized) their opposites too much. If the person loves or absolutizes mainly him-/herself, that equals selfish, narcissistic or when P is fully identified with pro/+sA he/she shows possibly manic behavior. However, I dare not lose the It because that would also mean the loss of my identity, of my Self. So, I always have to feed It. In the background, the opposite, the contra-sA, is constantly waiting. I have to fight its realization to assure the +*. Due to the exertion of force that is needed permanently to keep up what we love, we also start to hate it. We have to hate it because we bleed dry because of the +sA. At the same time, we enjoy bleeding dry for it because the It became our Absolute that we believe to need. P overstrains him/herself in this specific role. P does not see his/her limits because he/she is doped with inner endorphins. P is manipulable and vulnerable at this point. A special role is being played by the behavior of P on the positive sides of the contra-sA or the 0. When keeping up the pro-sA became too expensive, the positive sides of the contrasA become stronger. These contra sides cause P to show (often suddenly) antagonistic, hostile behavior towards the pro-sA or its representatives (e.g., towards other P). Therefore, in every absolutization an ambivalent behavior is possible. contra-sA/ ‒ P² is identified with contra / ‒sA. I am ‒*. (The terms contra-sA, ‒sA and ‒* are used synonymously). The ‒sA are our false devils/ enemies/ evil with whom we have identified ourselves. The behaviors of a P, determined by ‒sA, are variations of: P hates him/herself or others too much and loves their opposites too much - since they are both sides of the same coin, the It. Self-(or other) punishment and -aggrandizement may stay balanced or alternate. 174 0 The behavior of P, whenever P is identified with 0, is comparable to the behavior of a nihilist or a person that suppresses the most important aspects of life. The main characteristics are: I ignore, liquidate, neglect, and sacrifice something, somebody or even myself. Example: “I am the spirit of perpetual negation.” (Mephistopheles). There are often so-called displacement activities or similar behaviors. The behavior of this P is often the opposite of the behavior that is determined by the all - in sense of all-or-nothing behavior. See also `Negation (All or nothing)´. Ambivalent, Paradoxical Behavior “I loved my heroes like a fly the light; I looked for their dangerous proximity and fled and looked for them again.” (Hölderlin, Hyperion´). P will act in an ambivalent, contradicting way if two opposite powers are of equal strength. So if all and nothing, or pro-sA and contra-sA have the same power within P. Example: P loves and hates at the same time. The opposite powers are often balanced or take turns. P will paradoxically act if his/her+sA is connoted negatively or his/her ‒sA is connoted positively. More → Ambivalent and Paradoxical Reactions. Equal and Opposite Behavior by pro-/contra-/0 sA Persons who have the same sA can show the same but even contrary behavior. Persons who are determined by an opposite sA, can show contrary but even the same behavior. Example: One can have the obsessive thought of killing someone due to the enormous hate one has for that person. However, someone (like one of my patients) may have the same obsessive thought due to too much love. (The woman of my patient was his +Absolute, and he developed the obsession he may kill her for fear because he may lose her thereby - the meaning of his life). Although maintaining these opposing positions requires much energy, P often benefits from living from both pro-sA and contra-sA positions. This allows P to maintain (an expensive) balance. P can compensate for the disadvantages of a sA with the opposite behavior. The person can use this "pendulum strategy" as a defense and thus become invulnerable. Systematic (Optional Remarks) Here only keywords because the role of P towards the It, which I discuss later, is much more important in terms of the emergence of mental illness. (For more details, see `Summary table´ column P and Q). P² with Misdimensioned Efferent Dynamics a1: In this aspect, P mainly acts out of an absolutistic, or relativistic, or nihilistic position. a2: P acts out of a hyper-identified or alienated position. a3: P acts out of a hyper-realistic, or wrong, or hyper-realistic position. Example for criticism on such a hyper-realism: “The words of humans fill me with fear. They name all the things with articulate sound: 175 [...] It's the singing of things I'm longing to hear. You touch them and stiff and silent they turn. You're killing the things for whose singing I yearn.“ (Rainer Maria Rilke) Some P² in this position express everything in the indicative. They do not seem to know the subjunctive. Others however, do not seem to feel the desire to express themselves clearly. a4: In this aspect, P acts out of a one-sided, monistic or dualistic position. P isolates, merges and divides him/herself or something or other people. a5: In this aspect, P mainly acts out of a deterministic and dogmatic or unreliable and libertinistic position. P makes him/herself, something or another person too insecure, wants to let go too much or, on the other side, fixates too much, misprograms or determines. a6: In this aspect, P acts out of a dictating, radical position. P will equalize or radicalize; exaggerate or understate. a7: In this aspect, P acts out of an automatic, autocratic, tyrannical or servile position. P will (him/herself or else) subordinate, overadapt or become too independent. P² Efferent Dynamics Concerning the IV Main Differentiations Being: With the identification of the specific It, P acts like a thing (or on the other side, like a ghost) because P is being materialized and depersonalized. | Life: With the identification of the specific It, P mainly acts as a functionary, like a machine or a robot. Or in the opposite: hyper-alive. Qualities: P acts out of a perfectionistic or negativistic or positivistic position. The life, the actions of P become too negative, too imperfect or too positive or generally too faulty and disordered. Connections (subject-, object-roles): P acts out of a subjectivistic or objectivistic (functionalistic) or instrumentalistic position. P mainly acts like an object (or an absolutistic subject). Concerning connections: P creates connections where there are none or negates existing connections. P dynamics as a Strange Unit P-dynamics as strange all-ornothing: P takes a totalitarian or negating position, depending on the It that identified him-/herself with. “All or nothing” says the It, and P acts by that principle. P totalizes or negates (or isolates). This all-ornothing behavior can also be found in everyday life. Such as living the motto: “I either do the whole thing or nothing at all.”, or “If I cannot perfectly complete this, I will not do anything at all anymore.”, “You are either here for me completely, or you can leave.” P as “God” or “devil”: P demonizes or idolizes or profanes him/herself or others out of this position. P may act as his/her own God or his/her own devil. 176 P as “thing” or “hyper-person”: Depending on the It, P may feel and act like a thing (depersonalized), or oppositely (like a hyperperson). Or P treats others that way. P as “hyper-I” or another person: P feels and acts like a person that is imprisoned within him/herself or only focused on him/herself in egocentricity (→ The Ego as a strange Absolute) - or acts and feels like another person (“heterocentricity”). P-dynamics are too physical/ too spirituous/ too mental: Depending on what part of P (body, soul, mind) is identified with an It, the affected person will differently feel. Here are also contrastive pairs. (Example: “Head” and “stomach”) Such as in the other aspects, nuances of behavior are missing. The behavior is too determined by body or soul. Additional Differentiations (Examples) I constrain here just on a few examples because the role of P as a victim of the Its in relation to the pathogenesis is more important. But as said: All types of dynamics overlap! In keywords, I have listed all aspects of differentiation and their personal dynamics in the Summary table. Aspect 8: Volition We want whatever the It wants and not what we really want ourselves. Aspect 11: Necessities P is acting out of an It that represents absolutized necessities. P will start to believe that something, that is really not an absolute necessity, is definitely necessary and has to be made. Since P as It is mainly in the role of an offender, P will mainly demand other people to fulfill the requirements. They are usually dogmatic, bureaucratic or technocratic people on the one side, and on the opposite side, there are people that tend to anarchy. According to the contrast-pair-dynamics, there is often a change between the different positions. Aspect 12: Morale P acts out of an exaggerated conscience or out of lack of conscience. In the first case, there is usually a scrupled personality. If the conscience is the last instance and P acts out of it - and not towards it - the affected person will believe to know exactly what is morally and what is not. Being in this position, P is convinced to know exactly what one is doing right or wrong. Aspect 13: The Distorted View Just like looking through different glasses, the affected person has different views. Left: = pro-view; Right: = contra-view; Middle: = ambivalent view. Left: like magnification, rose-colored view with advantages². Right: dark prisms or no view. Note: Looking through the different `glasses´ at the same time is also possible. 177 Personal Dynamic towards the It (Addiction; Defense, Anticathexis, Repression) Generally: Considering mental disorders, this topic is more important than the described dynamics of P as It because here, the person has to make more sacrifices for It than before. P is like a prisoner of the It. Therefore P has to make appropriate sacrifices, to receive the positivity that seems absolutely necessary and to fend the negativity that appears dangerous and hostile. Put religiously: After eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of the good and the bad in paradise, we seem to be cursed to absolutely need to achieve the good and avoid the bad. P is in a `psychical Bermuda Triangle´ (see graphic). P is trying to find an absolute +*, and sacrifices with that +¹ from him/herself (or other +) in the long run. P does not find peace in that triangle and jumps from one pole to another. P cannot be with, nor without the It. Whenever a +sA becomes my life, my drug, then the loss of it or the ‒sA is like dying or death. Therefore, I do everything to assure that +sA stays alive and to avoid ‒sA. With that, there is a constant necessity of exertion because the +sA needs to be fed, and the ‒sA needs to be fought at all times. The It lures with a +sA and threatens with a ‒sA. The It can be everything for P: +It (object of addiction), ‒It (object of defense), or 0² (zeroobject). −sA: the evil*, the bad etc. +sA: the good*, the ideal* to reach to fend to fill 0: emptiness Fig. P in the `psychological Bermuda Triangle´. The opposites are ever-present. At least potentially. After reaching the +sA, or the defense of ‒sA, the respective opposite becomes stronger because the price is becoming too high to keep the +sA alive and to avoid the ‒sA. The result is: I hate and love the It too much. From which I depend, I love and hate too much. Also: The dependent person makes easily other people dependent. 178 Addiction P is looking for a +It/sA that gives absolute positivity (+*). P feels great, awesome, high, when receiving +*.191 Addiction to what? The addiction is directed towards something absolutized positive. Usually, that is a +sA. But it may also be the positive side of ‒sA or of 0 that we are addicted to. That is the case if +sA became too expensive, and if there is no other +sA as an object of addiction. More important than addicting substances (alcohol, drugs) are `behavioral addictions´ (=non-substantial addictions). Addiction to +sA In the beginning, the It mainly offers its positive side, the +sA. It always promises more than it can give. Compared to the first-rate positive, the It often has the advantage of faster satisfaction, even if that is usually connected with higher costs for P.| All aspects May Function as +sA Examples: • Success (aspect 15) P always and consistently has to pump successes into the It-center to feel good because the +sA that causes well-being has only short-term effects and becomes soon weak. We have to feed our Egos. Therefore we are doomed to success. • Safety (aspect a5) Safety is often conveyed by accurate rules which must be obeyed, like in an army. With an absolutization, the actual danger is often pushed in the background. (A very grotesque example was the instruction for the terrorists of September 11, 2001, to make sure that their clothes are clean before the dying.) It is also a common behavior for people with compulsive illnesses that feel secure by following certain rituals. Those compulsions have a high cost for the affected person. • Health (aspect 5) The specific +sA, or its representatives, the health fanatics or people that use health for business, the believers that view God only as a God of health - all of them tempt others people with the message of health being able to be achieved completely if certain requirements are met by P. (Ideology of `healthism´). • Satisfaction (Aspect 7) Currently, drugs, internet addiction, soccer (and similar) play a big part in this aspect. The more we are seeking satisfaction with those kinds of Absolutes, the more we will receive compensatory-satisfaction (or compensatory-fortune). And as soon as the compensatory- 191 I write often for the sake of simplicity instead of P² only P. 179 satisfaction becomes too expensive or does not fulfill us anymore, we will try to find another + *object. We may also let a part of an unachievable object fulfill our needs temporarily: at least catch a glimpse of the loved one, a piece, an idol´s autograph, etc. The terms of psychoanalysis describe similar aspects: compensatory-satisfaction, compensatory-objects and compensatory-actions. C. G. Jung denotes neurosis as compensatory-affliction. (It should be added: neurosis as compensatory-luck, too). Briefly, the theory of S. Freud: Since the original object of love (mother) is forbidden, the child tries to find a compensatory-object. The consequence of the suppressed original wish may be a symptom. With that, the original wish would be partly satisfied because of the associative connection between the wish and the symptom, so that with the symptom, the wish is fulfilled symbolically. Freud says that a compensatory-satisfaction takes place, whenever a wish or a drive/ instinct cannot be fulfilled due to inner or outer prohibitions other actions are made to (partly) fulfill those needs. I differentiate: first-rate (heavenly) happiness, that is free of costs, and second-rate "happiness", that has to be paid for (compensatory-happiness). • For a general description of the topic `addiction to life´ see the section `Life and death as sA'. Addiction to +Side of a ‒sA Examples: • Choice/search of a negative identity (Erikson). • Seeking for sorrow, such as in: “It is easier for me to feel sorrow than to constantly be happy.” Or: “My sorrow is the strongest weapon against the fake optimism of my parents.” • “Addiction to illness” see: “Morbid Gain” Also: Depression is the strongest (second-rate) remedy against the danger of becoming manic. The same applies to mania, which is the strongest (second-rate) remedy against becoming depressed. Addiction, drive or pulse to the +side of a ‒ part of an It is also a defense of the ‒ sides of a +sA. Addiction to +Side of 0 Examples: Longing for nirvana or every-day reaction: If I cannot get everything, then I do not want anything at all. Because: The nothingness seems more bearable than the loss of +everything. 180 Defense and Anticathexis Overview and Definition Talking about defense or defense-mechanisms (DM), I am referring to second-rate, usually unconscious reactions of the affected person towards absolutely negative perceived experiences (‒*), which actual are only relatively negative.192 Negative* sides of the different It/sA (or ‒A) are being fended. Whatever is perceived as absolutely negative, the affected person will view it as an attack on the Self. Therefore the person will not react relaxed or with relative methods. On the other side, the defensereactions are inadequate, exaggerated and expensive, compared to first-rate solutions. Synonyms or similar terms for defense-mechanisms: anticathexis, counter-reaction, second-rate protection/defense. Anticathexis I view here as the defense of a part by an opposite. (More see below).193 The “defense” of negatively perceived consequences of +A is referred to as resistance. I view solutions or (primary) protection as first-rate reactions of the affected person towards the ‒* and other negative. Coping and Defense In short, "coping" is generally understood as stress management. There are fluent lines between coping and defense. The more it leans towards defense, the higher are the costs. I mean, defense and coping have only secondary value because they depend at last on the strength of humans and a human has only limited strength. In contrast, first-rate solutions are mainly based on the Self, require less effort and are less costly and more effective in the long run. I.e., absolutely negative experiences cannot be managed by the I alone because the I only has relative force/strength. Concepts of therapy and defense that are more focused on the I than on the Self are in my opinion secondary. Typically, the Self did not play a big part in S. Freud´s theories. The Ego and rationality were Absolutes for him. (Freud: “Where Id was, there Ego shall be”, “My God Logos” and so on.) However, a defense system that focuses on both of it (Ego and Logos) in the center, seems to be too weak to compensate deep disorders. I think that is also the reason why Freud only saw a few starting points in psychotherapy of psychoses. The strong and integrative powers of an actual Self remained unconsidered by him. Even the self-psychology only tries to extend old psychoanalytic models because it defines the Self only as a Relative. (Further, see in `Self-strength and Ego-strength´ or in the unabridged German version). What is Being Fended? (Targets of Defense) As mentioned before, everything that is experienced as absolutely negative is a target of defense. This is: 1) ‒sA and the consequences 2) ‒ of +sA (e.g., too costly harmony, esp. the loss of a +sA). 192 193 See `Summary table´ columns O and P. I will equal treat anticathexis and reaction formation here for the sake of simplicity. 181 3) ‒ of 0 About 1) Mostly fear, sadness, pain, guilt, anger, conflicts, bad experiences and burdens are defended. Especially what was experienced as absolutely negative has to be defended. At these parts that P identified him-/herself with, P is mostly endangered if they are being attacked. I² am the It. If you attack something* of me, you are attacking my Self. I call that the open black (or in case of +sA: white) gates within the defense-system of a person. Then P cannot differentiate between objective issues and personal issues. (Also see: Vulnerability-stress-theory). About 2) If somebody/something threatens my +sA, and I have to fear the loss of it than somebody/ something becomes my enemy because it threatens the center of my existence. “All my life I have been haunted by the obsession that to desire a thing or to love a thing intensely is to place yourself in a vulnerable position, to be a possible if not a probable, loser of what you most want.” (Tennessee Williams)194 That means that also the positive can be fended or feared if its negative side becomes too visible. About 3) 'Horror vacui' spreads fear and terror. P has to fill ‒0 with something. P has to pay a price. A constant escape from an unbearable emptiness. How many people cannot be without constant input. Thus, P² often fears the loss of +sA, the coming of ‒sA or total emptiness more than its own death. | How and with what is being Fended? (Remedies of Defense) With what P can solve or fend off Negatives*? 1. The first-rate remedies and opportunities leading to First-rate solutions are discussed later. 2. The main second-rate remedies are: • Coping, which are more conscious, need Ego- strength and unnecessarily high expenditure of energy since the Ego does not act out of the actual Self (resp. + A). • "Defense by Sacrifice". They are described later in 'Sacrificial-dynamics' and `Emergency solution by disease´ which play a special role in the pathogenesis and other Emergency solutions. • Defense by “Anticathexis” = defense by opposites. 195 The term `anticathexis´ is defined differently in the literature. I use it here to defend a part by its opposite, similar to the so-called reaction formation. Instead of ' anticathexis', I would therefore speak of 'defense by opposites'. See also section: `The Opposites´, where we found how inversions in the second-rate realities create opposites that can strengthen, fight or neutralize. Here is about the latter two functions. One can differentiate: a) Anticathexis by the contrary opposite (example: +sA against ‒sA) b) Anticathexis by the contradictory opposite (0) The opposite It/sA of the same aspects are to be mentioned first, ultimately all the other aspects are 194 195 Tennessee Williams, “The Theatre of Tennessee Williams”, p.4, New Directions Publishing. Inclusive reaction formation. 182 to be mentioned too. Example: Defense against the disadvantages of wealth* with modesty* (same aspect) or with self-punishment or illness (different aspect). c) Anticathexis by a similar part (This could also be called “defense by Co-cathexis”). Further Differentiation: + Anticathexis P puts +* against ‒*, resp. `false Gods against devils´. Examples: Work against boredom, hyper-control against chaos or sex against mortal fear. (Similar to S. Freud's anticathexis 'Libido against Destrudo'.) ‒ Anticathexis A common saying is “To replace devil with Beelzebub”, which describes the process of replacing a negative aspect with another negative aspect that might be even stronger. Illness as defense plays a big role in this aspect. Example: Woman with cancer: “I hate everything to prevent myself from dying of fear.” S. Kierkegaard: “Since my earliest childhood a barb of sorrow has lodged in my heart. As long as it stays I am ironic if it is pulled out I shall die.”196 Additional example: If parents keep correcting their child over and over again, expecting it to speak properly, the likelihood is high that the child starts to stutter or stops speaking. Stutter can also be viewed as a counter-reaction of the child. In those families, functionality and speaking are absolutized. To go against the pressure of expectations of those families, a counter position can be the strongest weapon. A distinct dysfunction (stutter) will be used against the sA (functionality). Usually, there will be some kind of (unconscious) power struggle about the existence of the old sA (functionality), which stabilizes the family on the one hand but mainly overstrains the index-patient. As a rule, the affected person has no precise position but switches between pro- and contra-sA. The person sits between the chairs. Sometimes, he/she still finds hold in the old sA, although it is also overstraining for him/her. This situation applies to many psychical ill people. Depending on the case, illness as a defense may be more or less an anticathexis by ‒ or by 0. Anticathexis by 0 (Repression) Here, it is about the mechanisms, where ‒* is defended by a 0 (Nothing). Psychoanalysis mainly describes those mechanisms by using the term “repression”. I will present two examples out of the publication of I.D. Yalom 'The Schopenhauer cure' 197 "Schopenhauer made me aware that we are doomed to turn endlessly on the wheel of willing: we want something, we get it, we enjoy a brief moment of gratification, which quickly sinks to boredom, then inevitably the next 'I want' follows. To breastfeed the desire is not a way out - you have to jump completely off the cycle … In fact, these ideas are also at the center of the Buddhist doctrine." (p. 360, 338). (→ Buddhism). 196 197 https://jebralston.com/tag/longing-2/ I.D. Yalom „Die Schopenhauer-Kur“ btb-Verlag München. 2006. (Translated by me). 183 Additional keywords about that topic: Stoicism and similar escapism-ideologies; Buddhism: “Nirvana”, “Victory of renunciation”. Hermann Hesse: “Courage, my heart, take leave and fare thee well!”. Goethe: “This, die and become”, and many more. Also: Fending off the negative sites of the all by the nothingness. S. Freud´s Anticathexis in Comparison with Pro-contra-sA-Dynamics S. Freud: Anticathexis “a psychical process that supports the psychical defense. Its main use is to prevent desires of a drive of the It to become real. Destrudo helps to neutralize libidinous desires - or vice versa.”198 Discussion: In my opinion, it is an expensive emergency solution in the second-rate realities.199 Anticathexis is about the dynamics between the named It-parts (pro/contra sA) which stand in opposition. E.g., if a part* (sA) is experienced too negative, its effect can be neutralized by its opposite (contra-sA). This anticathexis requires a constant supply of energy. Even according to S. Freud, this energy is as great as the energy that the repressed part* has. The Double Character of Defense-Mechanisms (DM) Due to the fact that the sA/Its and their consequences are ambivalent, one sA may strengthen and/or weaken the defense-system. This mechanism can be compared to a tank that weakens the defense because it is very immobile but it also makes them less likely to be attacked. Another example are debts that help at first but become very burdensome in the long run. Depending on the situation or the time frame, there are either positive or negative consequences in the foreground. Therefore, the sA/Its resp. the strange-Selves may be the second-best friends (following the Self), or the second-worst enemies (following the actual negative Absolute). However, the defense is always more costly than a first-rate solution. Overview of possible defense mechanisms from one's own point of view, see the `Summary table´ columns O and P. Summary of Defense-Mechanisms Answers to some W-questions: Who? Why? What? With what? When? Where? Whom? (How? How long?) • Who defends? P². • What is being fended? Everything that is experienced as absolutized negative. • Why? To defeat the negative and keep the positive. • With what? Everything that is experienced as negative can be fended by all psychical relevant aspects. • How? Especially by anticathexis or sacrifice. • Where? Mainly in the unconscious of P². • How long? Until one +sA predominates or until an actual solution was found. • What is the price? P² mostly pays with parts of the Self, otherwise, everything that is of 198 199 Cit. by UH Peters literature list. Note: Freud only describes dynamics of second-rate realities. 184 psychical relevance can be used to pay. • Who pays the price? If it is a sacrifice, P² mainly pays the price him/herself, otherwise it will be paid by other people or other realities. • How expensive is the price? The DM is the more expensive, the more has to be sacrificed of +A or the Self. • What is being defended? The It and its system resp. the Ego. • Active or passive? Conscious or unconscious? Actively and consciously as action or reaction especially in form of coping; passively and unconsciously in form of processes and functions especially in form of defense-mechanisms. P-Dynamics toward Nothing * It depends on the side of the nothing*: 1. Towards the main side of nothing (0 of 0: strange emptiness, nothing) → must be filled. 2. Towards the positive side of nothing (+ of 0: Examples: Nirvana, belle indifference) → 'Search' or addiction. 3. Towards the negative side of nothing (− from 0. Examples: Horror vacui; Hell as nothing?) → Defense. If we consider the behavior of P² in relation to the all-or-nothing alternative, then P² wants primarily everything +, nothing else. If P cannot have everything, she prefers nothing, rather than a Relative one. Ambivalent and Paradoxical Reactions Patient L: “There are two main misfortunes that I fear: First, if that what I fear the most becomes real and second, if that what I desire the most becomes real.” To be exact, every reaction of P² is ambivalent because the It of them is ambivalent as well. The strongest ambivalence exists if a +sA-part and a ‒sA-part of one It are of equal strength, or if there are two contradicting Its facing each other. P² is caught within the It. So, P² is facing contradictions and paradoxes that seem intractable for P² and that are the basis of many mental disorders. P² constantly finds himself in all-or-nothing situations. P² can be torn between the plus-parts and the minus-parts of It (sA or ‒sA), or he falls into the nothingness.200 The opposing forces can also keep themselves in balance () and neutralize. The affected person will have an excessive love-, hate-, or indifference relationship with other people. Every dependant person thus loves or hates too much that on which he depend on. Because the sA are experienced very differently by the person, there can be some crazinesses, that cannot be explained or understood with common sense. E.g., whatever was fended first because it had a ‒* connotation may become +* and vice versa. However, that crazinesses may have important functions in the second-rate dynamics. There are often multiple functions at the same time: Addiction and defense at the same time (s. Freud´s 200 „Psychical Bermuda Triangle“.Extreme ambivalent behavior e.g. before the Reversal into the opposite. 185 `mixture of drives´) or alternating. Addiction, defense and sacrifice as functions of the opposites (sA, ‒sA, 0) are parts of the totalitarian unit 'It'. Keywords: If the enemy dies, the false friend will die as well, resp. if the “devil” dies, then the false God will die, too.201 But also vice versa: If the devil dies, the false God can have a short high. The false God needs the devil in order to be itself and vice versa. My “God” is also my “devil” (or nothing). Whatever I love excessively, can also be hated excessively. In relationships, those people tend to love too much (→ pact, symbiosis) or to hate too much (→ enmity) or living both sides (love-hate) or to lose themselves in emptiness (0). I repeat: those opposites are just two sides of the same coin, the It (resp. the strange Self). Although they are opponents, they are friends when it comes to the opposition towards the first-rate Self. The opposites can be active at the same time or appear in phases one after another. E.g., hyper-position and hypo-position can be taken simultaneously or successively. “Because I am so submissive, I am the greatest and better than the others.” Or the succession of two contradicting desires: “I desire your love but because I experienced love as exploitative in my past, I am also afraid that you love me.” Likewise, I can now love something that I hated because it frees me from the flip side of a +*. For example: "I hated the exhausting diets (during anorexia), now I'm (unconsciously) free of it and eat me full (bulimia)." Such contradictions and paradoxes are created by Inversions, such as described at the beginning of the chapter 'metapsychiatry'. | Example of a Patient Patient W. had problems with women: He viewed women either as saints or as whores. He desired but he also feared to fall in love. He was longing for intimacy and affection but was afraid to become dependent on a woman. Typically, he fell in love with a prostitute because she was also depending on him. That way he was able to direct the relationship. However, the more he fell in love with her, the more he was afraid to lose her or to lose himself. He could not be without her anymore but at the same time he could not “really be with her”. “I loved her and I hated her.” As a result, he developed fantasies of murdering to her to end the dependency and because he did not endure imagining how she slept with other men. But it was paradoxically also been right to him that she had sex with other men because that way he did not experience his dependency as that strong.| Other Examples for “Love-Hate” • In sadomasochistic relationships. • In Borderline-disorders. • Tolstoy and his wife. • Pablo Picasso and the women. • All people that sacrifice too much for others. For example: Idealists for a certain idea, 201 Tennesee Williams: „If I got rid of my demons, I´d lose my angels too.“ 186 mothers that sacrifice too much for their kids, men that sacrifice too much for their job, a partner for the other partner, etc. “If you begin by sacrificing yourself to those you love, you will end by hating those to whom you have sacrificed yourself.”202 (George Bernard Shaw). A development worker: “Most people that I know went to the developing countries as idealists and came back as racists.” (See also: `Possibilities of interactions´.) Fascination of the Negative and the Evil Can't everything fascinate people? Can't everything have advantages, at least temporarily, and we fall for it / choose it, even if the price is too high? Since every Relative has two sides, the inherently negative Relative also has a positive side, which can be fascinating when it dominates. (→ Examples of Different sA with their 3 Sides). There are many different fascinations of the negative: • There is a fascination of the evil. From a religious point of view, the fascination of sin is similar: after we have eaten the apple of the knowledge of good and evil, we are condemned to do good and leave evil, and it is fascinating to lift this curse by doing evil . Similar to Paul: “… the good that I want, I do not; but the evil ... ”- that is,“ that force that wants good but creates evil.”(Based on Goethe). • There is a fascination to be just a thing / object or a machine instead of a person. Example: “There was a grandiose emptiness and self-abandonment on the faces of these men, which has probably never existed in the course of history ... They lived so cleanly, so precisely, so without thoughts, as without conscience as living engines. They were just waiting to be started or turned off ... engine people."203 • There is the fascination of giving up oneself, the fascination of wanting to lose one's own individuality and merge into a crowd. • There is a fascination to be sick rather than healthy. • There is the fascination of death and the nothing. (Keywords: death instinct, longing for death, suicide).204 (→ Inverted, paradoxical world.) The causes of these fascinations vary from person to person. They essentially correspond to what I have listed in the section on Morbid gain under `Morbid gain in detail'.205 In relation to the fascination of evil, taboos probably play a special role.206 Some people only want the positive and suppress the negative. But then the person concerned lives contrary to his nature and pays a price: He lives only half and unfree. The complement, the counterpart - the negative side (evil, aggressive, immoral, etc.) is missing in his life. This applies above all to humanists, pacifists, idealists, altruists, perfectionists and moralists.207 An insoluble conflict arises: On the one hand, the person 202 I suspect that many relationships fail not only because of too little, but also because of too much (excessive) love, because too much of a good thing is bad. 203 Franz Werfel cit. In P.S. Jungk: „Franz Werfel: Eine Lebensgeschichte“. S. 257 204 → S. Freud `Thanatos´. 205 These processes play an important role in mental illness. They are often an expression of emergency or replacement solutions. 206 The fascination of evil can theoretically also come primarily from a ‒A (as primary sadism, primary destructionism ...). 207 Karen Horney called her "press angel". 187 concerned wants to live without negative sides, but on the other hand, he wants to be free and whole. Therefore, the negative sides are taboo and fascinating at the same time. There are many examples in life and in fairy tales of how taboos are irresistible.208 It Dynamic towards P (Sacrificial-Dynamics and Consequences) Not only “revolutions devour their children” (Pierre Vergniaud) but all Its. "There is no strong desire that you do not have to pay for." (Elias Canetti) The Its make all or nothing. Especially nothing. That is discussed here. Sacrifice is a part of every second-rate dynamic and ideology. The Its need sacrifices. They favor the Self, personal and lively subjects as sacrifices. Its need either a) of its own P or b) others as a sacrifice. Usually, it is connected with each other. Everything personal can be sacrificed. Very important for our topic: the sacrifice of health. How are the Sacrificial-Dynamics? The second-rate personal dynamics (D²) are determined by the Its. Their priority is the maintenance of the Its (resp. the strange Selves). The person can sacrifice itself or others for that. 209 If P sacrifices too much of him-/herself, P acts in a self-damaging and sickening way. If a person sacrifices others (other people, other objects) he/she will cause others to become ill. (→ Emergency solution at the expense of other people). As mentioned before, P longs for an absolute positive. P is convinced that the It is something good (the best) although it is not and views something absolutely negative although it is not so negative. To achieve the +* and fend off the ‒*, P lives of its own costs, of its own substance. P is a double loser! P loses the play and itself. P may also use the advantages of inversion and lets other people pay the price for it. The consequences of the inversion can be transmitted within WPI! It can be transmitted between W and P and I or within W, P or I. Concerning mental disorders, we are going to focus on the dynamics of self-sacrifice: Here, it is mainly about unconscious dynamics, about processes, functions and unconscious structures of behavior. Above all first-rate but also second-rate things are lost. Since the first are more serious, this loss is at the forefront. (See more → Emergency solution at one´s own expense by disease. 208 This also includes the fascination that dictators, murderers, criminals, vices, etc. have on corresponding counter-types. For example: One-sided love for one's neighbor (altruism) has above all the consequence of loss of self-love (and also the loss of a true love for one's neighbor), as well as a one-sided self-love (egoism) has above all the consequence of loss of love for one's neighbor (but ultimately the egoist comes off badly, too.) General: A second-rate Absolute (sA) has above all the consequence of the loss of the same first-rate Absolute (but also the loss of the opposite). 209 188 Systematics (a selection) For more details on all aspects, see also `Summary table´ columns O, N and Q. The Sacrifice of Absolute Dimensions Especially the following first-rate dimensions are being lost: a1 Sense, transcendence, faith and love Consequence e.g.: P resigns, despairs and P´s actions, reactions and function are nihilistic and senseless. a2 Identity, the Self Consequence e.g.: P alienates and P´s actions, reactions and function are uniform or strange and contradictory. a3 Truth, reality and opportunities Consequence e.g.: P degenerates and P´s actions, reactions and function are unreal and false. a4 Unity and variety Consequence e.g.: P disintegrates or merges and P´s actions, reactions and function are divided, fragmentary or unilateral, nbound. a5 Safety and freedom Consequence e.g.: P loses footing or narrows and P´s actions, reactions and function are unsure, unfree random or fixed. a6 Basis, center and superstructure Consequence e.g.: P falls, declines, goes under and P´s actions, reactions and function are groundless, exaggerated, eccentrical, extreme. a7 Autonomy and refuge Consequence e.g.: P loses his autonomy and P´s actions, reactions and function are too in-/dependent, too reflexive. Sacrifice of BLQC Loss of first-rate personal being, life, qualities and connections and the subject-role of P. I Being Consequence e.g.: P atrophies, decays, degenerates and P´s actions, reactions and function are amorphous dissolved or too materialized, somatized. II Life Consequence e.g.: P dies, vegetates and P´s actions, reactions and function are unlived, deadly or too in-/functional mechanistic. III Oualities Consequence e.g.: P flattens and P´s actions, reactions and function are false, too deficient, meaningless and negated.210 IV Connections and the subject-role Consequence e.g.: P lives as object and functions for the It and P´s actions, reactions and function are too passive, dependent, too incoherent, wrong linked. Sacrifice of Single Aspects 1 Sacrifice of the personal all. Consequence e.g.: P disappears and P´s actions, reactions and function are too total or all or nothing, 2 Sacrifice of the personal relationship to God, which may also lead to senselessness. → e.g. P despairs and gives up and P´s actions, reactions and function are too profan and senseless. 210 E.g. we become `martyrs of an ideal´ (Th. Mann). 189 3 Sacrifice of the first-rate personality, which may lead to apersonalism. → e.g. P loses his personality and functions as a thing and P´s actions, reactions and function are too impersonal, reified mechanical. 4 Sacrifice of individuality, which may lead to the loss of I to Non-I. → e.g. P dissolves himself and P´s actions, reactions and function are non-individual, anomalous atypical. 5 Sacrifice of first-rate parts of spirit, soul and body, which may lead to mindlessness, soullessness and loss of health. Consequence above all: P falls ill and P´s actions, reactions and function are pathological. 6 Sacrifice of first-rate love, sexuality, gender-role, which may cause their loss. → e.g. P neutralizes itself and P´s actions, reactions and function are too neutral and sterile. 7 Sacrifice of first-rate, actual emotions, which may cause apathy and deadness. → e.g. P does not feel anything.and P´s actions, reactions and function are ambivalent, too un-/ misemotional and cold. 8 Sacrifice of the own will and voluntariness, which may lead to abulia and a lack of voluntariness. → e.g. P doesn't want anything and P´s actions, reactions and function are too willless, involuntary, reflex-like, too passive or overstimulated. 9 Sacrifice of actual personal possession, which may cause personal poverty. → e.g. P P loses, starves and P´s actions, reactions and function are too blank, fragmentary or overloaded. 10 Sacrifice of possibilities and skills, which may cause powerlessness and weakness. → e.g. P becomes weak, fails, loses - and P´s actions, reactions and function are too weakly, exhaustible or too strong. 11 Sacrifice of personal order with the consequence of personal chaos. → e.g. P disintegrates, dissolves and P´s actions, reactions and function are random, lawless, messy, too necessary, too rigid, fixed, urgent. 12 Sacrifice of orientation, which leads to a lack of orientation. → e.g. P staggers, sways and P´s actions, reactions and function are too unsteered, confused, confused, misdirected, crazy.. 13 Sacrifice of personal rights and opportunities of control, which leads to rightlessness and intemperance. → e.g. P gets stuck, shoots beyond and P´s actions, reactions and function are limited, restricted or uncontrolled and too excessive. 14 Sacrifice of creativity, which causes a lack of creativity. → e.g. P siltes, dries up and P´s actions, reactions and function are too sterile, monotonous or abstruse, and weird, 15 Sacrifice of own activities with the consequence of inactivity. → e.g. P lames, gets stuck and P´s actions, reactions and function are too passive, ineffective, laborious.. 16 Sacrifice of first-rate information and knowledge, which may cause a lack of knowledge and blindness. → e.g. P perceives nothing, goes blind and P´s actions, reactions and function are unclear, irrational, unconscious. 17 Sacrifice of opportunities of expression and candor, which causes mutism and a lack of candor. → e.g. P falls silent and P´s actions, reactions and function are expressionless or symbolic, ciphered.. 18 Sacrifice of own values and meanings, which may cause a loss of values and meaninglessness. → e.g. P devalues and P´s actions, reactions and function are meaningless, unintelligible, banal, illogical, ambiguous, inadequate false-valued. 19 Sacrifice of the own past, which may lead to a loss of experience. → e.g. P regresses and P´s actions, reactions and function are archaic and anachronistic, too unconscious, chronical, too late, deadlocked. 20 Sacrifice of the own time and presence, which may cause restlessness. 190 → e.g. P runs after or lames and P´s actions, reactions and function are too slowly, braked, delayed, incoherent, chronic. 21 Sacrifice of the own future, which may lead to a loss of perspective. → e.g. P despaires and P´s actions, reactions and function are aimless, unpredictable, undirected, false-preprogrammed. 22 Sacrifice of the own opportunities of corrections and compensation, which leads to faults and a lack of correction. → e.g. P misses the right and P´s actions, reactions and function are faulty, incorrect, unbalanced.. 23 Sacrifice of the own protection, which causes vulnerability and defenselessness. → e.g. P gives up and P´s actions, reactions and function are too passive, irritable, mis- hyperreactive, un-/ influenceable. More to Aspect 23: Loss of protection. (“The open gates of defense”) The open gates or sore points of the personal defense. One can differentiate between white and black open 'gates': the white gates represent the +sS and the black 'gates´ represent the ‒sS. The sacrifice of the own protection and security leads to something that I will call 'the open gates of the defense of the Self'. P is in those spheres especially vulnerable and also manipulable. Therefore, a person can be hurt by taking away the +sS or by threatening with a ‒sS. The open gates (or sore points) of the psyche can also be recognized by the fact that P will take something personal because P identifies him-/herself with it. The Spare Rest of P¹ It seems important to me that despite all the P²-dynamics there is always a rest of first-rate personality left. That is mostly the personal part that still allows P to make free decisions. That fact is important for therapy purposes and will be discussed more detailed in a later chapter. P Sacrifices Others and Others Sacrifice P This publication is mainly about self-sacrifice and a lack of self-protection of P because that represents an important cause of the emergence of mental disorders. Therefore, I will discuss the sacrifice of other people only briefly. However, the mechanisms, as described above, are the same. They are then focused on other people or the environment so that those are more endangered to become ill than the person that is causing the actions. Equally important is that the health of a person is often sacrificed by others, esp. if the affected P has little self-protection. [In total It-results and P²-reactions summarized - see `Summary table´ columns L to V.] 191 Phases of the Interaction of P² and It This chapter is shortened to a great degree. To read more, view unabridged German version or chapter 'Relationship-disorders'. 1st Phase: Expansion and inflation with participation of P (of society), monopolization, boom. 2nd Phase: Stagnation, crisis, tip over. 3rd Phase: collapse, finale. 1st phase: Expansion P is still over-identified with +It. P has not yet experienced a reversed side of the It. P tries to expand in the sense of It. Interphase: Increasing concentration on the needs of the It; Exclusion of the enemies; Blackwhite-scheme. 2nd phase: Crisis P only stays stable as long as he/she has enough energy to follow +*, fight against ‒* and to fill 0*. The exertion of force that is used by P, to stabilize the psychical balance/ the center, is becoming bigger and bigger. This force will be missing in general life. In this phase, the It will be experienced as more ambivalent and negative. P becomes increasingly a victim of It. Typical features of this phase: • Expensive balance + ‒ Ambivalent situations and dilemmas: There are opposite phenomena that co-exist and keep a stiff balance. There is always the danger of tip over, the loss of balance, or the risk of being torn. Examples: see unabridged German version. Symbol also Yin-Yang ☯, see below). 192 • Vicious Cycles or Spirals Vicious circles can arise between all opposing It-parts or sides. Here three possible main courses are shown (similar to electrons on their tracks with quantum leaps). They start mostly with pro/+, then because of increasing disadvantages, they spring to the advantages of contra-part (or to +0), and then the same game from the beginning or new games with new sA. That all at the expense of the person concerned. • Zero point There is chaos at zero point. The affected person is 'dangling in the air'. Usually, P has distinct symptoms, is vulnerable - and constantly endangered to fall back into old patterns. The advantages and disadvantages of the Its are equal. This is also a point where P has to make decisions. The zero point is danger and chance at the same time. In this highly labile state, just before a turnover of the system, the Its are very aggressive and cause P to be very agitated (example: Panic-attacks or florid psychoses). • Reversal into the opposite Starting position: +sA above, ‒sA below +sA becomes more negative ‒sA becomes more positive tipping point contrary to the starting position: (‒sA above, +sA below) or disintegration This graphic illustrates the reversal into the opposite (psychical tilting mechanism) by using the Yin-Yang symbol or into disintegration. P can tip-over into the opposite or emptiness and breaks. Wherever previously advantages were, are now more and more disadvantages being created, until the It (or the system) turns completely into the opposite or disintegrates. The illustration should also show how the pros and cons of the It increase exponentially before the system tipping over. The system inflates, becomes extremely ambivalent and collapses (→ 0) or tips over into the opposite. [•Toward → 0, e.g., Friedrich Nietzsche: "... the man seems to have fallen on to a steep plane - he rolls faster and faster away from the center - whither? into nothingness?" In: The Genealogy of Morals/Third Essay. •Toward → 0pposite: In general: exaggerations, extremes, strange absolutes and the like. E.g., Robert Musil: “Ideals have curious properties, and one of them is that they turn into their opposites if one exactly wants to obey them.“ In: The Man Without Qualities´. Or P. Watzlawick, who pointed out that an excess of good always turns into evil. Or: Too much of a good turns into negative.] You can find in all aspects of WPI this tipping over into the opposite according to this basic pattern that can be caused by all possible Its! In practice, it is mostly that the person (s) must sacrifice themselves or others more and more in order to compensate for the ever-increasing disadvantages in the system and 193 thus to prevent the downfall of what is their Absolute, their "Self", that what they themselves have become. 3rd phase: Collapse P is now the final victim/ sacrifice of the It. First P is going down, then his Its. In this phase, it is typical for the person to fall ill because they can no longer pay the price for maintaining +sA and the defense against ‒sA and s0. It is the dynamics of individuals, but also of entire societies and entire cultures that were broken in this way. In this phase the mercilessness of the ruling It towards P shows itself quite unvarnished. While it seemed the It has given P absolute importance at the beginning of their interaction, P is now more and more brutally suppressed and sucked out. P has to sacrifice himself for his It - or, from P's point of view, P prefers to die himself before he sacrifices his strange Absolutes. For me, Friedrich Nietzsche is a typical example of how in the course of his life an increasingly dangerous, ever increasing struggle for his ideals and against his anti-ideals led to psychosis. (Also see: `Sacrificial-dynamics', `Crisis and falling ill´ and 'About the emergence of paradoxes'.) 194 Complex Personal Dynamics and Relationship Disorders (See also the remarks in the section (→ Opposites, fusions and negations) Possibilities of Interactions Every P² can create a pact with another P², fight, or neutralize him/her. (Symbols:  = Pact, # = Opposites, 0 = annulment). That means, they create pacts, opposites or neutralize each other because each of their It/sA -centers has three main options of reaction: too pro (+), too contra (‒) or too 0. Each P² is therefore very fast friend or enemy or indifferent to other P². Put in other words: P² tend to love or to hate others too much, or to ignore them. The graphic illustrates two P² with all their It/sA-interaction-possibilities. Example: If the first P² absolutized 'wealth', the white triangle represents the pro-sphere (wealth) with its three sides/corners (+/‒/0) = advantage, disadvantage and indifference of wealth. The gray triangle represents the opposite of wealth - poverty - and its three sides/corners. The dotted triangle represents neither wealth nor poverty (0). All three triangles (parts of 1. P²) are connected to each other and dependent on each other. (→ `It as nine-sided triad´). Depending on which side of the It/sA is activated, this will merge or combat or erase a second person's It/sA (or Co-It/sA). Suggesting that the second person is dominated by 'power', the advantages of wealth of the first person would create a pact with the advantages of power and collide with the disadvantages of power, etc. (List of all interactions in second-rate personal systems, "games" of P², and details on pacts, antagonism and annulment, see unabridged German version). Interactions of Opposite P²s Opposite It/sA resp. their representatives fight or support or neutralize each other. • Opposite It/sA fight each other if they are both connoted equally. (Example: Wealth is +*, asceticism is +*). • Opposite It/sA support each other and make a pact if they are connoted opposite. (Example: wealth is ‒* and asceticism is +*) • Opposite It/sA neutralize each other if they suppress each other´s advantages and disadvantages. (Example: wealth does not matter, asceticism does not matter). 195 Interactions of P²s who are too Similar • Equal P²s create a pact if they are connoted the same. • Equal P²s fight each other if they have opposite connotations. • Equal P²s neutralize each other if they suppress each other´s advantages and disadvantages. Overly Equals and Opposites in Relationships When trying to find a certain cause for a certain result (e.g., certain actions/ reactions/ symptoms /behavior), one should not only think about the main cause but also about the opposite as cause. A common example is the connection of morality and immorality. Usually, morals would oppress immorality. However, the opposite may occur as well if excessive morality causes immorality. In a relationship, that could cause a hypermoral person to cause amoral behavior of others. Or: Excessive fidelity causes betrayal, fixated love causes hate and so on. In principle love* views hate* as its enemy. Love* then, is the strongest remedy² against hate*. However, excessive love* will promote hate* if love* became too negatively (too exhausting). Then, love* and hate* create a pact with each other. Also the other way around if hate* appears as too negatively, the excessive love* seems to be a savior. Further examples: Machismo fights feminism and vice versa - but at a certain point, both create what they fought before. Machismo suppresses women and brings surrogate potency to the man but in the long run impotence. Impotent men need machismo to stay potent, even though they tend to remain impotent in the long run. Exaggerated feminism suppresses men and gives women short surrogate satisfaction but long-term frigidity. Frigid women need feminism for surrogate satisfaction, although in a long way they tend to remain frigid. Both machismo and exaggerated feminism promote homosexual tendencies. (→ Dynamics of opposites) Inversed topics always have two opposite meanings. 211 Examples: Because my father drinks too much alcohol, I drink too much as well. / Because my father drinks too much alcohol, I am not drinking. “You are doing fine because you do not have much to do.” / “I am feeling bad because I have nothing to do.” “We are so much in debt already, it does not matter if we spend a few more dollars.” / “We are so much in debt already, we have to save every penny.” Her: “I am ill, that´s why I cannot also deal with your illness as well.” / Him: “I thought you would be 211 Therefore, all parties involved are more or less right in a conflict of interests. 196 able to understand my illness and my situation because you are ill yourself.”, etc. There can be a special situation if the advantages and disadvantages (pro and contra) have the same strength. That may also be the reason, why one person is being desired and feared at the same time. One may fear or desire the opposite at the same time. In that case, one dear and desire one thing and its opposite simultaneously. (See also: `Ambivalent and paradoxical reactions´). Personal System and Relationship Disorders over the Course of Time 1st Emergence of the Strange, Collective Absolute - the Collusion Origin of a disorder of a system or relationship is usually a mental overload. The affected people react to this overload by using compromises or emergency solutions. In the emergency, they try to find support and relief in the Relative. Since their previous Absolute has abandoned them, they establish new bases, new centers, new strange Selves, compensatory-Absolutes, or the reactivate old ones.212 Often the new center is established within a group/system. That way, fixed balances are created (usually unknowingly) that save the system from the feared collapse but with high costs. The system, as well as the individual, is in a constant dilemma: On one hand, there is a desire of changing the emergency-balance and to end the costs and on the other hand, there are strong tendencies of remaining the homeostasis to avoid the feared collapse. The basic patterns of those disorders are equal to the strange Self-disorders and will be found more detailed in that chapter. In the following section, I want to point out the most important aspects of relationship-disorders. Such as the psychical disorders in general, the story of relationship-disorders is about dependence or lack of relationships. Dependence is mainly caused by false love and hate. Both cannot be held apart because false love also contains parts of hate and lack of relationship, such as a person that hates another person, cannot be apart from that person, and cannot build a real relationship. Dependence means dependent on sA; sA may be a person or something that was absolutized by P. Example: A person `A´ may be dependent on two strange-Selves (sS) that may be achievement* and intellect*. This person `A´ is dependent on these two factors. They are important for him-/herself, `A´ is fixated on them. They have characteristics of an Absolute. `A´ gives them greater importance then him-/herself. Whatever we have already discussed when talking about the strange Self, applies here. The person `A´ is determined by three main factors: By the actual Self and two strange-Selves. Whenever other people create a relationship with person `A´, where they cooperate with 212 In the following, I usually speak of the strange Self (sS) or the strange Absolute (sA) as synonyms. One could also speak of the 'It' because of the cooperation of several sA. 197 `A's dependence, a collusion arises. 213 The direct dependences/ fixations of person `A´ will also become a dependences/ fixations of other persons/ people. More precisely: Person `B´ cooperates with the fact that the strange-Selves of `A´ (achievement* and intellect*) determine the relationship. Person `B´ is caught in a co-dependence. These dependencies can only come from one person - but usually, two or more people are involved. In our example, there will be an additional sS (absolute fidelity towards the partner) of person `B´ that also is part of the relationship. Person `A´ will also be dominated by that sS. With that, the interdependence becomes even stronger. The absolutizations are transmitted and determine both of them (or the whole system). All the affected people then become dependent. On one side, the sS/sA cause the affected people to stick together, on the other side they appear as topics that cause arguments and disagreements later on. If we think of several people, such as a family (parents, two kids) that adapted the mentioned absolutizations, which we will mark as 1*, 2* and 3*, the situation will be as listed below: Father: 1. achievement* 2. intellect* 3. fidelity* (sS of wife) Mother: 1. achievement* 2. Intellect* (adapted from husband) 3.fidelity* (own sS) Child 1: 1. achievement* 2. intellect* 3. fidelity* Child 2: 1. achievement* 2. intellect* 3. fidelity* Illustration: Four people have the same absolutizations (1*, 2*, 3*), that oppress their own Self. All of the affected people are therefore dominated by the named strange Absolutes. Similar constellations can be found in bigger groups or societies. There are other illustrations as well: A B 3* 1* C 213 2* D Synonyms: pact, wrong friendship, symbiosis. 198 Left-hand side: People circle around three, second-rate fixpoints. They create an unstable wholeness. Motto: “We (A, B, C, D) agree that there are 3 priorities in our lives (here: achievement*, intellect* and fidelity*). They are our unconditional goals in life. They give us self-affirmation, fortune, sense, stability etc. We submit ourselves to them.” Right-hand side: Possible “orbits” of these three persons around the three sA. Although those people are individuals, they are mentally connected with each other through the sA and represent a whole, a system of collusion. One sees that the system of collusion is marked by the fact that it does not have one center but multiple centers that are orbited by these persons. They can be compared to fix points, although they are really not. They may be called second-rate centers or second-rate fix points. The affected people “wobble” around them. Their orbit is more similar to an ellipse than an actual circle (Greek: ellipsis = deficiency).214 One may also refer to it as an unconscious, strange community-self, an unconscious, joint pseudo-identity, or as collective, strange absolutization/ collective It, which is the basis of those systems. This system is dominated by a certain spirit. Everything of the actual Self, such as identity, right of self-determination, self-esteem, self-security and so on, is made dependent on the collective, strange Absolutes (sA). Therefore, there is some sort of pressure for all the members to adapt to the system. Everybody has to function a certain way in order for the system to work. Even though the sA give the affected people what they cannot achieve themselves (at least they believe so) but at the same time, they are like holes that have to be stuffed constantly or like predators that have to be fed all the time. The food that they like the most is the Self. The sA partly protect the affected people but also expect them to give up their Selves. The ambivalent role of fixated familiar mindsets, taboos, principles or ideologies was mentioned before. The created wholeness with its different centers is only stable as long as the members confirm it to be so. As soon as one person questions one point, or does not fulfill the expected role anymore, the whole system becomes unstable. As long as that does not happen, the system can be compared to a conspiratorial unity with strict rituals. If someone does not follow those rituals, that person has to expect sanctions. Instead of achieving free self-determination, everyone is stuck in the circle of common absolutizations. Family therapists also refer to this as 'family-myth'. Ferreira said that such as any other myth, that the family-myth expresses shared beliefs about humans and their relationship within families. They are convictions that are accepted and viewed as something holy, although they include a great variety of falsehood. The family-myth dictates the member's roles. Those roles and duties are accepted fully, even if they are absolutely wrong and fatuous in reality. Nobody would dare to 214 As I said, in this example, father or mother themselves (and what they represent) or else a person may form a wrong center point in the system. 199 reassess them nor to change them.215 If a member of the family/system tries to play a role other than the one assigned, it will be seen and treated as a betrayal. 216 Even if the change would be beneficial for all members, it is initially viewed as a danger that causes resistance. The resistance is stronger the more one or another member of the system has something to lose, although in the long run, it is the other way around. Everything in this world can be absolutized and then take a central position. As mentioned before, certain ideologies, ideals, taboos and people or their ways of thinking are most commonly absolutized. This makes them the cause of collusions. Especially concerning beloved people, a person often mistakenly believes that it is love to give up their right to self-determination and to place the other person at the center of their being. It can be distinguished: • identical (or symmetric) collusion: People who are part of the collusion have the same sA. • complementary collusion: The absolutizations complement each other. • mirror-image collusion: The sA are primarily opposites (+sA # ‒sA) but the reversed sides match each other (= pact of the opposites). In the example given above, all the affected people have the same fixated centers. The main motto of the complementary collusion is: “I fulfill your unconditional desires if you fulfill mine in return.” That kind of 'teamwork' is even stronger if the members have certain talents - or even: if everyone must do it. So, if one member has to achieve a certain thing, and another person has to give it to him. Example: different strange Absolutes, that work in a complementary collusive way: MAN: I definitely must ... …have sex ...have a beautiful wife ...admire her ...be her ideal …help ...be dominant I must not… …give up ...have a wife who is like my mother in law. I give her recognition Both P are connected to each other in a collusive way: I fulfill your ideals* and fend your taboos*. In return, you fulfill my ideals* and fend my taboos*. WOMAN: I definitely must... ...give sex … look good ...be appreciated ...be his ideal ...receive help I must not... ...be dominant ...become like my mother I have no worth 215 Quotation from M. Selvini Palazzoli. The quote lifts very emphatically the central role of what I call strange Absolute (sA). The unadapted member usually comes into a counter-role (e.g., black sheep) which restores a certain system equilibrium. Or it is liquidated, brought to zero. To compensate, however, an external enemy image can also serve. 216 200 At first, these people are like in a wheel of fortune: their ideals* and taboos * complement each other and they both can be just as the other one needs them. At a later stage, it becomes clear that they have to be the way the other person needs them. The absolutized positive* has to be given at any cost, while the absolutized negative* has to be fended at any cost. These or other collusions are only possible if those affected people are not determined by the actual Self but by sA. sA sA People can only be dependent within the system and collusively connected if they are also sA-determined themselves. Whether it is an identical or a complementary collusion: The initial wheel of fortune eventually turns into a vicious circle (see below). Since the dependence is mainly unconsciously, it takes a long time to analyze the patterns of collusion. The affected people initially have a feeling of a strong common bond such as “We are creating an ideal whole together”, or “We agreed that we will always be there for each other”, “Your luck is my luck”, “Only you make me happy”, or even “It does not matter how I am, as long as you are feeling good.” Such symbiotic feelings are experienced as very pleasant by people, mainly in the beginning of a relationship. That is the +* side of collective misabsolutizations but that is inextricably connected to a ‒* and a 0-side. The core of the later combats can already be seen inside of them. This situation could be symbolized as follows: The necessity of a balance between two people. (The smaller the joint basis, the less scope there is for the two P in the system. The basis is narrower the farther the sA is to the actual A.) Or: WOMAN He* MAN She* BOTH She He* 201 Illustration: symbols of collusion between a man and a woman. 217 Both cores (Selves) are not free/ independent, as it would be optimal but overlap each other. One is within the core of the other, one is the other´s strange Self. Left: The man determines the woman. Center: She determines him. Right: The mutual heteronomy put together. Both have a symbiotic, dependent relationship. He is within her core and she is within his core. In the beginning, they are complementary, although he is a strange Self for her and she is a strange Self for him. One is the other´s self-replacement. Such as: One is the other´s happiness because they cannot be happy enough on their own. Therefore each one also has to be the other person's happiness. Or one is the other´s compensatory self-protection, selfesteem, self-determination etc. One´s desire becomes the other´s command. Each one has primary responsibility for the other one as well, which also limits the own right of selfdetermination. That also means: All people that play a part in a collusion give up their selfdetermination (partly). They then live a secondary, non-actual, heteronomous life, instead of a life that is based on voluntariness and self-determination. Everybody is in control of everyone else. If a woman has a lot of sex appeal, she might dominate the man. But at the same time, she makes to become the sex object of the man who therefore dominates her, too. Both of them dominate and are dominated at the same time. They are experiencing a +*(thrill) emotion if they receive whatever matches their +sA. But they also feel bad (‒*) if they lose it or if they are being confronted with their ‒sA. Then, there will be a crisis. Another picture: Both work with each other like (uneven) gear-wheels: Wherever one person has a deficiency, the other person has something to give. Complementary collusion: Gear-wheels complement each others fixated ideals* and taboos*. A lot of times, the patterns of collusion are cross-generational and can be found in the relationships of the parents and the children. In the next generation, one often finds the same sA (or collusive pattern) or the opposite! You may think of it as many gear-wheels, like a clock mechanism. Functioning is the top priority. The individuals represent the wheels in a gearbox (family, group, state). It is not surprising that some people feel like they are only a small gearwheel within a giant gearbox? If you look at the bigger picture you will realize that every single person (wheel) has to function/work in a certain way because the person him/herself and all the others need it that way. Everybody has to turn him-/herself and all the others into slaves of their own strange Absolutes. 217 Instead of "man" or "woman" can stand also any other person or group relationship. 202 There are different sorts of dependence of the affected people within the system of collusion. It may come mainly from one person, while the others are just following (unknowingly). However, it is more common that all of the affected people are part of something that causes dependence and that also causes the others of the system to subjugate. To a certain extent, that is normal. Every person is somewhat heteronomous and transfers this to other people. There, the person is manipulable, corruptible, suppressed and debased. As strong as the bonding powers may be, there will be more and more of a countertendency within the system, of trying to burst the bonds and to leave the system - especially when it comes to the members of the system that have to pay the highest cost for these fixations. Typical Examples for Collusions • An old, wealthy man and young, poor woman (complementary collusion) • Prostitution: The man is giving the woman money in order to have sex, which he needs (or believes to need), she gives him sex and receives the money she needs. • Male helper - ill woman • Admiring mother - thankful son • Strict parents - obedient daughter. • Harmony-seeking woman who desires to be loved - man who seeks acknowledgment. • Partners who correspond in anti-sex moral (identical collusion). Both have a fixated view: Sex is dirty, they fear sex (‒*). Advantage: No quarrel, no conflicts; Disadvantage: No pleasure. • Him: addicted to alcohol and therefore impotent; Her: cannot be alone, gives him alcohol, causes him (unknowingly?) to stay impotent and prevents him from being interested in other women. He stays with her and secures his nursing and she does not have to stay alone. In literature the following examples are usually mentioned: The collusion of a helper and a person in need (= oral collusion), a person who idealizes and a person that has been idealized (= narcissistic collusion), ruler and sufferer (= anal-sadistic collusion), sexual leader and the one being led (= phallic-oedipal collusion). Additional examples: Sadomasochistic relationship; Familiar collusion with a poster child and a black sheep; Victim-offendercollusion and so on. 218 There is an endless amount of such patterns of dependence. They can appear in relationships, families, or other groups and societies. What is the Common of these Collusion Systems? • They are being created if misabsolutizations and negations dominate within a system. • Factual issues, that interfere with the sA, are taken personally. 218 See in particular: Jürg Willi: `Die Zweierbeziehung´, Rowohlt TB 1975/ 2012. 203 • The affected person is dependent on his/her own strange Self and the ones of others. • Everybody in the system is conditioned to those sS. Everyone in those spheres is manipulable, corruptible, alienated, dependent and became an object there. • Everybody experiences the common sS as more important than the own actual Self. • Everybody becomes an expedient (to reach the sA). • Everybody is in the sphere of the others Self. • Everybody only loves him-/herself under certain circumstances if the sS-requirements are being fulfilled. • Everybody does not love him-/herself and others enough. • The members sacrifice (partly) the most precious thing they have, the actual Self, for something Relative. • In the beginning, the collusion has more subjective advantages than disadvantages to offer. • Everybody gives up his/her first-rate responsibility for him-/herself and the others. At first, it appears to be relieving. Nobody has first-rate responsibility anymore, which looks like a perfect deal. Eventually, that luck of fortune turns into a kind of clock mechanism. | Second Phase: the System is Still Functioning (Clock-Mechanism) While the advantages of the collusion are in the foreground in the beginning, the high is coming to an end in this phase. The system is still working but it takes much more effort. The advantages and disadvantages of collusion are still balanced. The system is in a deadlockposition. Everybody gives the others what he/she has to give and is still able to meet the requirements. The reciprocity is still balanced. Since the advantages of the collusion become less, the system begins to be in a dilemma: The previous balance becomes too expensive but venturing something new seems too risky. The question is: Who has to pay for the dilemma? And: Who is taking the effort to solve the common problem? Third Phase: Crisis, Enmity and Conflict "Kill your neighbor as yourself." (André Glucksmann) In the crisis, all the extremes become more apparent. The system loses its balance. (→ Reversal into the opposite). A crisis is developed if the compensation forces of the members are exceeded. It is the time of mutual set-off, blame assignments, in which everyone also has a piece of right. (Common example: He drinks because she is nagging, she is nagging because he drinks). The crisis happens along with similar intra-psychical processes. The crisis of the collusive relationship is preprogrammed if the affected people did not find a deeper solution so far. 219 The disadvantages of those relationship-patterns become more apparent: 219 From a religious point of view, relationships that are not based on +A are particularly vulnerable. Why? I believe we human beings are designed for an absolute, unconditional love, which nobody but only God can give us, But this is also not a guarantee for a happy relationship. 204 One is in control of the other. Everybody becomes more manipulable and corruptible. Everyone gives too much and sucks the other at the same time. They all become more and more irritated. That becomes understandable, as both experience some kind of lovedeficiency and the compensatory-love is not giving enough. Both desire true love more and more. The only option they see is to give love by fulfilling each others sS-requirements. Since the affected people only love each other under certain prerequisites, it is hard to keep up the love, especially if the other person's love seems to disappear as well. ”I sacrificed myself for you." "I did not love myself anymore, I only loved you.” Sentences like that can be heard in almost every relationship-crisis. Both experience more pressure, the more the crisis grows. Both of them have to put much more effort into the relationship, to be happy. The freedom they have becomes steadily smaller and the dependency becomes steadily bigger. *_________* *_________* I *_________* You *_________* ***** I You Illustration: The strange-Selves* that originally connected the affected people with their positive sides become separating strange-Selves due to their reversed sides. In this phase, everyone feels like being the other person´s object of satisfaction (not without good reason). And indeed: They abuse each other and themselves (usually unknowingly) to keep their own +sA and to fend the ‒sA. The young, poor woman (example above) will accuse the old, wealthy man of viewing her as sex-object, while the man will accuse the woman of only being after his money. They are both somewhat right when saying: “You make me dependent on you. You suck me dry. I am only an object for you, only an instrument to satisfy your wishes (sA)”. In this situation, the affected people argument with half-truths, where they view themselves as the only victim. They do not mention the other half of the truth: That they allowed the other person to act as an offender or that they offered to be treated as a victim. They will say “you do not love me”, while they do not love themselves either. They view themselves as losers and the partner as the winner, which is not accurate. They ignore the fact that the main reason for the crisis is not the lack of love to the other person but to something Relative. It is love on the roundabout way, “wrong” and fixated love, and all people included in the situation come off badly. Everybody is betrayed. However, the affected people usually have no overview. They do not realize what kind of unconscious dynamics caused them to be victims. Those people remain in a vicious circle, such as “I will only give you what you need if you give me what I need”, or “If you do not love me anymore, I will not love you either.” Soon, there will be a fight. The affected people entrench themselves and fight for the survival of the mental life. In reality, they fight for the survival of their strange Selves. They are convinced that they cannot live without them. The partners usually argument on different levels: On the sS-level, or on the Self-level. The sS-levels are contrary in this phase 205 and also contradict the Self-level. Therefore, those people live and talk at cross purposes with each other. PERSON A ||. ↓ I gave you so much money* acknowledgment* and much more  || PERSON B ↓ I gave you so much sex*  dominance *  and much more The communication, argumentation and eventually the fight of the partners is mainly about the sS* (arrows). People take different standpoints and therefore talk at cross purposes. Direct communication has stopped (||). Such as the strange Absolutes were a big part of the relationship in the beginning, they are also the main focus in the fights. Jürg Willi: ”Partners often represent themselves as a polarized unit that is being held together by a common issue of dispute”.220 Unconsciously but accurately the partners injure their strange Selves. Those are the sore points because there is no actual Self in those spheres (no self-protection, no self-esteem, no self-identity). Thus the attacks on the Absolutes will be experienced as an attack on the respective person him-/herself.221 Therefore, the attacked person feels like he/she has to fight for his/her right of existence, even for his/her life. The use of absolute-terms such as “always”, “never”, “definitely”, “impossible” is another indicator that the conflicts take place in the absolutesphere of the person. Let's take another look at the crisis situation using the example of the boat without keel (= without + A), where two people maintain an expensive balance. Here, the complex dynamics in which the system members are located, is particularly clear: They both stabilize and burden each other at the same time. They act right and wrong simultaneously. Right because they stabilize the system and wrong because the stabilization is of a very high cost and because they do not risk a change. So everyone can rightly accuse the other person of being wrong. But with the same right everyone will be able to assert that he stabilizes only the system and a change makes danger. “You are the only reason I lean back so far if I did not do that, you would fall into the water.” “That is your way of thanking me for my sacrifices that you're blaming me now.” 220 Jürg Willi: `Die Zweierbeziehung´, Rowohlt, p. 14 If P puts a matter above itself and identifies with it, then it means attacking on its own person from this point of view, if someone attacks the thing. 221 206 The other person may argue with the fact that he/she has to lean out even further to balance the boat out because the other person is already leaning out so far. Both sides may have good intentions but receive only criticism for it. The affected person might even query him-/herself in silence. That way the circle is closed: I, or the others, or everyone is doing it wrong. "How one does it, it is wrong." The system destroys itself, although nobody wanted it.222 It is a fallacy to think that a person could free oneself by taking a counter position. The person remains in the system and stabilizes it even more. Only a positive destabilization (sitting relaxed inside of the boat, or -better- choosing a boat with a keel), or leaving the system will help. However, that is usually viewed negatively by the other members of the system because the system temporarily becomes unstable. If one member does not fulfill the common sA-requirements anymore and stops being manipulable, or he/she will not be able to be part of the stabilization of the system - then the system comes into a crisis and this member will encounter resistance (internal and external). 4th Phase: Sacrifice, Illness as Emergency-Solution If a system faces the danger of decompensation, it can be compared to a boat that is about to keel over. One of the most important tries to stabilize the (family-)system, is the emergency-solution with illness.223 The person sacrifices his/her health to stabilize the system. He/she is the victim and martyr for the system.224 “I would rather be sick than seeing the others being sick”, “It is better to be sick than to call into question the family.” Such are the unconscious mottoes of the patient and he/she does not have to question its own absolutizations. Since the system becomes more and more selfdestroying (the more sA-determined it is), the costs will be raising. Not everyone is paying the same price though. Even if the index patient often pays the highest price, it will nevertheless be sensible for the therapist to accept all members of the system and their situation and not to take a single-point position. Only if there is an accepting attitude it will be possible to try actual and deeper solutions which are usually painful for the included people, although they are an advantage in the long run. (See also `Resistance´ and concerning therapy `The umbilical cord´ and `The small child in us´). 222 Of course, not all people are always good at others. But no one can judge from the outside about the motivation of the others. Therefore, it is wise to suppose initially a positive motivation of all system members, without excluding a negative one. 223 Elsewhere, unconscious emergency solutions are mentioned →`Emergency by disease´. 224 Barbara Gordon describes in her book “I´m dancing as fast as I can” particularly impressively the overly high price for a "happy" but dependent relationship and how quickly it can tip over to its opposite. 207 From Complex to Symptom Complex Interactions This chapter is mainly concerned with the development of symptoms or mental disorders by focusing on the various causative sA / Its or complexes. S. Freud imagined that psychical powers can act such as physical forces with vectors. Then the sum of the energy would be converted into a symptom. Something similar is true of the field theory of Kurt Lewin, which states that "out of an arrangement of psychologically relevant forces (vector forces), individual behavior emerges."225 Von Uexküll created the term of “changing function units”.226 These conceptions correspond to those of this thesis, which regard the sS/Its and their complexes as dominating "function units" with corresponding vectors. I assume the following hypotheses: • Symptoms are equivocal because different reasons may cause symptoms to occur. • Every inversion has the potential to cause/support any symptom, although with varying probability. • Psychical symptoms may have organic causes. • Symptoms may be signs of an aberration or a misbehavior of the affected person him-/herself. • The appearance of symptoms may also have nothing to do with the person concerned but originate from other sources (environment, other people, etc.) Rarely are they from + A. 227 • Finally, symptoms can also be an expression of positive development; as in withdrawal, when the individual tries to relativize the It/sA-complexes on which he is dependent. • Ordinarily, many factors together will cause a symptom or a mental disorder. The sorts of conditions are similar to the ones of the emergence of weather or accidents. The weather forecast is probably still easier than the 'forecast' of symptoms. In most cases, the context of cause and symptoms is hardly able to indicate. Some conditions seem more constant, others more variable. Organic or even genetic causes are more constant, while psychical or mental influences are more variable. Even a very brief influence may cause a symptomatology, such as the last straw will break the camel's back. The emergence of symptoms appears to be dependent on the following factors: • What kind of It/sA are being effective? The kind of It/sA also determines the effects. What effects does the +sA, or the ‒sA have? The +sA mostly attracts (addiction), while the ‒sA causes fear. What is the difference in the effects of a +sA in the shape of a person (idol*) and an object, or ideology (success*)? • How is the interaction and how influences that affect the person? • How is the person structured? Organically or psychically. 225 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feldtheorie_%28Psychologie%29, 2013. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symptomwandel, 2013. 227 Relative negative can come also from God and from the ‒A relative positive, but God aims ultimately at the + A and the ‒ A has the negative to the goal. 226 208 • Where are their “black”, “white” or 0 points, where P is seducible, able to be frustrated, or without answer? • If a dysfunction has been established, it will most likely affect the sphere, where the certain function is necessary or dominant. (Regarding psychosomatic medicine: skin: mostly contact; gastro-intestinal tract: mostly ingestion and excretion; liver and pancreas: mostly processing/digesting; kidney: mostly excretion; larynx: mostly output of information, etc.) However, some authors exaggerate those connections. • How are the outer circumstances? • How is the further inner/outer interaction between all the effective powers? There are many factors that determine what kind of psychical or mental disorder is being developed. Or as Heimann said: The symptom is the “Common end of complicated condition connections.“ 228 As mentioned, I believe that inversions play a big role as primary causes. In addition, I am convinced that the cause of the mental disorder is less specific than generally meant. One reason for the small specificity of the causes can be found within the “spreading and compression” of the effects (discussed below). Spreading and Compression229 E. Bleuler writes: "Contrary to previous expectations, one and the same damage, which has a psychological effect, may lead to many symptoms, and one and the same symptom may have many causes."230 Similar A.R. Brunoni: “… patients with different mental disorders can share similar symptoms, while those with the same diagnosis might have different symptoms.”231 L. Ciompi has attributed these experiences to various generalization and abstraction processes. In the context of this publication, that means: All It/sA and their complexes scatter in such a way that they can cause many disorders, such as all pr disorders may be caused by various It/sA and their complexes. None of those entities has only one effect but multiple effects with three contradicting ones each (pro-, contra- and 0). If we assume that every person is carrying a great number of such complexes, then that also means that there is a great variety of different factors of effects. 228 Heimann see bibliography. Similar: generalization and abstraction. 230 E. Bleuler see the bibliography p 113. 231 A.R. Brunoni in http://www.scielo.br/pdf/rpc/v44n6/0101-6083-rpc-44-06-0154.pdf, 2017. 229 209 Read from left to right, those graphics illustrate the following aspects of spreading and compression: - The picture on the far left illustrates how one It (*) is the cause of three opposite vectors.232 There is one main-vector (solid arrow) and two side-vectors (dashed arrows). The main-vector is based on the dominating It-part (here: +pro-sA) and the side-vectors are based on the contra-sA and the 0part of the It. Every It “scatters” in three different directions. Even if there is only one main-effect seen superficially, the side-effects have a latent existence. - The picture in the middle shows how different vectors of two Its work together: In our example, the main-effects and the side-effects of the two Its potentiate in a way that creates compression. The top compression has a positive connotation (such as a positive condition), the middle has a negative connotation (negative condition), and the bottom compression has a 0 connotation (deficit). - The right picture illustrates how the situation within a person can be imagined: The two Its (*) that are located in the absolute sphere of a person (the Self) cause the described dysfunctions or disorders in the relative-sphere. Spreading and compression illustrated as 3 stones that were thrown into the water. They cause “spreading” as well as overlaps (“compression”). Also, there are different centers and distortions. In the figurative sense, one can say that symptoms develop where the "waves" overlap. And that their origin and location (kind of symptom) also depends on the "water quality" (condition of the system) and on the shore (ambient conditions), at which the waves are reflected. Spreading and Compression in More Detail In the following graphic, I tried to explain the effects of spreading and compression in the example of the absolutization in aspect 14 (truth / lie). 232 For the sake of simplicity, this is only shown differently and not in opposite directions. 210 Notes: 1. Here are shown only 21 aspects. 233 2. The spreading actions come from attitudes (ideologies) that are not listed here but in the Summary table in column E. absolute action loss and new strange FUNCTION or QUALITYdisorder FEATURES SECONDARY ACTIONS CHANGE (relative actions) 1. neglecting/ I-weakness, withdrawal, more egocentric, the I damaging of the I autoaggressivity splitting of the I more divided 2 damaging, disturbing, obedience, giving up, more dependent, COMMUNITY overmatching mismatch misidentifying less normal someone lack of structure not functioning, more amorphous, 3 hurting STRUCTURE being ill organically malfunctioning misshapen 4 wounding, sadness, fear grieving, sorrowing, more painful, CONDITION insulting, inciting snap on misfeeling dulled 5 robbing someone, BELONGINGS/ being poor, vegetating, emptier, indulging OWNERSHIP being indulged dragging heavier 6 not enabling, weakness, weaker, OPPORTUNITY failing misconditioning misconditions more chronic 7 causing chaos, being confused, disintegration, irregular, ORDER forcing being compulsive acting under constraint more ritualized 8 not orientating, lack of orientation, straying, stumbling, ORIENTATION less directed moralizing disorientation fumbling 9 allowing everything, being unrestrained, to exceed something, less controlled, forbidding what is FREEDOM being inhibited being stuck less free wrong false freedom 10 wanting nothing/ WILL willlessness, addiction, no moving, not doing more mechanic, motivating falsely GOAL wrong aspirations anything, only following falsely automatic 11 not dreaming, imaginativeness, fizzling out, more monotonous, REALITY escaping reality worldliness, false realityfalse creating more abstruse 12 not doing anything, RESULT inactivity / activism, less flexible, limping, cramping doing the wrong thingSUCCESSmisbehavior less successful 13 not informing, blindness, not realizing, less clear, more INFORMATION informed falsely false information false realizing contradicting 14 Truth* becoming silent, less expressions, reticence, negating/ TRUTH repression, suppressing, more symbolic, illusion twisting* compensatory-behavior less natural 15 disparaging, weak judgment, VALUES/ more inadequate, misinterpreting overstating, wrong judgment WORTH exaggerated mispricing disbelief lack of reaction, 16 omitting, missing, lack of criticism, not reacting, reacting too much, QUALITY not forgiving guilt, being too critical false reactions reacting in wrong way 17 not handling past, immaturity, regressing, more archaic, PAST handling past wrong wrong past misbehavior more recurring 18 dawdling, PRESENT apathy, missing, too slow rushing TIME being rushed rushing too fast resigning, 19 not/ falsely plannin hopelessness, false expecting PERSPECTIVE more hesitant expecting wrongly false expectations ~ 20 acting in an anti-me women, -sex way, LOVE idolizing 21 not protecting, PROTECTION stifling 233 asexuality, false sexuality sexual malfunctioning, sexual failing too neutral, sexually subnormal lack of resistance, morosity giving up, false defense reacting wrongly, reacting too much The numbering is not the same as for the other individual aspects. 211 Explanations of Table About Spreading: In the left column of the chart, the different aspects are listed and it is being illustrated, how the absolutization of aspect 14 causes potential factors of spreading on all of the other aspects. It can be differentiated between a main vector and many side-vectors. Examples: 1. Frank is lying to John. Following aspect 14, John will experience a disturbance of truth. Since the lie is hurting his self-sphere, the “whole John” is affected. That means that it is not only the disturbance of truth that is developing within John but (at least potentially) a disorder of the entire psychical sphere (all aspects): a more or less severe disorder is being developed of his I, of his relationships, of his inner structures and psychical conditions, ownership, opportunities, orders, orientations, freedom, success, reality, behavior, information, values, qualities, past, time, perspective, love, protection and safety (and so on). Those aspects are differentially affected. This becomes quite clear when we specify what exactly Franz's lie was. Let us pretend that Frank lied when he said: “John, your wife is cheating on you!”. John will not only internalize the lie itself but it will also affect the relationship and the intimacy to his wife. He will probably also feel worthless, be sad, feel some kind of loss, worry about the future, become tenser, dig in the past, etc. As mentioned before, those possibilities are illustrated in a simple way, as if the lie would hit a defenseless, uncritical John. However, an affected person will have some defense-mechanisms or solutions, which decide what is defended, internalized or solved. Seeing how difficult it is to analyze such a simple example, makes one realize how complicated such occurrences are in reality. 2. A woman is told by a doctor that she has cancer. If this information becomes of absolute relevance for her, it will affect the entire person, all the pr aspects, and it will cause certain changes and reactions (as illustrated in the table above). 3. As mentioned above, it could also be illustrated how all ideologies are affecting all the aspects (if they are defined as absolutized ideas). On the right-hand side of the “possibilities of spreading”, I marked a gray column with ~. This column symbolizes that the spreading factor meets an (usually) unknown personal so-being (genes, experiences, predisposition) that also determines the characteristics and the dynamics. Due to the individual variety, I can mention it only briefly. About Compression: On the right-hand side of the chart, disorders of functions and second-rate actions of aspect 14 are listed as they may be developed as consequences of absolutizations. Focusing on the first example, they are mostly created by an absolutized lie but may also be caused by any other aspect = “compression”. Another example: If we start from a sexual impotence, it cannot only have arisen directly 212 from disturbances in this aspect (here Asp. 2o) but also from disturbances of all other aspects - e.g. through an Ego disorder, disturbance of relationship, by organic disturbances, by state or sensory disturbances, misconditionings, misorientations, inhibitions etc. About the Lack of Specificity of the Causes and Consequences I am convinced, that the fairly big lack of specificity of the causes of mental disorders is also the reason for the lack of specificity of the theories that try to explain the different psychical /psychosomatic illnesses. They seem to be exchangeable at a certain point, as you can see when comparing theories of the genesis of different illnesses such as anorexia, rheumatism, depression, fibromyalgia, migraine, stutter, etc. One could call it the law of incompleteness of psychological knowledge and the discriminability of the causes of psychological occurrence. (See also the opinion of A.R. Brunoni below.) I see a big resemblance if not even common roots, in the incompleteness theorems by K. Gödel. 234 I also see parallels to the theory of spectrum disorders.235 A Brief Derivation of Some Exemplary Symptoms/ Illnesses A sketchy superficial attempt to derive symptoms/illnesses from simple preconditions. Examples: • Fear, caused by: 1. losing +sA, or fear of its disadvantages. 2. occurrence of ‒sA. 3. – of 0. If something becomes +sA, then I will be scared that I cannot fulfill its demands or that I could lose it. If something becomes ‒sA, I will be scared that it will become. If something becomes 0, I will be scared that I have nothing at all. • Schizophrenia: If splittings are in the foreground, especially if one or more ambivalent Its determine the person for a longer time. (Otherwise, see Causes for schizophrenia in 'Psychiatry'). • Acoustic hallucinations: `P² listens too much to what other P's say´. P² hears voices of the `homunculus'. (For details, see Hallucinations). • Eating disorders: By absolutizing in the spheres of reception and possession in general and eating and similar topics specifically. • Depression: loss of +sA, while ‒sA or s0 are dominating. • Mania: Absence of ‒sA, s0 and +A, while +sA (that P is identified with) is dominating. • Obsessive-compulsive disorder: only if certain +sA are being fulfilled and ‒sA are being fended, the patient will feel secure.(Further see part `Psychiatry´). 234 235 S. lit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectrum_disorder, 2016. 213 Interpretation of Symptoms Summary: The psychical symptoms are usually ambiguous, sometimes equivocal and contradicting. That means that they usually have a pro- and a contra-meaning. Therefore, the opposite interpretation of a symptom is very likely, too. Role and Meaning of Illness and Health “I believe that diseases are keys that can open certain gates for us. I believe there exist certain gates which only disease can open. […] And perhaps illness shuts us off from certain truths but health cuts us off from other truths.” André Gide. Remarks and Hypotheses Regarding the role and the meaning of illness and health, I assume the following hypotheses: • Suffering /illness/symptoms as well as well-being/health, are Relatives. • Every of this Relative may have a positive or a negative (or 0) meaning /relevance objectively. • Subjective feelings and objective situations are often not congruent. • Suffering /illness or well-being/health, which function itself as sA, may have qualitatively equal effects/consequences, or opposite and paradoxical effects/consequences. • To gain a +sA, or to fend off a ‒sA, P may sacrifice his/her health. • At a high cost, illness may save us from the excessive demands of sA. Illness may force us to do what we are too scared to do (or have no will): to relativize the power of the sA. 236| Good Illnesses - Bad Healths? Examples: - For + sufferings: many crises, such as cord clamping, birth pain, pain of parting, pain after surgery, withdrawal, rehab, compassion. - `Bad healths´: If they are based on the expense of others. Similar: Actual Suffering and Substitute-Suffering Is there 'actual' and 'non-actual' suffering/illness? • Actual suffering (suffering¹). Actual = usually fateful, guiltless (regarding the affected person). • Substitute-suffering = indirect, shifted, senseless, unnecessary or guilty suffering. Too much suffering of the relatively negative. Or suffering because it is profitable (→ Morbid gain). C. G. Jung came up with the hypothesis: “Neurosis is always a substitute for legitimate suffering”.237 Neuroses would be the suffering from the non-actual. So, whoever avoids actual suffering, will face compensatory-suffering. With my words: Substitute-suffering 236 As I explained, I distinguish between first-rate and second-rate ( "neurotic") diseases. If I do not specifically label the term 'disease', then it is about the latter, second-rate diseases, which are in the foreground in this section. 237 https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Talk:Carl_Jung 214 emerges if the requirements of the It (and the It requires a lot) are not being fulfilled and that´s why the It punishes the person. These costs, usually in the shape of a symptom or an illness, means also a partial self-abandonment of P². I.e. P² has to sacrifice a part of the Self to satisfy the It. But: In the long run, the substitute-suffering will be greater than the actual one. This also means: Accepting the actual suffering will diminish the substitute-suffering tremendously. (→ First A then B.) "More stress than in Auschwitz there was hardly anywhere else, and right there were the typical psychosomatic diseases that are so much taken for stress-related, virtually disappeared from the earth." 238 Do Illnesses Make Sense? An additional question to the one that was just discussed is if illnesses/symptoms have a sense. Illness is relative. Therefore I believe that it can only be either relatively sensible or relatively senseless. In individual cases that would be hard to determine. A few examples will illustrate the difficulty of determination: If the dentist puts us through pain by pulling out a tooth, then it is a sensible pain. If a woman gives birth to a child, she will suffer it as a very sensible event. However, if a woman is being raped, that pain/ suffering becomes senseless to me.239 Contrariwise, not every kind of well-being or health is good or sensible. A drug-addict that has no drugs anymore will feel better if he/she gets new drugs again. A work-addict will feel better the more he/she has to do even if it is not sensible at all. Symptoms that are based on the +A are usually very sensible, such as withdrawal phenomenons, or warning signs by excessive demands (such as burn-out). The symptoms and illnesses that are in the focus of this publication and that are caused by inversion neither appear as absolutely sensible nor as senseless. Most of the times they are an expression of emergency-, or substitute-solutions that come along with substitutesuffering and therefore also some kind of “substitute-sense/reason”. Morbid Gain Definition: gain, that an ill person receives from his/her illness.240 Usual classification: (based on S. Freud) Primary morbid gain: inner/subjective gain. Secondary morbid gain: outer/objective gain (retirement, rest). 238 https://vitaosphaere.wordpress.com/tag/stressoren/ I am emphasizing this because there are people who see a sense in every suffering, in every illness. The rape itself is absolutely senseless - the resulting suffering is from a theoretical perspective, perhaps `only' almost absolutely senseless. At 99.9% of senselessness, a "sense " could be that we as the person concerned recognize the dangerousness of such ‒A and protect us and our children from it. I believe: all symptoms appear very nonsensical when they are the result of other people's mistakes. 240 U.H. Peters 1999. 239 215 Tertiary morbid gain: gain for the environment of the ill person. I distinguish: 1) normal morbid gain 2) second-rate, “neurotic” morbid gain. About 1) “Normal” morbid gain: Based on the hypothesis that no Relative is absolutely positive or absolutely negative, it is also normal that illness also has a positive part. That case is very common. One is ill and stays at home, does not have to work and is probably treated well and so on. That is normal and there is no need for treatment. About 2) This is about the case when illness or the causes of illness became something too positive that is causing more advantages than disadvantages for the affected person. It can be compared to the morbid gain determined by S. Freud. This second-rate, or 'neurotic' morbid gain (which does not mean that it is only found when neuroses appear) mostly occurs if illnesses or its causes have no relative but absolute importance and therefore became sA. That means that the affected person needs the advantages of the illness to maintain mental stability. Thereby they gain relevance and power, which lets their dynamics appear so confusing. From the point of view of P², the disease prevents worse (loss of +sA/ occurrence of ‒sA). With the illness, P² has an alibi when it comes to the demands of It/sA. With the sacrifice of health, the subjectively best can be maintained and the subjectively worst can be avoided. The illness allows P² to be excused and to be reconciled with sA. A major disadvantage, however, is that the inversion consequences persist. These are above all: partial selfabandonment and further on disease. 241 Morbid gain in detail: Illness may allow a person to find sense in life (if it cannot be found without illness); Illness may allow finding an identity (if it cannot be found without); Illness may cause security (one is used to the role as a patient so that it gives security); Illness may allow gaining autonomy; Illness may allow maintaining the Ego or at least the strange Self; Illness may allow living an easier life (protect one´s Self from requirements and overextension); Illness may give more time; Illness may become an important weapon; Illness may allow manipulating people; Illness may cause to receive more love and attention from others; Illness may give more freedom; 242 Illness may allow proceeding one´s own will; Illness may allow living aggression or other negative feelings; Illness may allow to hold on to old habits; Illness may cause more orientation and order in one's life. Illness often has an alibi-function and is a relieving mechanism of self-punishment to be free from actual (or imagined) guilt. Illness may cause balance within the person/the system that is of high cost, etc. 241 The person has advantages by the Its only in the short term but in the long run more disadvantages. What Freud specifically said about the repression: "Preservation of repression presupposes a constant expenditure of force, and its abolition means economically a saving." (https://www.offenesbuch.com/g119506) - One could formulate in general: "The maintenance of an It-system (second-rate system) costs the person a lot of strength that he/she would save on in a first-rate system." 242 Again and again, I have experienced how disease (even cancer) can lead to a great (oversize?) feeling of freedom among some affected persons. Perhaps also because we did not take that liberty when we were still healthy, which we now receive, albeit at a high price. Perhaps it was also because we saw that what we were perhaps too afraid of was not so much to fear. Or, religiously, the experience that God is stronger than all illness and death. 216 Illness as a protection against the negative* can also be understood as a mirror image, of the '+list' above. Illness may be a protection against the senselessness of life; Illness may be a protection against the loss of identity and alienation; Illness may be a protection against insecurity, dependence and the loss of the Self.243.244 Illness may also protect from the loss of all +*.245 The listings make it more obvious that the ('neurotic') morbid gain is only a substitute-gain/ substitute-protection of high cost. However, it is also an emergency solution that may save one's life in an emergency situation. Therefore, it should not be viewed as taboo. Example: An anorexic young woman compensates her dependence on her parents, by dominating with her illness over her parents, thus securing substitute independence. At the same time, the dominance and control of the parents remain untouched. On the other hand, questionable independence on the one hand and questionable dominance, on the other hand, keep the balance with the price of the disease. Changing the role of one system member would create a crisis that is normal in this process of detachment. But since, like every crisis, it does not automatically end in a positive emergence or solution, there is also the risk of failure and those people concerned then avoid these crises, however, somebody has to pay some price for it. (For more information see the unabridged German version). Can God Make People Sick? Obviously there are correlations between God and mental health, because whoever believes that he is absolutely loved and nothing last can happen to him is also more resilient. But: even the most devout can get sick. Even God can cause suffering or even make somebody sick, albeit rarely. Why? The positive Absolute is God and not health and well-being, just as suffering and sickness are not absolutely negative. They are Relativa. This means that the relative positive (health, wellbeing, etc.) can also be negative and, on the other hand, the relative negative (illness, suffering, etc.) can also be positive. And that also means that positive illness, suffering etc. can come from the positive Absolute, i.e. from God, and negative health, well-being etc. can come from the negative Absolute (‒A). But since health and illness are predominantly positive resp. negative, that´s why the origin of the predominant negative from the absolute positive (God) resp. the origin of the predominant positive from the absolute negative (−A) is the exception. These abstract assumptions also find their concrete form in human relationships. If we see the relationship between God and us like a love relationship between people, it becomes We are afraid of the ‒sA, we can also be afraid of the F0, but even before the + sA we can fear (for example, that we lose a + sA or that it does not keep what it promises or that it is too expensive). 244 I have the impression that we often shift the most negative existential problem, our death, to a different, milder level, namely that of the disease because we can thus prepare ourselves to death in a more tolerable way and, furthermore, we still have everything under our control. 245 When we are sick, we need no longer to fear the loss of our health, or experience it as liberation, no longer needing to take care of it. 243 217 clear that negative feelings / suffering / or even injuries can also come from a loving person, although the motivation behind it is a positive one. This motivation from God is just as difficult for us humans to recognize as our children often fail to recognize the importance of frustration or punishment. Both the killer and the surgeon hurt us, even though the motives behind them are completely opposite. On the one hand, you can tell someone bitter truths and thereby hurt them, but you can help - on the other hand, you can spoil someone and thereby cause them harm. Incorrect consideration, avoidance of suffering, absolutization of health and well-being etc. are as questionable as their opposite. Equally questionable are some “Christian” views that see every suffering or disease as a punishment from God or those that postulate an unconditional connection between God and healing. Even though God does not cause "negative suffering", He obviously allows it. We will cover the reasons for this in the next section "Theodicy". God and Evil - a New Theodicy How can we know what is life and what is death when we don't know who God is? 246 Dedicated to my grandson Felix. Theodicy is an attempt to answer the question of why a good and all-powerful God permits the occurrence of evil. Or: Why does not God fulfill some prayers? Can God be justified? (Theodicy). 247 The problem of theodicy is one of the most important problems of theologies, and perhaps of humanity in general. Although as with all metaphysical problems, a solution in the scientific sense is not possible - one can try credible explanations. Theologians usually distinguish between the following "evils": 1. The "moral evils" (what people do to themselves) 2. The "natural evils" (natural disasters, transience) Distinguished from this are painful, but meaningful, positive circumstances such as processes of cutting the cord, "growing pains", meaningful frustrations, etc. That means we experience some things painfully, although it is of use to us. Thus it would be wrong if God or parents would eliminate this "positive suffering" towards children. (See also `Can God Make People Sick?', `Relativity of Illness and Health´ and `Role and meaning of illness and health´. For a short summary of the most important known solutions of theodicy, see long version.) 1. The "moral evils" Regarding the causation of the “moral evils”, theologians largely agree that they are the result of the mistakes / sins of people and that God has given people the freedom to act in this way. (`free will defense´). Here God appears justified because it is a token of his love for us when he gives us the freedom to do evil against his will, because a relationship without Based on Confucius: “If we don't know life, how can we know death?” 1. Theodicy = theós ‚God‘ and díkē ‚justice‘ = justification and vindication of God. 2. Main sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodicy#Jewish_anti-theodicy, https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodizee , https://lehrerfortbildung-bw.de/u_gewi/religionrk/gym/bp2004/fb1/3_r_7_8/8_leid/3_aus/m8_2_m8_4_gott_u_leid_interrel.pdf 2020). 246 247 218 freedom of choice is not love. 2. The "natural evils". This means: suffering is not directly caused by humans, but by natural disasters, transience, some diseases, etc. - evils, therefore, which are already given to man and are present everywhere in nature Obviously theology has no satisfactory answer here. My hypothesis on God's justification: As Adams and Eves we are also responsible for the "natural evils". How so? If you want to solve the theodicy problem, I think you need another than our usual concept of time and space.248 If there is God, then He is above the laws of space and time.249 And if that is so, then we must look for the solution to the theodicy problem outside of the known laws of nature. But if we seek the solution of the theodicy problem only within our human limits, such as our intellect, then we make God small and find no answer to the great final questions in this downsized God. Only if we cross these boundaries can we find credible, though not provable, answers. Physics has also expanded our horizons with the theory of relativity and quantum entanglement and has questioned many of our previous findings. 250 Therefore my attempt to explain is based on other than our previous ideas of space, time and existence of our existence, even if this contradicts our feeling of a linear course of time and a clear spatial allocation. If we disregard our previous conceptions, like the physicists, then the idea is to interpret us and our existence in a meta-temporal and meta-spatial manner and not to see Adam (Hebrew "human") and Eve as two concrete individuals in the paradise of that time, but prototypes or 'archetypes' that represent every single person who, like these, has separated from God and thus has lost his paradisiacal original state / has left paradise and now lives in a world that also contains “natural evils”. When and where we separated from God, I can quite imagine with this aforementioned other space-time concepts (independent of time in a parallel kingdom of God / “paradise”? “Parallel universe”?).251 So I start from the assumption of a pre- or parallel existence of every human being beyond our world. This means that in addition to our earthly existence we have another one with which we are connected, like in a quantum entanglement, and which is called Adam and Eve in the Bible. 248 Similar Ludwig Wittgenstein: "The solution of the riddle of life in space and time lies outside space and time." (Tractatus logico-philosophicus). The quotations from B. Russel, A. Whitehead and K. Goedel mentioned in the section `First-rate solutions´ can also be interpreted in this way. 249 Didn't Jesus also have different conceptions of space and time than the usual when he said: "I was before Moses" or he was "with God from the beginning"? 250 → https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantenverschr%C3%A4nkung or https://www.scinexx.de/news/technik/quantenverschraenkung-ueber-150-millionen-kilometer/ 251 1. This assumption is somewhat similar to the Many-Worlds-Theory of Everett (A. Loichinger) and the ideas of reincarnation in Buddhism and Hinduism - with the crucial difference, however, that Christianity does not know of overwhelming, seemingly endless reincarnations. 2. Christians have certain ideas about what comes after death. But why not what was before the birth? 219 Quantum entanglement proves that an existence / something that belongs together, even separately, can form a unit beyond our space-time conceptions (i.e. even despite the greatest distances and time shifts). In any case, I can identify with Adam very well. And who not? Don't we keep eating the heavenly apple with every sin over and over again?252 And God gives us freedom of choice, for good and bad - as I said, as sign of the love relationship with us. If we identify with 'Adam' and 'Eve' in this way, then we and not God are responsible for both: for the moral and the "natural evils" - and God would be justified. God is justified according to this concept- because his omnipotence and unlimited love do not contradict our sufferings. In my opinion, only an interpretation like this, which starts from a meta-temporal and metaspatial perspective, can explain the contradictions between the omnipotence and love of God on the one hand and the "natural evils" on the other, what can also serve as "evidence" for such a hypothesis. One can also say “upside down”: God's justification makes it also credible that something like many or parallel worlds / existences exist. 252 Angels are perhaps the ones who did not eat the apple like Adam and Eve and are therefore still in paradise. 220 Concrete Examples: Hölderlin and Nietzsche (Draft) Note: In the unabridged German version, I have described this topic on Hölderlin in more detail. Here are only some thoughts relating to this work. 253 Hölderlin and Nietzsche are for me typical examples of people who got sick because of various strange Absolutes. Stefan Zweig impressively described in "The Struggle with the Daemon" the development of madness in Hölderlin´s and Nietzsche's life. The term 'demon' of Zweig is largely the same as the `strange Absolute' of this work. Werner Ross also describes Nietzsche's life and the genesis of his psychosis. 254 The analysis of both authors with respect to the development of the psychoses of Hölderlin and Nietzsche agrees with my metapsychiatric hypotheses even if the terminology is partly different. If one also compares the information of the authors about Hölderlin's and Nietzsche's symptoms with the data in the columns 'It-Effects and Results' of the Summary table, you will rediscovere most of their symptoms there. When Nietzsche's friend Erwin Rohde writes about him: "An indescribable atmosphere of strangeness, something completely weird at that time, surrounded him ... As if he came from a country where nobody else lives "255- this is what I name 'strange person' here. Hölderlin, Nietzsche and many other psychotic people seem to me like “Yin-Yang-people” rolling into the abyss and are broken due to their contradictions - just as I presented in the section `Reversal into the opposite'. What they lacked in the end, according to the hypotheses of this work, was an Absolute that could compensate or correct the strange Absolutes with their contradictions. Did not Nietzsche similarly see it when he wrote: "But we feel as well that we are too weak ... and that we are not the men to whom universal nature looks as her redeemers ... we must be lifted up - and who are they that will uplift us?"256 Juan and Maria López-Ibor come to very similar conclusions as I did when they emphasize the role of world views and belief systems in relation to the development of schizophrenia, and make this clear using the example of romanticism and Holderlin's illness. 253 Regarding Hölderlin, Juan J. López-Ibor and María I López-Ibor adopt in their publication "Romanticism and Schizophrenia" similar views. https://www.actaspsiquiatria.es/repositorio/16/91/ENG/16-91-ENG-201 -227-751202.pdf , Actas Esp Psiquiatr 2014;42(5):201-27.. 254 Werner Ross: "The Fearful Eagle". 255 https://archive.org/stream/erwinrohdeeinbi00rohdgoog/erwinrohdeeinbi00rohdgoog_djvu.txt 256 https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Schopenhauer_as_Educator , 2019. 221 PSYCHIATRY CAUSES OF MENTAL DISORDERS “For like the plant unable to root in its own ground, the soul of a mortal will quickly die out.“ F. Hölderlin 257 Preliminary remarks: • In general to causes, see on `Causes and Results´ in Metapsychology and further on `Emergence of strange realities´. • Illness should not solely be interpreted as the consequence of misbehavior! • Illness should not be viewed as the absolute evil that has to be destroyed. • Every person can become ill (mentally and physically). The causes of illness are similar to the causes of misfortunes: Every misfortune can hit any person, although with different probabilities. The person concerned can become sick without or by his/her own fault.258 Underlying Hypotheses I repeat briefly the most important: 1. Illness and health are of relative importance. 2. Illness is not absolutely negative and health is not absolutely positive. As Relatives, illness and health have both, positive and negative sides. 3. The most frequent primary (!) causes of illness are Inversions.259 Inversion means that by reversal of fundamental meanings like Absolute, Relative and Nothing, basic disorders take place. Such reversals of meaning arise, above all, by attitudes that make a claim to absoluteness that excludes other attitudes. `Isms´ or ideologies are typical examples of this.260 Of course, mental disorders may also be caused secondarily by physical disorders (“secondary causes”). 4. Causes of mental disorders are rarely to be found only within the affected person him/herself but in all of the spheres that affect him. A similar statement can be found in various references about the discussion of the genesis of many mental disorders: “The genesis is assumed to be multifactorial, with genetic, neurobiological and psychosocial factors constituting the relevant pathogenic causes.” The share of the single factors is different in every case. I tend to focus on the spiritual spheres because I am also convinced that there are the most options of efficient therapies. 257 Translation by Maxine Chernoff and Paul Hoover. Undoubtedly many clinically healthy people are much crazier than many patients. How is that possible? I believe that these people will not be ill because they do not call into question their morbid attitudes and shift their disadvantages to others. (See also `Emergency solution A´in the Psychotherapy section). 259 In this publication, I neglect the role of the ‒A as an important cause of disease intentionally, because it escapes a therapeutic influence. 260 The ideologies are only a well-known example of at least as important dogmatic and pathogenic attitudes in families or individuals - or for those who lack fundamental orientations at all. 258 222 That is usually not the case if one only tries to influence the biological-material sphere (brain, genes) usually by using psychotropic drugs.261 MENTAL DISORDERS FROM THE BIOGRAPHIC PERSPECTIVE Beginning “And children grow up with deep eyes; they know nothing; they grow up and die.” (Hugo von Hofmannsthal) The story of mental disorders usually begins in childhood, or as I believe, even before being born. It is determined by the different attitudes that the parents or the environment transmit to the child or that are later on chosen by the child. All of those attitudes are ultimately based on different Absolutes. Whatever the parents and the environment of the child find absolutely important, they will convey to the child. This usually happens unconsciously and often in seemingly inconspicuous everyday situations. This Absolute may be an actual Absolute it or it is a strange Absolute. Only the first one will actually match the child, while the second one may be the cause of later mental disorders. Then the child may not be able to develop its personality freely. To be more exact: the Self will not be strong and independent. We defined the 'Self' as an individual, unique core of the personality. I remind the main characteristics of the positive Self: It is the actual and existential core of the person. It is unique and irreplaceable. It is the most important. It is independent at its core. It has something absolute, something holy to it. It is lovable in an unconditional way loved by God). It is made to exist forever. It is indestructible. It is a present (it is already given to a person and does not have to be earned). It lives on its own. Every person has the right to live with such a Self. I will define any other basis of life as strange Self (sS). The more the parents take a Relative as absolute, the more the basis of life will be relativized and weakened. Then, parents, as well as the children, feel like it is about all or nothing, about being or not being. In this situation, what was in itself only relatively right and good must be fulfilled (if absolutized) at any cost (coping), while the relatively wrong and evil (if absolutized) has to be fended and avoided (→ Defense-mechanisms). Many times, the cause for it lays in misunderstood love, whenever parents transfer such attitudes onto their child(ren). They want to give their child orientation, but they interfere with the kid´s emotional and spiritual development if they absolutize Relatives because the Self is meant to be based on the actual Absolute.262 It needs a substantial ground - like a seed is put on solid ground so that it can grow freely. The Self does not only want to be strong, independent and precious, it also wants to be 261 262 This of course does not mean that such symptomatic therapies should not be used (see corresponding chapter). This refers to the +A and its synonyms. 223 irreplaceable, wants to be itself, whatever it really is. That means that every person deeply longs for a true Absolute - he/she wants to be loved for him-/herself and wants to develop freely based on such love. When I speak about 'free development´, I do not mean lack of orientation. The child should develop in a certain direction. Such as a plant grows towards the light, the sun. Without any kind of tightness or coercion. Such as the sun does not always stay in the spot but is shining on us with an enormous range. The parents/environment are not necessarily the light because every person/environment also spreads negative influences: In all families, there are (usually unconscious) fixed mindsets, taboos, strict principles, unspoken oaths and so on. Who does not know sentences such as: “Boys do not cry!”, “A good child listens to its parents!”, “Don't you dare to contradict me!”, “A family has to stick together!” and many more. One may say that it is not the love speaking at that point but an imperative. (To facilitate matters, the parents are named here as the most important reference persons. In reality, the child faces many different influences, such as traumas and environmental influences that have nothing to do with the parents.) The Relative that invades into the self-sphere will turn into a strange Self: a new, strange, divided center resp. the basis on which a new strange I / Ego (dashed lines) will be established. Then the Ego displaces the actual I. The initial situation is often in such a way that parents or the environment of the mentally ill people are also caught in inversions. Therefore, they lack freedom/independence themselves and are overwhelmed with unsolved problems. Their worldview is usually narrowed, frightening and fixated. Some seem to be strong on the outside and some might actually be strong, but they are overstrained. What they are usually missing is a free, genuine, absolute Self, which is capable of tolerating and protecting a weak, frightened, faulty I. Instead one has to be strong, brave and good - and the weak I will be hidden due to fear and shame. To the parents, another world than the own, a bigger and more independent world is full of danger because they are not able to control it. And, to be honest, which parents are not affected? The psychical problems within a family can be compared to debts: Families that struggle with psychical disorders usually have psychical “debts”. Many times, one or more member(s) of the family will pay those debts by sacrificing their health, while others remain healthy. Later on, we will see why it is that way. One thing is for certain: It is mainly a matter of fortune or misfortune if a person becomes ill or not. As already said: The child needs a stable basis, an invulnerable core, a real, good Absolute and not something Relative but an Absolute that is not based on fulfilling requirements but one that is unconditional and that loves, protects and guides the child to allow normal psychical development. Such Absolute would be the unconditional love of both parents. If 224 they cannot give love enough - usually because they have not experienced such love themselves - the development of the child is endangered. Has the child bad luck, its Self is threatened to go down. Certain living conditions, personal misfortunes and traumatizations also play a big part since they may cause specific sA to occur. Usually, the child is too young to understand what is happening to it and is not able to fight against it. There is an unconscious mechanism that takes place in this dangerous situation. A mechanism that is of high cost. The child identifies itself with the Self of its parent(s). It adapts excessively. That leads us to the second act: Overadaptation or Enmity To save one's Self, the child identifies with the parents. Above all, the child takes over what is of absolute importance for the parents. Collective Absolutes emerge.263 The graphic shows how the child is shaped by misabsolutized positives or negatives (here by their parents). The created imprinting is just like a barcode with black (negative), white (positive) or black-white (ambivalent) sS (or defects that are not illustrated here). There is an analogy with genetic embossing. The child mainly adapts to what the parents determine as good* and bad*264- whatever has to be fulfilled and achieved (the good*, the ideal*) and whatever has to be avoided (the bad*, the taboo*). Since the parents have absolutized Relatives, the parents and the child have the feeling it is not just about something Relative but about all, about the Absolute, about being or not being. In normal development, the child also adapts to the parents and identifies itself with their worldview. However, it has the freedom to let go of whatever does not match its own identity, wishes or perception without being punished. Yes, children and teenagers have to question their parents absolutely and in a radical way to find themselves. Then they can choose whatever matches their own identity and perception or not. 265 They retain existential freedom of choice. However, wherever the Self of the parents does not match the own Self, wherever the child experiences it as strange-I or strange Self, there will be a central, existential and uncontrollable conflict within the child. The strength of this conflict becomes apparent if we consider the fact that it is about something that is experienced as absolute by the 263 I do not believe that the embryo or the newborn is already completely identified with the mother but has an innate absolutely unique (core) self that is different from those of his parents and all other people. 264 As I have mentioned, I sometimes label, to emphasize the mis-absolutized with an asterisk (*). 265 A process which most clearly occurs during puberty. 225 concerned. However, the false Absolute is strange to the Self. Those strange parts are unsolved complexes (like cuckoo eggs) within the Self and suppress the own parts. At those parts, the I is not master in its own house. It has to share its innermost, its own, with something strange, perhaps even hostile. That is the price the child has to pay unknowingly to save itself. On the other hand, the child also has some advantages from taking over the parent´s Absolutes/ Selves: The child does not want to conflict with the parents/ its environment. It can rely on these internalized parts and values and finds some strength and identity, even if they are relative and strange. The child is caught in a golden cage. It basically (unknowingly) agrees with the parents to stay within that cage to be protected. With that, some sort of emergency-solution is being created for the child: Rather having a strange Self than to have no self-perception. Here is already programmed what we also find later in mental illnesses: The division and depression of the Self by strange self-parts.266 Thus kids will be denied of their first-rate Absolute resp. Self. They may be misused as an expedient, as the parent's or environment's object. T. Moser explained: “Many mothers need obedient children, to allow their own inner chaos to be organized. Or they need the children to have an echo in their empty lives. Or they need them to heal their own self-contempt by planning the child's future. The emotional life of the kid tips over (dies) like an overfertilized lake that cannot regenerate itself anymore. The person that has to be the pride of their parents never knows if he/she is really loved: there are always requirements or even blackmailing. What emerges was called `false Self´ by Winnicott. That false Self makes the unconscious expectations of the parents to its own matter. The more important the child is as a crutch for the parents, the greater the fear becomes, when later, in a relationship or in a therapy, it finds confronted with the longedfor and at the same time terrifying possibility that one asks: Who are you really? Whoever happened to be the parent´s pride, due to expected success or presentable dressage, has to constantly achieve more and trying to adapt in order to avoid panic and depression if the outer appreciation fails.”267 Karen Horney described it similarly. Karen Horney described it similarly. "A child suffers from primal fear ... when it has parents whose own neurotic conflicts prevent it from offering the child the basic acceptance necessary for the development of its autonomous Self. Throughout the early years of childhood, in which the child views its parents as almighty, the parental disapproval or rejection may only lead the child to conclude that something is horribly wrong with it. To get rid of the basic fear and to receive the essential acceptance and the love from its parents, the child realizes that it has to become different; it channelizes its energies away from the realization of its own Self, away from its personal potential and develops a construct of an idealized self-image - a possibility of how it has to become to 266 There are many parallels between what is happening in a person´s inside and between the family members, groups, or countries. In principle, they are the same processes. 267 Tilmann Moser über Alice Miller: Das Drama des begabten Kindes; DER SPIEGEL 29/1979 p. 141. 226 survive and to avoid the primal fear.”268 Kids usually do not have a chance to fight against the negative effects of the strange Absolutes/Its. On the contrary, they unconsciously confirm these attitudes, especially since these are often not false but “only” exaggerated and one-sided. In this respect, the child often believes that the parent's behavior is correct and its own behavior is wrong so that it suppresses its own negative feelings towards the parents and believes that it has to be punished. With that, the child is drawn into some sort of vicious circle, in which the occurrence of symptoms is a typical “solution”. The situation becomes even worse if the child feels responsible for its parent's problems. That is almost always the case. Even if the child is not able to understand and name the parent's problems, it still has an idea of what it is about and tries to help them by sacrificing its Self. The child starts to act like a parent of its own parents and is absolutely overtaxed with that role, even if it is only unconsciously (`parentification´). In worst-case scenarios, the affected children are mentally (maybe also physically) like senile childlike-beings. They are blocked in their free development, and they are additionally confronted with problems that cannot be solved even by the grown parents.269 The worst thing that could happen is that the child experiences that it has to give up its own Self to receive appreciation and love. The child will despise or even hate itself and love the parents too much, although it unconsciously hates the parents too. However, it realizes that the parents are also caught in the game and it will try to love them still much more. It´s an endless circle, and nobody is there who knows how to end it. IDEALS* TABOOS* SELF SELBST EMPTINESS The graphic illustrates how the parental ideals*, taboos* and their emptinesses overload and dominate the child´s actual Self. However, they also stabilize the child, since the child's Self does not have enough stability on its own. As I said, there are also over-adaptations in the so-called normal development, which are not necessarily required by the parents. Likewise, in normal development, there are always rebellions and resistance to the parents, which are very important for the self-discovery of the child, and are best taken serenely by their parents.270 There will be no disruption if the child experiences a basic love from its parents and thus is able to relativize the sArequirements. The child will not only be able to buffer the sA through this love but will be able to deal with them from a secure position. The child will learn at an early age, not to absolutize pleasure and displeasure and to be so much better prepared for later life. But “A 268 Horney, Karen: Neurosis and human growth; Quoted by I. Yalom. I recall once again that the parents here are just as typical representatives of the environment. In individual circumstances it can be a matter of many quite different influences. 270 "Normal" is strictly speaking "ideal". 269 227 child´s independence is too big a risk for the shaky balance of some parents.”271 The more the parents depend on something, the greater the risk for them. Then there will be a strong polarization of the differences and a fight against each other, an either that or that, a pro or contra, a black or white way of thinking, a win or lose behavior. The child then bites itself into the parents and these into the child. In addition, as I said, parents often transfer their own unsolved problems to the child. One parent may form coalitions with the child against the other parent, other family members may be involved, and so on. Processes take place which become even more difficult and inscrutable because they are hardly or not conscious of the person concerned.272 However it may have been, the child´s Self usually remains suppressed and enmity with the parents does not lead to real independence. The dependence of the child continues. That means that it leads to the same situation if the child makes whatever the parents want it to do, or if the child makes the complete opposite of what the parents want. The parents remain determining in both cases. However, the phase of rebellion represents a very important step in the right direction that sometimes takes place after many years (or never). Commonly, over-adaptation and defiance alternate with each other - a basic pattern that can be found again in future relationships of the affected people, unless they came to a deeper solution. Often, there will be also over-matched and opposite (pro and contra) parts of the strange Self at the same time. 273 It is usually a matter of time until the strength of the child is not strong enough anymore to pay the constant tribute, although that may take multiple years. Whenever that point is reached, there will be a crisis that is explained in the next chapter. Crisis and Falling Ill „Each torpid turn of the world has such disinherited children, to whom no longer what´s been, and not yet what´s coming belongs.” R.M. Rilke (Duino Elegies, VII, 63-4) The cause of the crisis is the conflict between the actual Self of the affected person and the requirements of the strange Selves, the conflict between the legit desires of selfdetermination and the opposite powers. Those opposite powers exist in the shape of real existent persons (usually parents) but also in the shape of internalized parts. That is, the person increasingly puts the strange requirements on him/herself because he/she considers them to be his/her own. The requirements consist of fulfilling the +sA and avoiding/ fending the ‒sA. The person is like a swimmer who has constantly to kick to prevent drowning. The main characteristics of the requirements are the many "musts" with the main requirements: 271 J. Greenberg, p 27 The Oedipus complex described by S. Freud is only one of many possible complexes. It arises when the mother and child are symbiotically connected with the father. It is normal for parents in early childhood to adopt certain absolute positions for the child. However, if they are divided into opposite ( + / - or 0) positions, this is pathogenic. Fortunately, the influence of both parents already means a certain healthy relativization that facilitates the detachment of the child. 273 Most of the time one or the other dominates. 272 228 You have to be good and you can't be bad.274 In these cases, it does not matter if what is considered good is actually good and bad is actually bad. Because even the real good can have become bad or ambivalent when forced. Likewise, real bad can be well experienced. +* * * Danger of losing the unstable mental balance due to additional mental burden or weakening of the person. The width of the basis maintaining the balance equals the compensation force of the Self! A crisis usually happens if the affected person is exposed to additional requirements. That may be bigger events (starting work life, unfortunate love, death or other traumas, etc.). Often, however, there are small triggers that cause the whole system to lose balance, and the crisis occurs out unexpected and cannot be explained. E.g., experience of a schizophrenic patient: The “gods [+*] were laughing, golden personages … like guardian spirits. But something changed, and Yr was transformed from a source of beauty and guardianship to one of fear and pain [‒*]. Slowly Deborah was forced to assuage and placate, to spin from the queenship of a bright and comforting Yr to prison in its darker places.” 275 (See also `Reversal into the opposite´). fulfilment reward nonfulfilment punishment nonfulfilment DISEASE This graphic illustrates the different phases of dynamics between the person (P) and dominating It/sA. Phase 1 on the far left shows how the person is "positively" interacting with the It/sA even though the person is already dominated by them: P fulfills the requirements of It/sA and receives an extremely strong positive feedback (such as recognition). Phase 2 (illustrated in the middle) shows: It is getting worse whenever the demands of It/sA become too high and/or the person becomes too weak to fulfill the requirements - such as an imbalance of emotional distress and resilience. The affected person is now being punished by the It/sA. Phase 3, on the right, is intended to indicate the dual role of the disease. It protects P against excessive demands. On the other hand, the affected person remains ill and allows the continuing existence of the It/sA. The system decompensates whenever the requirements of It/sA are higher than the compensation forces of the I. More exact: whenever the requirements cannot be fulfilled 274 275 Our situation after we lost the paradise. J. Greenberg, p 52. `[ } is mine. 229 anymore, or whenever threats cannot be fended off anymore - i.e. in the moment when the power of defense and coping are not strong enough anymore. But also, if the person does not want to fulfill the requirements anymore - and therefore causes a positive crisis! In this situation, the affected person is back in the old position of his/her childhood: He/she feels existentially threatened, it is about being or not being, Self or No-self. The old emergencysolution does not work any longer - especially if the parents (or environments) are themselves in a crisis because they are confronted with similar conflicts that seem to be indissoluble. This dilemma can also be described as follows: On the one side we are in desperate need of love; But love also became very dangerous, almost deadly for us because parental love was connected to prerequisites or even exploitation. Therefore, many people seek love while they also fear and avoid it. With that, the person is stuck within a dilemma because he/she received a fearful, destroying love. It can be compared to a barefooted person that flees from the ice by running over hot coals and back to the ice again instead of trying to put on his/her own shoes. All this leads to reenactments (inward and/ or in new relationships) resp. to a compulsion to repeat until the affected person finds a solution. It is as if the person has to find out if he/she is loved for him/herself or not, no matter what. The situation appears hopeless - but the person is adult now. Maybe he/she can find a deeper solution now. What solutions are there? We will find out in the chapters of therapy. PSYCHOSES Psychoses in General Psychoses can be differentiated into three different groups: organic psychoses, psychoses of the schizophrenic forms and affective psychoses. This publication is mostly about affective and schizophrenic psychoses. Affective psychoses are separated into psychotic depressions and manias (manic-depressive illnesses). Schizophrenic psychoses (schizophrenia) will be discussed in more detail later on. Schizo-affective psychoses show symptoms of both groups. These classifications are arbitrary from a certain point on - on the other hand, they reflect certain basic patterns that play a role in the therapy. But: “At the end of the day, every psychosis is different and has to be seen in its individual peculiarity, the social connection and with all its different subjective meanings. Every schematic view leads to standardized treatment. That kind of treatment is not reasonable for psychoses. People that have experience with psychoses are very sensitive and will react in an offended way if they are not seen as an individual person and not treated with the necessary respect.” 276 A psychosis is always an expression of a severe existential crisis, which may happen to every 276 R. Schmidt (ed.) in: http://www.psychotiker.de/psychose.html 10/2015. 230 person. Usually, a large number of different and various factors have to come together to cause psychosis. (In general, to causes see on `Causes and Results´ and further on `Causes of mental disorders´). I believe that solving the "mystery of the causes of psychoses" is no more difficult than solving existential crises in general. I am convinced that every (psychogenic) psychosis is curable. I summarize my hypotheses: Psychoses are usually the expression of an inner conflict of the person between opposing absolutenesses with a loss of actual Absolute. Such as it is with all the other psychogenic illnesses, there are two main conditions first: The absolutization of the Relative and the loss of the actual Absolute with the result of emerging of strange Selves and self-sacrifice to maintain these strange Selves. The person pays with his own health and the loss of actual Self to solve the conflict between the Self and the strange Selves. To make it easier to understand the emergence of psychoses I want to remind you of the following: The forces of the absolutized Relative and the oppression of the actual Absolute change the I especially in the following ways: 1. Mainly dividing and causing faults. 2. Mainly oppressing and causing deficits. The mainly splitting forces cause schizophrenic, and the losses due to oppressive forces cause depressive symptoms. The arbitrary differentiation does not exist in real life but is a way of making it more understandable. It represents the main-symptomatology of those illnesses. There is neither a solely schizophrenic pathology nor a solely depressive one. Therefore, the term of schizoaffective psychoses for mixed forms is plausible. pro-sS actual Self strange-Self (sS) contra-sS s0 Basic constellation of psychoses, based on strange Self (sS), that causes splitting (→) and oppression (┴). The person is divided into strange Self, and actual Self at the core and the strange Self is furthermore divided into pro-sS, contra-sS and s0. Each sS is potentially acting dividing and depressing. As mentioned, also Karl Jaspers already believed that the classification of psychoses in two main classes: manic-depressive and schizophrenic, contains an essential core of truth since this classification has asserted itself in principle, in contrast to previous terms of illnesses. 277 I believe that this `essential core of truth´ can be explained by the above-described basic constellation and also by two fundamental forms of the negative (false and nothing). The two major psychosis groups, depression and schizophrenia, can also be understood as the 277 Jaspers, Karl: Allgemeine Psychopathologie. Springer Verlag Berlin-Heidelberg-New-York, 1973. 231 main consequences of inversions of the Absolute and Relative: nothing (⟶ depression) and false (⟶ schizophrenia). One could formulate, as in mathematics: A task can be solved falsely or not, i.e. the result can be wrong or it is missing. 278 In the case of the schizophrenic reactions, in particular, the divergent forces gain the upper hand, which causes in the center of the person splittings, contradictories, double bonds, pinch-mills, paradoxes, or the like. Especially the person is split, fragmented and torn apart in pro- and contra-parts. In the case of depression the s0-part mainly causes a central loss of the first-rate personal - or in case of mania too much of the "good" (*). S. Freud explained that mental illness is a result of overpowering the Ego by the Id, which causes a separation of the outside world. Mania would be a fusion of Ego and Super-Ego and melancholy would be an oppression of the Ego due to a tormenting Super-ego.279 This view largely correlates with the concept presented in this publication. The manifestation of a psychosis takes place if the negative forces of the strange Selves are stronger than the positive forces of the actual Self and other strange Selves. (Mind: the sS as a Relative has positive sides along with the negative ones.) It is easy to imagine and comparable to the loss of the physical balance that the mental balance is endangered at a certain point. If you compare the strange Self with a crutch that is helping and obstructive at the same time, the ill person can also be viewed as someone who is trying to get rid of the obstructive crutch although he is not yet strong enough to stand without it. The concerned loses balance and falls down → becomes psychotic. Distinguishing between a progressive and a regressive psychosis, this is an example of a progressive occurrence because the patient is trying to do the right thing. It would be regressive if he does not want to use the crutch because of the overestimation of his own capabilities. The comparison of a strangeSelf and a crutch also seems suitable when it comes to good therapeutic handling: It is not reasonable to take away such a crutch at any price, nor is it reasonable to take them for much longer than necessary. Contemporary, the second option seems to be the more problematic one because a large number of psychiatrists are too focused on the goal of symptom relief which causes them to forget that to much help (such as giving too much medication) can cause weakness of the person's Self. The kind of sA resp. sS has also a main impact on what kind of symptomatic will be caused (schizophrenic, depressive or manic). Misabsolutizations that create a wrong, strange Self are more likely to be schizophrenic and such that cause the person to be in a deficiency or oppression are more likely to be depressiogenic. As mentioned, the strange Selves become independent. They have their own structures and are like somewhat personal. Therefore, they are different than other volatile phenomena, such as single thoughts. Because of that, it seems obvious to view and treat them as dysfunctional metabolism or something similar to that. That thought is not really wrong but it is too superficial. To me, it is just as half-right as the thought that impotence is a 278 In this comparison one could call the + Absolute as the best common denominator, or the best "solver". If one done the Relative however to this denominator, then the problem is only relative or not solvable. 279 Cit. by A. Kielholz „Psychotherapie und Seelsorge“ Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt, 1977, p 114. 232 circulatory disorder or a hormone disorder. We will also find such biological parameters while talking about psychoses. And I also believe that people will continuously find better drugs for psychoses such as there are for impotence. Why not? Without a doubt, a pill would be often a better option than the pain and sorrow without it. However: It is and will remain an emergency-solution. Impotence or psychosis would be gone, the main problems and reasons for it not. And they will always emerge somehow and somewhere. They only will be shifted to another place. And someone has to pay for it. Overall, I view psychosis as a lifestyle in which the Relative dominates the actual Absolute. The not actual dominates the actual, the splitting dominates the wholeness, the object dominates the subject, the non-personal dominates the personal, the strange dominates the own, the second-rate dominates the first-rate, the functional dominates the lively, the strange Self dominates the Self and the strange-I (Ego) dominates the actual I.| Schizophrenia What is Schizophrenia? One assumes that about 45 million people suffering from schizophrenia. 280 The World Health Organization (WHO) rates schizophrenia as one of the most expensive illnesses worldwide. It is hard to explain what schizophrenia is because the one schizophrenia does not exist. What is meant with the group of schizophrenia is also an agreement. There are international committees of psychiatrists that listed certain symptoms as signs of schizophrenia. However, it is against human dignity to refer to people as hebephrenic or psychopath or similar. Those terms make it seem like the negative symptoms define the whole personality of the affected person. As Karl Kraus said: "One of the most widespread diseases is the diagnosis.”281 But what is meant by the term 'schizophrenia'? How do the affected people suffer? What are the symptoms? There is a great variety of descriptions of schizophrenic people's experiences. I think the following examples are more impressive than some psychiatric textbook: Joanne Greenberg's “I never promised you a rose garden”, and M.arguerite Sechhaye's “Autobiography of a schizophrenic girl” et al. Those accounts describe the feelings, experiences and thought of schizophrenic people in a way I could not describe. Although at the beginning of the psychosis even positive feelings can predominate because one has escaped an unbearable reality,282 afterwards the negative experiences are in the foreground. The affected report how they have lost their footing, stability and confidence, how they desperately strive not to go down or not to break or to implode, not to fuse with someone or something, not to be overwhelmed by foreign powers, to feel that not only the inside but also the reality is odd changed, and thoughts and reality cannot be separated.283 280 `Der Neurologe und Psychiater´ 11/04. https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Karl_Kraus 282 Like Otto Behrend, for example: "Look, Will, I've already thought whether I wouldn't be happier if I got really insane." 283 Delusion and Hallucinations will be discussed later on. A list of all possible schizophrenic symptoms can also be found in the `Summary table´ columns T, U and V. 281 233 A New Psychodynamic Theory of Schizophrenia Inversions as the Main Cause “But we cannot give an adequate account of the existential splittings unless we can begin from the concept of a unitary whole, and no such concept exists, nor can any such concept be expressed within the current language system of psychiatry or psychoanalysis.” R.D. Laing 284 „All evil is isolating … it is the principle of the separation.“ Novalis Hypotheses • The most frequent primary (!) causes of schizophrenia are inversions. But not every schizophrenic symptom necessarily results from an inversion. • Any inversion can cause schizophrenic symptoms. Especially all strange Absolutes (sA) are potentially schizophrenogenic.285 • Any second-rate system, such as P², has latent, or even obvious schizophrenic characteristics (e.g., it is more or less divided.) • Causes of schizophrenic symptoms are often outside of the affected person. • The well-known theories about the causes of schizophrenic psychosis are easily integrated into the present work. For the main hypothesis: 'Any inversion can cause schizophrenic symptoms', I have to ask the readers to look at the `Summary table´, which can be found either on the network or as an attachment or as a PDF file. (In general to causes see on `Causes and Results´, further on `Causes of mental disorders´ and on `Psychoses in General. To guarantee a better understanding of the emergence of such a disorder, it is recommended also to read the chapter “Spreading and compression” in `Metapsychiatry´.) If a Relative irrupts into the absolute sphere of a person it becomes a strange Absolute (sA). At the same time, there is a loss of first-rate personal. Metaphorically speaking, the Relative overthrows the Absolute from the throne. By the loss of the Absolute, the integrating metalevel disappears, which cannot replace by something Relative, so that alienations, displacements, ruptures, madness, etc. can arise. The sA resp. It has not only in the sphere effects which has been absolutized but it also affects all other aspects in its sphere of influence. There are also corresponding parallels to other disorders: If almost anything (albeit with varying probability) can make a person anxious or depressed or even addictive, why should not the causes for schizophrenic symptoms just as manifold? However, I see the following specifics regarding schizophrenic symptoms: • The affected person experiences the causes and results as determining. • 'Schizophrenia' (as the main term) includes especially the spiritual-mental dimension of man over more or less all aspects. • Especially those It/sA will be acting schizophrenogenic which have a completely different 284 285 R.D. Laing, The Divided Self, p. 19. We know it: All kinds of things can drive us “crazy”. 234 or even opposite meaning to the originally Relative, which was absolutized (for example, when something relative positive is negatively absolutized and reversed). They can be found in the `Summary table´ Column `I´ usually in the middle line of the cells). It/sA with all-ornothing character (= hyper or 0) have especially manic-depressive effects. • A meta-position is lacking for those affected, which relativizes these contradictions. For this reason, there is no possibility of overcoming and solution of these contradictions. • The It/sA-effects are stronger than first-rate (or second-rate) compensatory forces. • Usually, the surroundings are caught in the same or similar contradictions, which then may transfer. Affected children experience their surroundings, especially their parents, with second-rate characteristics, such as they are listed in the `Summary table´ in column I and K. • The schizophrenic It/sA must act over a longer period so that the initial absolutized mental position has been materialized and has become independent. (See also `Persistence of the strange Absolutes´). These specifics would explain why there are usually schizophrenic symptoms being created and not any other symptoms, although there is a ubiquitous occurrence of inversions. Do the affected, which are involved in such contradictions and paradoxes, see so wrong about the world? Does somebody see it more correctly who tells us that the world is fair, unambiguous, logical, clear and not contradictory? Our affected families or patients certainly see the world more realistic when they see them full of opposites. Their "mistake" is only that they take that not relatively but absolutely. For the causes of the schizophrenic symptoms, I also refer to the beginning of this chapter (→). There is not the one cause for schizophrenia. The causes for these symptoms are as varied as the individuals which were affected by them.286 Manfred Bleuler sums up: „Decades of research has not succeeded in proving just one specific cause of schizophrenic disturbances. Today we are ready for the thought that there is possible, not such. Rather it has become clear, how manifold disharmonies that disrupt personality development form the predisposition to schizophrenic illness.” 287 As described in the part 'Metapsychiatry', one can see the mentioned 'ideologies' as a starting point for inversions.288 This leads to reversals of fundamental meanings, which are solidified by a multitude of "Its". These Its are generating centers of second-rank realities in the world, in the person and in the I (WPI). Each It changes more or less all aspects 286 The theoretical questions of causality see the called links above. It seems to be important in this context for the therapy, that each individual, so also the patient, can become the primary cause of positive changes and thus break through existing chains of causality. 287 From the foreword to C. Scharfetters book: `Schizophrene Menschen´, Urban u. Schwarzenberg, München-Weinheim, 1986. 288 Juan and Maria López-Ibor came to very similar conclusions as I did when they emphasize the role of worldviews and belief systems in the development of schizophrenia. Actas Esp Psiquiatr 2014;42(5):201-27 235 ('spreading') with one 'main impact direction' each. Although the main impact direction of the particular It essentially determines which kind of symptom group develops, on the other hand, manifold symptoms can be produced by each one of the Its. Viewing from the symptom, this means that every symptom can have a variety of causes. In terms of schizophrenia, this means that there is not the specific cause for schizophrenia but that multiple factors must come together for this or that symptom group to arise. This also corresponds to the clinical experience and many theories of schizophrenia development (see later). As I said, in my opinion, a common denominator of these different causes is that they all invertingly act. I listed all sorts of schizophrenic forms and schizophrenic functional and quality disorders in the Summary table (see the last 3 columns). They correspond in many respects to the symptoms stated in the literature but are listed here systematically according to my classification. I have tried to make plausible the common of the schizophrenia causes in these statements. Probably everything can make us crazy or split if it is not taken any more relatively but absolutely, and I have tried to illustrate with the concept of the strange Self (resp. It) most different of such absolutized forms with her main results. As said, it seems that in this model most of the numerous theories of the origin of schizophrenic reactions have a place. But one should see them not alternative but in addition. I believe that only disturbances of the absolute sphere of the human being (the self) can cause psychoses, because as long as the causes and the disturbances are only of relative importance, a mental disorder, or even psychosis, will hardly be able to manifest itself. On the other hand, if we look at the enormous integrative power of the actual Self (resp. +A), which makes people identical, valuable and free in every situation, this basis is probably the strongest force against any kind of psychosis, and we should beware of ideology-based models and therapies, because they basically do what the patient does with himself - they create new preconditions for his existence. 236 Table Example: To the genesis of fusions and splittings D I S O R D E R S OF S C H I Z O P H R E N I A Ideologies and individual attitudes Inversion from: Ea1 "absolutism“ relativism nihilism the Absolute Relative Nothing Ea2 uniformism Identityphilosophy Ea3 realism factizism objectivism positivism irrealism Ea4 monism syncretism reductionism dualism eclecticism Ea5 determinism scepticism libertinism identity otherness I N D I V I D U A L F I X I E D A T T I T Ea6 U fundamentalism D /radicalism E extremism S Ea7 dogmatism evolutionism Effect of the It on the person La1 absolutized loves hates too much, damned negated La2 uniformed alienated hyperidentified Disorders of Disposithe beingtion sphere Ta1 absolute/relative/ 0 spheres (dfh) e.g., false relations Ta2 disturbed (dfh) identity, Self / otherness Malfunctions of schizophrenia Ua1 disturbed (dfh) absolutely and relatively relations relations to nothing Ua2 disturbed (dfh) identifying, Mistaking own and strange. hyperidentifying Pa3 only reality is valid / reality truth denied untruthfulness distorted absolutized reality Ua3 disturbed (dfh) reality relation = Dereismus (E. Ta3 real true Bleuler) disturbed (dfh) disturbed (dfh) verify and falsifying. ↕ realities unreality UNITY Ua4 disturbed (dfh) integration disintegration Ta4 exclusion, separation unity and fusion / splitting variety Reaction formation disturbed (dfh) countertaking. ↕ the whole with parts VARIETY Security Freedom La4 make onesided collect split, isolate, chaotisize La5 determines fixe unsettle drops La6 leveled uprooted, makes The primary crazy, The secondary underuse radicalized exaggerates Autonomy Dependence La7 dominate subjects overadapt incapacitate Quality disorders of schizophrenia Va1 unsolved unconnected inadequate relations. Hypertrophic of the person, e.g., in the behavior, feeling, thinking, percipience etc. Va2 not unequivocal uniform strange unempathizeable, distorted (Barz) hyperidentified, e.g., in the behavior, feeling, thinking, percipience etc. Va3 hyperreal / unreal, false, wrong in the person, e.g., in the thinking, behavior, feeling, percipience etc. Va4 one-sidedness e.g., „Concretism“ (C.G: Jung) autistic, merged, compressed ambivalent, split, contradictory, selective. e.g., ambivalence in the behavior, feeling etc. Va5 Random contingent Ta5 security Ua5 disturbed (dfh) incalculable e.g., constancy / protecting, , needing, ontological insecurity freedom limiting/ (Laing) / f. Unconditional, disturbed ↕ from necessary and determinate Fixed rigid unnecessary (dfh) the person, for example, in behavior, thinking, etc. Ua6 disturbed (dfh) Va6 ns priorities, ns hierarchy, over-, hierarchies oversubordination, no submissions, craziness Ta6 basic groundless inadequate, transcendence (Conrad), center abysmal, radical De- / centering hierarchies extremes Indirect, establishing foundations. / Outdoor preconditions e.g., in "Causality thinking" disturbed (dfh) (G. Benedetti) behavior, feeling, ↕ Primary / secondary thinking, etc. Causes / consequences . Va7 ns automated selfperpetuating ,the Ua7 disturbed (dfh) autonomization / impaired dominant / Ta7 Autonomy dependencies, bondings ( dfh ) adaptation and bonding in behavior, sensing, e.g., deficiency/ are disturbed thinking, perceiving ... overadapting (dfh) (Echolalia, echopraxia, ↕ dependence and automatic obedience / autonomy negativism) [dfh = defective, faulty, hyper; ns = new-strange] This chart outlines parts of the`Summary table´. The first column represents a selection of wellknown ideologies, the second column refers to possible, individual attitudes that correlate to these ideologies. All attitudes have inverting effects - one main effect in the main aspect and 237 many side effects (`spreading') in all other aspects. In the example above, I consider an inversion in the aspect a4 that mainly affects this particular aspect but can also cause disturbances in other aspects. In this example, it means that social or individual 'monistic' or 'dualistic' attitudes, (such as everything-or-nothing, friend-or-enemy attitudes) can not only cause disorders of unity and variety but can also lead to disorders of identity, reality, security, freedom and so on. But the inversions of other aspects can also lead to these schizophrenic symptoms ("compression" from the 4th column to the right). In our example, they lead to disorders within aspect a4. This means, that not only the inversion in aspect 4 itself can lead to disorders of unity and variety but also inversions in other aspects can cause disorders of unity and variety, more precisely: disorders of personal unity and variety (column T), functional disorders such as fusion and separation (column U), or quality disorders (column V) such as autism, ambivalence, splitting and contradictions. Schizophrenic Symptoms and their Meanings Once, a snake came into my heart, it had two heads, a black one and a white one. And each head was telling the opposite of the other. Both were speaking the truth, but the center of their words was a lie. General Information about Splittings (Partly Repetition) Here are some notes: A 'real', actual wholeness/unity cannot be divided. (See motto by R.D. Laing above). I.e., if the subject (resp. person) is connected with the +A, which can integrate all objects, also the negative ones, then no permanent subject-object- or other splittings can occur. Schizophrenia is a mental breakdown = "Zusammenbruch". The German term reflects two typical features: `zusammen´ (`fusioned´) and `Bruch´ (`split´). Inversion causes our souls to become divisible and fusionible. Splitting affects the whole absolute-sphere of the person as a result of an experience of absolute opposites. Within the relative-sphere, I only will speak of differences, divergences or polarities. In the following chapter, I will discuss mainly the phenomena of splitting and fusioning. They stand exemplary for other schizophrenic symptoms. Spheres of Splittings Inversions may cause splittings within all aspects. One may differentiate between: A: Splittings in the dimensions-spheres B: Splittings in the differentiations-spheres To A 238 1. The absolute split between +A and ‒A. 2. Splittings between A and It resp. between Self and strange-Self. 289 3. Splittings within an It into its parts: pro-sA, contra-sA and s0. 4. Splittings within an It-part into one of its three sides (+/‒/0). 5. Splittings between the different sA/sS. To 1) In my opinion, the split between +A and ‒A is the only absolute split. But you must believe in the existence of +A and ‒A. To 2) In relation to the person, the splittings concern the Self and the strange-Self(s). The affected person experiences a contradiction, splittings of the actual Self and the strangeSelves. That contradiction is not absolute because Self and strange-Selves coincide in some parts. Yet, that contradiction will be experienced as absolute. Due to the strange-Selves, the person will be 'de-individualized' and the individual (literally: the indivisible) will become divisible! To 3) The third area of splittings exists within the opposites inside of the It resp. the strangeSelf itself in the splitting in pro-sS, contra-sS and 0S (or: +sA,‒sA and s0; Example: ideal*, taboo* and 0*). Self It resp. strange Self (sS) Pro-sS Contra-sS 0 The graphic illustrates the splittings between the Self and the It resp. strange-Self and in addition, how the It/ sS continues to divide into three parts. For easier understanding, I recommend taking a look at the chapter ` The emergence of the It' again. There, I describe the structure of It. The It is made of two/three contrary, yet fixed connected parts, which are the starting point of splitting- and fusion phenomena of different illnesses. To 4) The 4th splitting possibility arises when one of the three sides of an sS is opposed to another. (This would be the case, for example, if the advantages and disadvantages of an absolutized object were the same.) To 5) The 5th sphere of splitting develops if two or more strange-Selves are contrary to each other. To B For example subject-object-splittings, matter-spirit-splittings or soul-body-splittings, or splittings of different realities and people All of these possibilities of splitting or fusion exist within the person as well as towards his environment! 289 In the person I call the It also as a strange Self. 239 Everything, that enters the core of a person and is not the Self, will decay, break apart and therefore causes a splitting or fusion of the person. We all live in a world that is more or less divided (or fusioned) and whoever internalizes these splittings/ fusions of the world without being able to process or integrate it, will be divided/ fusioned as well. (O Splitting and/or fusion phenomena otherwise.) Splitting and fusion phenomena otherwise - Social, family, divorces / symbiotic relationships - Other diseases (e.g. dissociative identity disorders, multiple personality disorders, anorexia/bulimia, dyslexia, stuttering - from a certain point on for most mental illnesses). Parallels to Physics? We already established, that there are similarities between the rules/laws of second-rate realities (such as in P²), and the laws of physics. That also applies to the impacts of pressure on an object or splitting of an object. In both cases, there are both fracture points and compression points (~ fusions). In some cases, the fractures predominate, in others the compressed. One may even see the third result between the divided parts: the nothingness. Perhaps there are parallels of second-rate dynamics to physical processes such as nuclear fusion or nuclear fission. The chaos theory describes chaotic conditions which also represent an analogy for psychotic conditions. Autopoietic system theories also describe bifurcations resembling splittings in P². Opposites in Schizophrenia and their Dynamics Here, using examples of splitting- and fusion-phenomena, representative of all other opposing phenomena. As generally described in the dynamics of second-rate realities, opposites are interdependent and have a particular dynamic: one part generates or fights its opposite, both associated with the loss of first-rate reality. (See also `Opposites, fusions and negations' and `Possibilities of interactions' in `Metapsychiatry´). We can find the same in schizophrenia. More precisely: Similar to the second-rate realities, schizophrenic people lose due to the It/sA their original unities and connections: the connection between A and R, between mind and matter, between person and thing, subject and object, but also between different persons. But opposing phenomena can also arise: mergers, one-sidedness, false connections, etc. In this case, the diversity of various units is lost, such as those of different persons, different things, mind and body, subject and object, etc., or they are reversed. Thus, people often become more like things, things become more like persons, subjects become object-like and objects become subjective. The primary identity of different people and different objects will eventually be lost. Schizophrenic psychoses often develop in families that either have strong tendencies of fusion (symbiosis) or they are much divided or both opposing tendencies can be found side 240 by side. The index patient either takes the pro-side, the contra-side or will be torn apart between those two sides. This person usually has no clear position of his own (no actual Self) and still needs an old position to guarantee psychical stability. But the more this position is overtaxing the affected, the more he will be forced towards the contra-position, or he will alternate between the two positions or becomes divided. In the meantime, the 0-position can be chosen as a balance between the opposite positions, but of high costs, too. R. D. Laing: "Therefore, the polarity is between complete isolation or complete merging of identity ... The individual oscillates perpetually, between the two extremes, each equally unfeasible. He comes to live rather like those mechanical toys which have a positive tropism that impels them towards a stimulus until they reach a specific point, whereupon a built-in negative tropism directs them away until the positive tropism takes over again, this oscillation being repeated ad infinitum."290 And Manfred Bleuler pointed out that autism and split are two sides of one psychological process. 291 All of these reactions are associated with deficits of first-rate reality and personality. I believe that the extreme introversion in autism or schizophrenia is an act of protection to guard the personal core from splitting or decay. Since the affected person has a weaker Self, every additional pressure threatens to destroy the remaining Self too. The person is caught in a vicious cycle of splitting- and fusion tendencies and cannot escape. (`Psychical Bermuda Triangle´). He may find some sort of balance between the two sides but that balance is of the very high cost. It will be very hard for the person to forgo that balance (although which would mean to can lose his symptoms) because as soon as he wants to get away from one side, the other side will threaten him. The threat will be experienced as existential. The affected person believes that he will die if he tries to give up the balance between the dividing and merging positions. Why? Because the person identified himself with the underlying sA, even though that sA is the reason for the splitting and the autistic reactions. To lose the sA and the symptoms, the person basically has to let the sA "die". However, since the person identifies himself with the sA, he will experience the `death´ of the sA like his own death. The person will not take that risk, especially not as long as he can not find a stronger Absolute. Not only division and fusion can create an expensive balance, but the pro-and-contra positions (↔) of all personal aspects, especially those that lie on the same aspect level. Here are some examples strange-I ↔ loss of I splitting, isolation, `explosion´ ↔ fusion, compression, `implosion´ chaos ↔ inner constraints, automatism peculiarity, specifics ↔ no individuality ecstasy ↔ lack of emotions hallucinations ↔ inner emptiness, isolation symbolized, encrypted topics ↔ concrete simplified topics closing, isolating ↔ opening, exposing 290 291 Ronald D. Laing: `Das geteilte Selbst´. Kiepenheuer und Witsch, Köln, 1983, p. 65. Manfred Bleuler: Klinik der schizophrenen Geistesstörungen. In Psychiatrie der Gegenwart, Springer V., 1971. 241 insensitivity, petrification ↔ sensitivity, pain reification ↔ liquidation bizarre topics ↔ amorphous topics emptiness, inner poverty ↔ heaviness weakness, powerlessness ↔ false potency, feeling of almightiness sense of inferiority ↔ megalomania fixation ↔ instability, dissolution, shifting. It is not only schizophrenia itself but also single symptoms that can be interpreted as positive sometimes. They may occur as part of a progression as well as a part of regression.292 Shifting and Fixation Everything that I mentioned regarding the opposite-pair 'splittings and fusion ' also applies to 'shifting and fixation' because splitting always goes along with shifting and fusion with fixation. The affected person is therefore not only divided and/or fused but also shifted and/or fixated. We are all not only somewhat split or 'compressed' but also shifted (crazy). 293 The clinically shifted/ crazy person may have adapted himself to our craziness and was not able to deal with them. (See also in the bibliography on this issue the publication by M. Siirala). As mentioned above, one may find certain opposite-pairs and their symptoms throughout all aspects. Paradoxes and Schizophrenia Like schizophrenia, paradoxes arise from contradictions within a system that has no metalevel 294 - ultimately caused by 'inversions'. One may also say: Whatever causes paradoxes, may also cause schizophrenia. In their characteristics, paradoxes (as well as schizophrenia) show contradictions/ ambivalence on the one hand and the indissolubility of those contradictions on the other hand. In addition: A characteristic of schizophrenia is its inherent paradoxes, which the person concerned cannot resolve. The solution for both consists in the introduction of a meta-level that can relativize or resolve the contradictions. By the way: our world is more or less ambivalent, ambiguous or even contradictory and paradoxical. The paradox is also, that interpretation and counter-interpretation often appear equally true. (See also Chapter `About the emergence of paradoxes'.) 292 See also the theory of `positive disintegration` of Kazimierz Dabrowski with which I partly agree. Dąbrowski, K. (1966). "The Theory of Positive Disintegration". International Journal of Psychiatry 2: 229–44. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_Disintegration. 293 The graphic in chapter "Fear" should illustrate how the sA / It displace (make crazy) the person. 294 Pictures of schizophrenic artists are usually without horizon (~ missing transcendence, meta-level). See, e.g. Leo Navratil: Schizophrenie und Kunst, dtv, München, 1965. 242 Further Thoughts on Schizophrenia After inversion, P² will live on many different foundations. The affected individual will experience those foundations as contradicting, ambivalent, incompatible, not capable of being integrated and therefore unsolvable. The really relative limits become absolute and will be experienced as insuperable („fehlender Überstieg“ 295 Conrad). In itself, the Self (as well as God) compensates for all contradictions and opposites, but the sA does not. While the person (P), who is based on the actual Self, has no problems cooperating with all the different areas of life and always remaining himself, now, strange foundations make P opposite and crazy. The strange Selves of these people are sometimes like wolves. They are distrustful and lonely but in a pinch, they will stick together. They are not friends but fellows at most or conspired communities. They quickly have common enemies, but also quickly get into hostility with each other. Or they are like helpless lambs. They can never rest because they are constantly being haunted. They have to escape and overcome different obstacles. Or they have defective or contradicting views and behavior according to that sS on which they depend on. Therefore they act in ways that cannot be understood by others. Or they are forced into further roles by other strange-Selves. And is the I once it is itself, an I-self, then it is still uncertain in view of other positions, "is it really me or not"? The schizophrenic patient is lacking the self-evidentness. The individual does not experience himself nor the world as self-evident.296 The 'schizophrenic' lacks a Self that protects him, gives him identity and integrates everything negative. Since P is identified with a number of different objects or other persons, he is very dependent on them. He can see the same thing completely reverse or distorted and crazy, depending on which strange Self dominates him. The person concerned can, as one so aptly puts it, no longer deal factually with these or those things and problems. He takes it personally. The centers, the strange Selves, of these persons, are weak and heteronomous. Their limits are perforated. The graphic in the chapter 'Vulnerability-stress-theory' shows how the self area, which is in itself unassailable, becomes vulnerable to the strange Selves. The person does not give priority to his own Self but the strange parts. Those strange introjects receive the status of a subject, become quasi-personal, and the Ego becomes a passive and assailable object. No wonder that the person concerned delusionally reacts or hallucinates in this situation. Since the strange has established itself in a dominant position, the person also feels how these foreign powers dominate him, how they do something to him, as an object, pursue him, observe him, or even talk to him. As inexplicable as these phenomena may seem, at first sight, they become understandable when we consider the role of the strange-Self (sS) ~ „missing cross over“ W. Blankenburg called the `loss of natural self-evidentness' as a sign of schizophrenia (1971), but that affects us all since we have lost the paradise and not just `schizophrenics´. As a sign of schizophrenia, one should only ascertain a predominant loss of natural self-evidentness (corresponding to a predominant loss of the first-rate Self in the sense of this work). 295 296 243 because the strange-Self was personalized while the I-self was depersonalized. If, for example, parents or what they represent are absolutely taken, the child will develop structures that conform to the absolutized parental parts, which now (quasi-personal) take on some sort of subject-role. They act as subjects and will also be experienced as such. Therefore, there are many affected people that are able to assign voices to specific people. The sS becomes a quasi-personal foreign body that is also able to 'speak'. One can also say: a strange Ego speaks of an sS basis. There are many more phenomena caused by the mentioned sS resp. It and are noted in the Summary table column T-V. Therefore, I will not list them again at this point. Of course, the actual occurrences are barely as simple but I think in principle plausible explicable, and it's amazing why schizophrenia is still considered as a total mystery. Regarding the causes of schizophrenic reactions, I recommend looking at the chapters 'About the causes of mental disorders' and `Mental disorders from the biographic perspective´. If we read these sections from the point of view of splitting phenomena, we find that the most frequent and typical genesis of schizophrenic reactions is the following "story": The most important reference persons (mostly the parents) of the later ill individual are sSdetermined if they are apparently ill themselves or not. These strange-Selves of the most important persons add up in their effects. The child is confronted with different absolutized positives (+*) and negatives (-*), with things they have to obey and things they have to avoid. The core of this child will depend on if it obeys or avoids the specific subjects. The actual Self of the child that mainly wants to be free and independent, has to subordinate itself and will be forced aside. This is the main splitting. Surely, we all have such splittings within us. They will have a more negatively effect, the more the actual Self will be forced aside, the less the child is itself but has to be strange-self. The parents barely ever deal with such a process consciously, which does not mean that the parents do not make conscious mistakes. As already said, they are very often strange-determined themselves but either they have enough own Self still not become ill or they can compensate the sS-parts somehow or live with another emergency solution (that will be discussed later on). As long as the child takes over (mainly unconsciously) the strange-Selves of its parents, existing splittings or other symptoms will not be as noticeable as at the point where the individual tries to live more out of its own actual Self-basis. That point can also be later on in life when the child is all grown up. Then, the affected will stand in distinct opposition to his outer and inner strange-ideals* and strange-taboos*. The contradictions will be experienced now as full of tension or even highly existentially threatening. That is a very important point: Even if the situation seems to be easily manageable, the personal experience is very otherwise because the affected person (P) perceives it as absolute. P will feel as if it were a matter of life and death. While some people, who are a little more fortunate find a solution, others do not. The tensions and splittings threaten P to tear apart. As mention in the paragraph 'solutions', there are different possibilities now. In our case, the individual will become ill (which we refer to as emergency solution B.) That means, that the person takes a compromise (alternative) as a solution, which relieves him to a certain point but is also of high cost: the price is his health. People with psychotic reactions, or mental illnesses in general, often want to live deeper, 244 want to live their own lives. Therefore, it seems important to me not to regard mental illnesses only as something negative, because even if the individual tries to do the right thing - for example, to part with his parents, he can become ill. Even though we all have latent schizophrenic phenomena within us (according to my theory), not every person will become clinically schizophrenic. Why not? For one, extent and nature of the sS play a big role. Then, whether they tend to weaken or intensify each other's effects. I believe, schizophrenic phenomenons will be experienced, above all, if the person dares to venture into the tension between the actual Self and the strange-Selves. The sick person experiences the sS resp. It as ‘gilded cages' and wants to escape somehow. (Mostly unconsciously.) He tries to change his basic life foundations, his strange Selves because the old ones increasingly constrict him. He tries to cross the border of the strange-Selves but the danger is: He falls in between the chairs or will be torn apart. He could make it simple and just sit on the old sS-chairs. Then P wouldn´t become schizophrenic but would pay the price of a second-rate, over-adapted life. It seems like many people decide on that. But some affected people prefer a divided life that is at least halfway real and maladjusted compared with a life that is all the way adapted and inauthentic but then they risk a crisis. I believe that many clinically healthy people have more inner splittings or similar phenomena than those who are diagnosed as schizophrenic because they solve it in an easy and comfortable way with being adjusted. Even though they prevent their own manifest disease, they will become some sort of transmitter of the causes of illness. I do not want to condemn this, but I want to show people with psychotic reactions, that they might be more courageous (even if unhappier) than some so-called healthy people. They are often more honest in a frightening, but also a self-destructive way. Frightening for us so-called normal people, who barely dare to face the lies of our lives and the heteronomy. The clinically healthy people are therefore not automatically less crazy, they only suffer less. R.D. Laing said: “Thus I would wish to emphasize that our 'normal', 'adjusted' state is too often the abdication of ecstasy, the betrayal of our true potentialities, that many of us are only too successful in acquiring a false self to adapt to false realities.” [R.D. Laing in `The divided Self´]. On the other hand, psychotic reactions can, of course, also occur in a regressive way. While the above-mentioned people tried to jump into life but crashed halfway, others are running away from a life that seems unbearable. A psychosis can, therefore, arise both, when moving forwards (`progressive) or backward (´regressive´) since the future is unknown and insecure or past and presence seem unbearable. Often the stalemate situation appears to be the safest. But it is too much to die and too little to live. Schizophrenia can be described as life in conflict between the actual Absolute and the Relative that seems to be absolute, as live between the Self and strange-Selves or between different strange-Selves themselves. It is a suffering from contradictions that is experienced as unbearable for the person concerned. This fact can only be explained by the assumption of disturbances in the absolute realm in the person because there are no relative fragmentations. Those affected trie to live 245 on two or many bases, two or many Absolutes. They are chronically desperate and undecided. They live in an existential dilemma.297 I think also, we tend to overemphasize the differences between the different mental illnesses, while not seeing the common in depth, like the strange-Selves. I also have no problem to see direct parallels of schizophrenic psychodynamics and corresponding external situations, such as those of divorce - only with the difference, that in case of schizophrenia, the `divorce´ takes place inside and the schizophrenic person cannot separate completely from himself, although he tries. By the way: I would give a human in divorce and a human with schizophrenic reactions medication only if they could be overwhelmed by the respective suffering, but not as self-evident "relapse prevention" from the outset. I also want to point out, that I do not think that the elimination of schizophrenic symptoms is the first and most important step of therapy. Above all, the therapist should accept the patient with all his splittings and unsolved problems. Symptoms are not the absolute bad, just as health is not the absolute good. By not giving absolute significance to schizophrenic symptoms, the therapist does not cause any additional disturbances that would otherwise occur. But also the relativization of symptoms is not of absolute importance and does not guarantee their cure but the chances are much higher. Finally, the positive sides of the schizophrenic symptoms should be pointed out once again. Here, they shall be named only as keywords and hypotheses: With psychoses, the patients defend their remaining parts of dignity, freedom, individuality and self-determination, albeit at the cost of giving up part of themselves. The disease is both protection and self-abandonment. “You know, the thing that is so wrong about being mentally ill is the terrible price you have to pay for survival.”- so it says in 'I never promised you a rose garden'. Or as a patient of Luc Kaufmann said: “If I woke up I would die!”. On one side, it will be good if doctors and patients respect this psychotic defense but on the other hand, the question remains whether the patient cannot do without this expensive protection. Therefore, I present the psychotic reactions, like mental illness in general, to the patient as an `allowed emergency solution'. With that, the patient has the opportunity to allow that option without feeling guilty but one should also always questioning the necessity of that very expensive protection. The same applies to medication protection. Psychosis is not only emergency protection but also offers an emergency solution in all other personal aspects: it can give substitute individuality, substitute dignity, freedom, variety, order, reality, past, present, and future. It can give substitute communication, substitute well-being and all other positives of the second-rate reality. Better an expensive alternative than a total loss of Self. Thus the disease can become an emergency rescue of the Self. 297 1. "The desperate is like a wave, which is driven by the wind back and forth. He is a man with two souls. " (James 1: 6,8). 2. I have, as I said, placed the symptom of `splittings' in the center of this article because it gave its name to schizophrenia it is, as the Summary table shows, by no means the only and most typical symptom of schizophrenia. 246 Accordance with Other Schizophrenia Theories Do not all common concepts of schizophrenia have a certain rightness? At least in the sense by describing many different possibilities of causes of schizophrenia. I can integrate most of the theories into my concept without any problem i.e., with the concept of inversions with their It/sA, I am trying to find a common denominator. The known schizophrenia theories emphasize the following factors as the cause of schizophrenia:298 • High-expressed emotions (HEE) (G.W. Brown and others). • Double-bind-theory (Gregory Bateson). • Entanglement (S. Minuchin). • 'Delegation' and 'impossible mission' (H. Stierlin). • 'Paradoxes' (M. Selvini Palazzoli). • Narcissism and contradictions based on internalized object-relationship (Kernberg). • Ego-weakness, often emphasized by psychoanalysts. • Disturbed family / interpersonal relationships (H. S. Sullivan, Th. Lidz et al.). • Schizophrenogenic mothers (Frieda Fromm-Reichmann). Similar Margaret Mahler, D. Winnicott. • Social isolation, especially emigrants (Scheflen). • Vulnerability-stress-model. (See below). • Psychosis is the result of a collapse of openness in the face of the event. (Henri Maldiney). • Schizophrenia as the result of the 'loss of the natural self-evidence' of the person. (W. Brandenburg). • Genetic, neurobiological factors, immune disorders, birth defects and Infections are in my opinion overestimated as the polluter. It also remains open whether some are not the result of primary psychogenic disorders. (→ Neuroscience). • Drugs and alcohol can induce psychosis. Each of these theories could easily be assigned to one of the aspects in column A of the Summary table or in Summary of the classification, as I do with the following examples. In the following paragraph, I will compare these most common theories with the hypotheses of this work: the vulnerability-stress-theory, Kernberg's Object-Relations Theory, the Doublebind theory and the Expressed-Emotion Concept. Vulnerability-Stress-Theory “Authors such as Zubin and Spring, Ciompi and Nuechterlein all used the vulnerability-stressmodel to explain the multifactorial psycho-social-biological development of schizophrenia. 298 Hints: Here are just extremely brief keywords. The causes mentioned overlap. 247 People at risk of schizophrenia ... show a particular vulnerability and sensitivity which combined with stress and social or physical strain - can lead to an outbreak of psychosis.”299 “A burglary of something exterior and foreign into one's own experience which means a deep disorder of one´s personal identity with blurring of one's ego boundaries and abolition of the clear difference between inner and outer reality” is typical for any schizophrenia. (Ciompi, p. 272). With the following two pictures I try to explain these views with my theory: 300 'Stress' = sAs for example in aspect 3 other people 9 ownership 12 obligations 16 information 19 past Amount of requirement Lack of strength of the person to fulfill the requirements 19 Self  16 9 The vulnerable areas of self-protection. 3) For example: I am not allowed to become like my dad. 16) For example: information, that is taken absolutely 19) past topics (for example: trauma with subjectiveabsolute effects. Example 9) Expectations/ requirements from the outside does not harm the Self, if P does not view the requirement as absolute. Fig. The stress-vulnerability concept applied to my concepts. Note: The vulnerable spheres are also spheres for manipulation and spheres in which overstimulation can take place because the external stimuli can freely penetrate into the self-area. In the Summary table this topic is shown above all in the row of Asp. 23. All psychiatrists agree that many factors must come together, that are also rather unspecific by themselves. It is probably a mistake to find the one cause, especially since there are not one but many forms of schizophrenia, which also differ individually. Note: The so-called 'Demands and Capacities Model' (explanation for stuttering) is very similar to the vulnerability-stress-model. Kernberg's Object-Relations Theory Kernberg's theory of the confusion of self- and object-representations and the related lack of distinction between inner and outer worlds can be explained by the above right figure. It is illustrated how absolutized objects of the world penetrate the self-sphere of the person, 299 300 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diathese-Stress-Modell, 2015. An overview of the numbers of the named psychical aspects can be found in the `Summary table´. 248 become strange-Selves thus disturb the differentiation between one's own Self and the strange objects, or the inner and the outer world. Ciompi also describes the blurred borders between self-representatives and object-representatives and the connected problem of schizophrenic people to differentiate between the inner and outer world. In the Summary table, this topic is represented particularly in row IV (subject-object relations). Melanie Klein emphasized the child's relationship to good and bad objects in their development and the difficulties or disruptions in their integration. In the Summary table, this topic is represented particularly in row III. Double-Bind Theory The double-bind theory is G. Bateson's theory of schizophrenic disorders, presented as early as 1956. In the following paragraph, I describe the double-bind theory using information taken from Wikipedia.301 It will be shortened and written in italics, and I compare my corresponding hypotheses in this regard in square brackets [ ]. “The classical double-bind theory describes the following requirements for a double bind to take place: A primarily negative commandment or prohibition that is essential for survival and incompatible with a second essential commandment, and a third commandment that prohibits the victim from attempting metacommunication and makes it seem impossible for him to leave the conflict. These conditions are usually internalized and a self-runner.” [This theory is largely compatible with my concept: it emphasizes the absolute character of that which binds twice, the incompatibility of commandments with one another, the impossibility of the person concerned to resolve these contradictions, even if they could objectively be solved and that it is impossible for the individual to solve them due to subjective reasons because they have acquired an absolute meaning and a relativizing metalevel is missing.] "The main difference between a [relative] contradictory and a paradoxical rule of action is that in the case of the former, one can consciously perceive and choose the alternatives. Although one loses with the choice of an option the other option, but one consciously accepts its loss. "(Which is not the case with the paradoxical rule.) [Here, the loss of the option to choose in a paradoxical situation is rightly mentioned because the individual has no superordinate Absolute which would allow the choice of option. Instead, the differences are absolute.] “The double-bind theory considers two levels (at first): A dominant parent and the dependent child. A third, superordinate level, such as social norms, ideals, or goals, to which the dominant sender of the double bind message feels committed, is not considered at first. However, such a third superordinate level can be found in the Stanford-Prison-experiment and in the Milgram-experiment.” [The necessity of considering a third, superordinate meta-level is mentioned here. That also means considering an absolute sphere in which the “offenders” are also captured.] 301 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doppelbindungstheorie 6/2013, 2017. 249 “There is ... a wide field of potential contradictions that are not really contradicting itself on the level of logic. The real determinant is ... the subjective excessive demand in the awareness of the child. A certain problem may overtax the child but as long as the child must not solve the problem, the child can look at the problem with a relaxed interest, and will learn from the situation.” [With those statements, the classic double-bind theory is expanded to all the problems or contradictions of the individual that seem to be unsolvable, which coincides with my hypotheses.] Regarding the pressure to adaptation and the self-image: "... in double-bind relationship patterns, the kind of influence also includes the kind of selfperception the victim has for itself.” [Important reference to the disturbance of the victim´s identity whereby not just the identity but all psychical aspects are disturbed. And the causes are not only double binds (or splittings) but all inversions.] My concept confirms and extends the double-bind theories. In detail: • The counterparts of double-binds are double-splittings and lack of ties. They are the other It-effects (when the It is a triad); i.e., there can be two, or three different effects of the same It/sA. • Double bonds/splittings can occur if the solution of an inversion is forbidden or impossible, as it is of absolute importance to the persons concerned. Uncovering of fundamental errors in the system is banned because it would plunge the system into crisis, and system members therefore believe that their common Absolutes must remain in all circumstances. • All inversions can have double-bind, multiple-bind, -splitting or deficit effects. • Even one single It/sA may cause double-binds or double-splittings or deficits. • All P² can be the cause, as well as the target of those double-effects because every P² is dominated by It/sA that can have contradicting effects. But keep in mind: the whole P does not only consist of P²-parts. • If people live sA-determined (= P²), they send double-bind messages. • Every (absolute) bond is also a discrepancy of outer or inner necessities and the inner need for freedom. Note: With terms such as double-bind or double-message, also paradoxical binds, predicaments, dilemmas, traps and so on can be described. When S. Freud stated, that these are the results of “two opposite affective reactions or drive reactions where one of them is a partial drive” and “the other one tries to prevent it” and that this is absolutely typical of neurotic symptoms, then the similar is said - as is also the statement of H.F. Searles that one cause of the double-bind is, "that one is in the same relationship with the other on two (or even more) different levels at the same time, that do not have any kind of connection with each other. This has the tendency to force the other person to dissociate his participation from one or other of these levels (possibly both) because he finds it inappropriate to refer to a particular level if it has no relation whatsoever to what is going on at the other level ...". Searles describes how a very attractive and provocatively dressed woman made him nearly 250 crazy by a sterile discussion with him about theology and philosophy.302 • Double-binds/splittings may also occur if they originate from two contradicting sides of one part of an It (e.g., a front side and a reverse side). But because they are based on the same part, it falsely seems like they cannot be contradictory. A second possibility: A part and the opposite part state the same thing because the reverse side of a part and the front side of the opposite have the same connotation. • There are 1000 causes that may lead to bonds or separations or deficits of two (or many) people, as well as 1000 causes that may lead to bonds or separations or deficits within one person. In both cases, many different possible causes, that may lead to one very specific but individual various result. (s. Spreading and compression) Examples: - Mother and father take an absolute position for the child. This creates a double bond: The child must follow both mother and father, although they are different. But this is also a splitting of the childish image of the parents and the truth, which states that that the parents are not of absolute importance. - Analogous example: Mother is the good, father is the bad → bond, splitting and trap for the child. Ʃ² strangeSelf (sS) Contra-Ʃ² contra-sS Pro-Ʃ² pro-sS Ʃ² other strange Selves 0 Possibilities of double-binds and splittings in systemic and dimensional spheres². In the `Summary table´ this topic will be displayed particularly in row a4. If a first-rate +metaposition is engaged, the subjective or objective contradictions (including all dichotomies and their double-binds/splitting) will be solved or at least relativized. Expressed-Emotion Concept “High expressed emotions (HEE) means, that the family members mention a lot of critiques towards the patient. They show animosity or are characterized by an emotional hypercommitment. The unfavorable influence of HEE on the relapse rate of schizophrenia, depression, bipolar disorders and eating disorders is scientifically proven. However, there is no recognized theory on the mechanism of action."303 Even this concept accords with the ideas of my theory, which emphasizes the absolute importance of certain people and their attitudes toward the person affected. That absolute importance has certain consequences in the area of emotion and behavior (esp. aspect 7) 302 Harold F. Searles: Das Bestreben, den anderen verrückt zu machen - ein Element in der Ätiologie und Psychotherapie der Schizophrenie. In http://www.alex-sk.de/D_Searles.html (S. 132/ 133). 303 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expressed-Emotion-Konzept, 7/2013. 251 and, regarding emotions that are illustrated in cells I7 and N7 of the Summary table (hyperemotion, mis-emotion and insensibility). I believe that common literature over-interprets hyper-emotion, while neglecting misemotion and insensibility. Criticism on Certain Schizophrenia-Theories • Holistic concepts seem to be missing. Questions: How can theories that have no concept of a whole explain sufficiently schizophrenic phenomena? How can therapies solve splittings that split off anything that is not scientific and thus are split themselves, too? Don't they lack a meta-theory that integrates everything that is psychical relevant? I.e., a band for the person/system that encompasses everything and 'holds together'? The integrating instance has to lie on a meta-personal, or meta-individual level if the person is no longer able to solve the splitting by himself, or with the help of other people.304 The index-patient and his family can be considerably relieved if the main responsibility for solving the problems lies in an instance outside of the affected people. Here, we can also notice a disadvantage of one-sided psychiatry. I refer to the predominant personal image of psychiatry today, consisting of many self-representations that are not being held together by a superordinate unity so that an unfavorable initial situation of therapy of schizophrenic psychoses exists. • Many concepts solely focus on the elimination of disorders. In contrast, Eugen Bleuler said, that basic characteristic in psychoses is, that the healthy parts remain over in schizophrenia. They are not be gone but only hidden.305 • C. Kulenkampff stated: Griesinger's statement from the second half of the 19th century, that states that mental illnesses are brain diseases was too dogmatic. His hypothesis "schizophrenia is a somatic-based illness" - eventually became an "unreflected assertion". “The elephant of worldwide biochemical, anatomical, genetic and natural scientific research has not yet given birth to a mouse when it comes to the area of etiology.”306 I have the impression that nothing has changed in principle about this statement to this day, even if more detailed neuropathological research results are available today. • Most of the theories of schizophrenia are based on a positivistic principle which means, they only accept hard facts. M. Musalek, on the other hand, is right to say: “The main problem of positivistic research approaches lays in the circumstance that nature obviously knows nothing about our principles of classification and order. We are the ones who create disease categories into which we then order the nature surrounding us. Nature does not know those forms and categories. Therefore, on positivism based schizophrenia-researches 304 As Antoine de Saint-Exupéry said: "For one day I will speak to you about the necessity or the Absolute, which is the divine knot that connects things." `Citadel´, Karl Rauch publishing house, p. 216, 1956. 305 Eugen Bleuler: Lehrbuch der Psychiatrie, 1975. 306 In the foreword by Bateson et al. „Schizophrenie und Familie“, Suhrkamp-Verlag. 1978, p. 9. 252 ... remained without any success.”307 R.D. Laing even went so far as to regard schizophrenia as a projection of some schizophrenic theories. 308 Why can be seen, regarding the above-named theories, inversions with their effects (sA/It) as the common denominator for the schizophrenia genesis?309 I have stated in the previous sections in what way the inversions-impacts explain the vulnerability-stress-model, the double bond theory, the "paradoxes" (M. Selvini Palazzoli), the pathological narcissism after Kernberg and the High expressed emotions theory. Regarding other theories: - S. Minuchin says, that the entanglements happen because the affected individuals are not able to find a solution at the certain (sA dominated) spheres, i.e. they are not able to engage a solving meta-level. - “Delegation” and “impossible mission” (H. Stierlin) may be explained likewise: The affected individuals are not able to fulfill the sA-demands delegated by other people. - The common I-weakness can be explained with an Ego that is overtaxed by the sA. - The “broken-home-situation”, often described in older literature, may be found, as well as the opposite form of fusion, hyper-proximity, etc. - The schizophrenogenic mothers (Frieda Fromm-Reichmann) can also be found in addition to all other schizophrenogenic factors. See also chapter `Psychotherapy of schizophrenia´ in part `Psychotherapy'. Delusion Delusion can be explained by the fact that the person (P) does not judge himself and the world from a first-rate perspective, i.e. from the actual Self, but P interprets the world from foreign, distorted, partly contradictory points of view by the Its/sA. This disturbed way of thinking and interpreting cause disorders that are particularly found in aspect 18 of this work. I am assuming, that other absolutizations are also added which determine the content of the delusion. The topics of delusion reflect certain absolutizations: e.g., absolutization of one´s own responsibilities and morals → everything is my fault → delusional guilt; Others, depending on the absolutized topic: paranoia, delusional impairment, persecutory delusion, delusional jealousy, megalomania, hypochondriac delusion, and so on. The connection between ideology and delusion seems obvious: ideologies believe to possess absolute truths. In other words, ideologies are more or less delusional and encourage delusion. One may assign the different delusions to certain aspects of differentiation of this work. Instead of a +A, the individuals experience strange Absolutes in their systems. "Such people live in their own solar systems ...“ said F. Nietzsche once. 310 307 Musalek, Michael: Die unterschiedliche Herkunft von Schizophrenien und ihre philosophischen Grundlagen. Fortschr Neurol Psychiat, 73 (Sonderheft 1), 16 – 24, 2005. 308 Aus https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_D._Laing, 12/ 2015. 309 For the sake of simplicity, I refer here only to the sA and not to the more comprehensive It. 310 F. Nietzsche: Über das Pathos der Wahrheit. München 1954, Band 3, S. 267-272. 253 The causes are by no means only to be found in the person affected. People with delusions are often the victims of healthy people with non-clinical delusions whose price the sufferers pay. Therefore, misidentifications play an important role in delusion: I identify myself with somebody/something or I identify somebody/something with me. Exterior topics then represent the inside of P² and the other way around the exterior acquires other meanings to the person. Example of delusional jealousy: A patient who compensates his low self-esteem by representing his attractive wife like an object towards other men: “Look what a guy I am that I have such a sexy wife.” But at the same time, he develops the delusion that his wife might like other men better and he could then lose his love object* (sA), his wife. E. Bleuler: “The development of delusion seems to be less puzzling if one imagines it as a result of a comprehensible confrontation of an inner and outer conflict-situation: [e.g.,] an ambitious, young man wants to achieve great things but he does not accomplish great things. His selfesteem does not allow his own inability to be the reason for his misfortune: he protects himself from inferiority feelings by ascribing blame for his fate to the evil intrigues of other peoples. Or, a girl, who has no boyfriend because of her contact difficulties, dreams of men of much higher rank falling in love with her but she blames evil people who prevent coming together with those men.”311 Bleuler is only able to imagine the transition from normal to psychotic by picturing a certain 'point of no return'. That would be the point, where the confrontation of the own situation with the reality becomes as painful and shattering, that one gives up the reality and is caught in a surreal world of imagination." 312 (See also about the therapy of delusion in `Values´.) 311 Bleuler E.: Lehrbuch der Psychiatrie. Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg-New York, 1983. I would describe that 'point of no return' as the point where a Relative became a strange Absolute (resp.It), that is not to integrate. 312 254 Table: Example of the Genesis of Delusion (Extract) Ideologies and Effect of Its Inversion of: individual attitudes on person E11 dogmatism G11 It orders, bureaucracy organizes / I order technocracy chaotizes anarchism N Disturbed forms Functional disorders of schizophrenia of schizophrenia T11 disturbed U11 disturbed (dfh) (dfh) organizing, arranging, orders laws integrating/ disolving, resolving Quality disorders of schizophrenia V11 Incoherence of thoughts (E. Bleuler), dissociations, vague, e.g. absent-minded thinking, "word salad" imperatives! ritualized V12 divergences, e.g. G12 It orients, U12 disturbed (dfh) of D E12 moralism T12 disturbed "intrapsychic ataxia" (Stranski) / positions orientation steering legalism (dfh) duties single-track It does not line up, Pat. can´t orient I / antimoralism superego in P, e.g. in behavior, feeling, lets float himself(Bleuler) thinking, perception etc. . V V13 constrictions, unfreedoms, E13 liberalism T13 disturbed restrictions rights G13 It regulates U13 missing and false laissez-faireI (dfh) / uncontrolled, overshooting, control / doesn´t regulate controlling / binding attitudes rights e.g. movement storm, restrictive ideologies D logorrhoea V14 trivial level, sterile, U14 lack of creativity / U stereotypes (motor activity, E14 creativism news T14 disturbed "grounding" speech) G14 It generates also progressivism and (dfh) false creativity: above all there A artificial, abstruse, bizarreness, / does not… chtonism, secularism old new shared hallucinating delusion e.g. neologisms, hallucinations, strange inspirations L (delusion) mannerism U15 disturbed (dfh) V15 immobile, lame, made, movements, actions, e.g. E15 activism G15 It activates ,/ T15 disturbed tense, stiff, tense deads absurd, inadequate actions, utilitarism paralyzes (dfh) in P, e.g. in behavior, feeling, behavior catatonia, stupor. pragmatism deactivates done results thinking, perception etc. activity ↕ passiveness U16 disturbed (dfh) V16 incomprehensible, too E16 rationalism T16 disturbed F perception, data processing, unconscious, contradictory G16 It informs scientism gnosticism (dfh) I information (think, see Asp.18) "double absurd, / contradicts scepticism Information X accountancy" illusions e.g. absurd activities, speech antirationalism consciousness E information ↕misinformation overconsciousness. D U17 disturbed (dfh) V17 concealed, too expression above all speech unconscious unclear;T17 disturbed E17 exhibitionism G17 It represents / e.g. paraphasia ("word salad") Symbolism facades, (dfh) occultism reproduction hides, becomes A schizophasia verbigeration e.g. symbolic, coded language, expression esoteric ism invisible echolalia. thinking, paramimia, reproduction T the reality false reflect paraphasia U18 disturbed (dfh) judging, E18 meanings T18 disturbed V18 too insignificant, T thinking (basic symptom anti-/ logicism/(dfh) unimportant false meanings, G18 Bleuler), illogical thinking cognitivism value meanings hyper-meanings I (paralogia) Delusion ethical nihilism/ above all in the thinking, behavior, It de-/valuates ↕ Important/ different `absolutism´ (psych.) self esteem experience... values T meanings E19 conservatism U19 development is faultily V19 archaic atavisms, e.g. T19 disturbed U empiricism and faultily remind, archaic thinking, archaic G19 It chronificizes (dfh) past traditionalism regressions behavior, It works away past D /modernism ↕ of different times Ego-anachoresis / false habits U20 disturbed (dfh) time V20 delays, "blockage" no/ too E experience, e.g. of the time long post duration, E20 carpe-diem G20 It realizes T20 disturbed shutdown, merge of the time, e.g. of the affects, modernism perpetuates / (dfh) present S time breakdown (Jaspers) ↕ subj. feeling, e.g. flow of actualism eludes the present present times thought is tough/ high-speed E21 utopism V21 disconnected, G21 It preprograms U21 disturbed (dfh) future T21 disturbed progressivism / unpredictable e.g. future anticipates / relation (dfh) future apocalypse fatalistic unpredictable reactions remains ↕ from different future ideologies (Benedetti, Redlich) V22 uncorrected unsolved, e.g. T22 disturbed E22 perfectionism G22 It does not U22 disturbed (dfh) correction uncorrectable wrong thinking, (dfh) right and convictions (see also delusion) laissez-fairecorrect ; takes regularisation error/ lack of wrong Faulty in all functions ideologies revenge ↕ from guilt and innocence error of the psyche possibly G23 It armourU23 disturbed (dfh) defense, E23 pacifism V23 raised vulnerability, (Subj.: plates arms, It vulnerability (G. Benedetti, T23 disturbed masochism becomes not Jaspers) defense often based feeling of the overwhelming, (dfh) protection / militarism nazism also of the "made" see above); influenceable/ on symptoms. Resistance protection sadism becomes weak, ↕ from first and second-rate Pat. feels threatened helpless protection ` dfh = deficient/ faulty / hyper. ↕ = confusion, mistake Analogous to the previously mentioned derivations of splitting and other schizophrenic phenomena mentioned earlier, this table is meant to illustrate some possibilities of the 255 development of delusional thoughts and similar mental disorders due to inversions. Especially absolutizations and negations of different meanings and values will promote the development of delusions. Those are often about idealization or degradation of people. The table also emphasizes the fact that it is not only inversions of meanings and values (asp.18) that can cause delusions but potentially also all inversions of the other aspects. Dogmatism and anarchism, for example, do not solely cause disorders of order but may also lead to disorders of thought and judging and therefore promote delusional thinking. Or, if we are fixated on responsibility and functionality, then we will feel secure and self-confident towards other people as long as we fulfill the responsibilities and functions. If we do not fulfill them, we may become ill and even paranoid. I want to explain this from my own experience: When I myself had to be psychiatrically treated about 30 years ago, the main reason was that I was full of absolute "musts". I believed that I had necessarily to be a good human being (also by misunderstood Christian views). I had ever to be helpful and available to my patients but also to gain a certain amount of appreciation. As long as I fulfilled those requirements I received a lot of appreciation and had a strong Ego. However, it all collapsed when I was not able to fulfill all of the requirements anymore - maybe I did not want to fulfill them either. My fellow men, especially my patients became more and more alien threatening. Everyone who entered my consulting room during this phase made me think: “That person is expecting much help, and I have to give it.” I was not aware, that my attitude made me vulnerable and that it caused me to view his wishes as unconditional demands towards me. The patient eventually became my opponent and I became my own opponent, too. “Why is everybody asking me for everything?”, "Why do some people weirdly look at me?", “What can I do?”, “Nobody can help me.” Fear, strangeness, despair and helplessness became overwhelming. I was only moments away from experiencing a manifest delusion, only moments away from losing my mind. Fortunately, I decided to seek professional help. I experienced a turning point when I realized that I am absolutely loved by God, that I may be, whoever I am, who does not make his love and my self dependent on whether I fulfill these or those responsibilities and functions, no matter how good or meaningful they are, or not.313 Questions: - Can't any ideology create delusion? - Does not have every person or every group or society its delusion in the shape of absolutization of growth, progress, performance, perfection, feasibility, beauty and other delusions? - What distinguishes the delusion of the healthy from the delusion of the sick? (The so-called healthy person does not suffer from it, because his delusion is still positive for him, while the delusion is sorrowfully experienced for the sick person.) - Doesn't the madnesses of us "healthy" promote the madnesses of the sick? (See also about the therapy of delusion in `Values´) 313 Although the psychotherapy did not intend this at that time, it fortunately lead me in this direction, for which I am grateful. 256 Hallucinations Delusions and hallucinations are closely related. Hallucinations are sensory illusions, without a demonstrable cause of stimuli. Hypotheses: While the main reason for delusions is most found in aspect 18 (thinking and judging), the main reason for hallucinations is found in aspect 16 (perception). The affected person has a contradicting perception of himself and the world. He sees, hears and feels everything in an alienated way. I believe, like all the other psychical symptoms, hallucinations are mainly be caused by inversions. Due to certain It/sA, the affected person views the world as though looking through a faulty pair of glasses: black and white, too clear or unclear, distorted and so on. Acoustic hallucinations are mainly developed through internalized absolutizations of people that act like a Homunculus in the affected person. It speaks to him, gives advice or orders etc. It is expressions of a special strange Self (sS) that become effective here as pseudopersonal, homunculus-like "central internalization". It was pushed from a subject role and the affected into the object role. ("It commands me...", "It comments my behavior", "It threatens me" etc.) These kinds of personal voices are being created because the personal sA/It (as `humunculi´) are often stronger than some other personal forces. Acoustic hallucinations are mainly voices of introjections of absolutized people (of people as sS), that were/are loved or hated too much. Or they are a transference of pathogenic behavior patterns of people surrounding the ill person. These are usually healthy themselves but they transfer their pathogenic issues and attitudes onto others who cannot defend themselves. I think, that phenomena such as delusions and hallucinations should not be viewed solely negative and absolutely pathological. Those disorders may also be an expression of going the right direction and may have progressive characteristics. Thus, they may also be an expression of the actual I-self. Consider, how many intuitions, illusions or predictions were thought to be abnormal and turned out to be absolutely true. (See also about the therapy of hallucinations in `New and old´). 257 Depressive and Manic Reactions “It is the phantom of our own self whose deep affinity and profound influence on our mind either damns us to hell or uplifts us into heaven” E.T.A. Hoffmann, 'The Sandman'. Depressive and manic symptoms may be caused by every inversion that leads to certain strange-Selves. The following graphs illustrate which sS mainly caused depressions and which cause manic symptoms.314 + Hyper-sS → Mania strange-Self strange sS → Schizophrenia − Contra-sS and 0 → Depression This graph is meant to illustrate kinds of the strange-Selves (resp. personal Its) and their effects. −* e.g., taboos as ‒ contra-sS +* e.g., ideals as + hypersS fulfillment defense 0 Main positions of the depressive and the manic: The absolutized positive (+*) has to be fulfilled and the absolutized negative (‒*) has to be avoided or fended off and the 0* has to be filled. As soon as the person goes against those requirements, he/she will become depressive. If the person meets the requirements, he/she may become manic. I postulated: If a person absolutizes something Relative or negates an actual Absolute, depressive and manic reactions may be the consequence. Absolutized Relatives become a strange-Self, which intrude in the actual Self and it pushes aside. The actual I can no longer live freely with the actual Self (as I-self) but will be rejected and also pushed aside. We were talking about the subject-object-splitting and understood it as a process of the strange-I (Ego) becoming the subject instead of the actual I. The actual I becomes the object being degraded and oppressed. That is the suppressing and depression-causing side. But the strange-Self will also give something 'positive': It will give exaggerated 'good' feelings, 'lust' in the sense or compensatory satisfaction. I cannot repeat enough, that it is important to not only view the strange-Self as solely negative but as ambivalent, substitute, or second-rate. The motto for that could be: It is better to experience inebriation than to commit suicide. We discussed those two sides of the strange Self: the pro-sS (ideal*) and the contra-sS 314 I ignore the possible causes by ‒A. 258 (taboo*).315 The ideal* gives, motivates, stimulates and makes the person happy and proud if it is being fulfilled. On the other side, it will constantly demand something and therefore it oppressively acts if it is not being fulfilled enough. And if the affected person decides to act against the ideal*, it becomes a tyrant and causes a sense of inferiority and guilt, a feeling of loss and depression. The person will keep trying with self-denial to fulfill the ideal. However, he/she becomes overtaxed and gets symptoms of depression. Along with the punishment through the strange Self, there will be a loss of the positives of the actual Self, since it is no longer the only base of the person. That mainly means loss of identity, vitality, uniqueness, freedom, self-confidence, which are all signs of depression. Therefore, depression can be viewed as a loss of the actual Absolute and as oppression through a strange Absolute (resp. strange Self). I view mania as an expression of conformity of the person with an absolutized positive* (ideal*).316 A manic person has the feeling that he/she found the +Absolute or is identical with it. 317 However, it is only a short-time fulfillment of the ideal that is giving that kind of feeling. Since the strange Self only gives substitutes, the positive feeling is not only limited but also less worth quality-wise. It remains a meager feeling of luck: A short rush, a thrill. Therefore, a manic person is not happy but more like being `high´. Such as the term 'bipolar disorder' describes, mania and depression are two sides of the same thing - the ambivalence of the strange Self. Mania is also protection against depression, such as depression is protection against mania. Mania is an inverse co-form of depression and vice-versa. Therefore, the depressive person has always latent manic parts and the manic person has always latent depressive parts. It is well-known that the illness proceeds in different phases. Since those phases run autonomously and do not correlate with the actual situation of the affected person, they do not appear to be explainable in a psycho-dynamic way which makes a lot of people think of them as some sort of metabolic disease. Unfortunately, we do not have enough place to discuss this problem. But if we look at the hypotheses made earlier, it becomes very clear why the named phases may appear. The main reason lays in the characteristics of the strange Self. In the first part of 'meta-psychiatry' I already mentioned how the flowing transitions of black and white, right and wrong, good and bad, positive and negate are being reduced to their opposites. The same thing happens to the mental state of a person. Regarding the reversal of mania in depression and vice versa see paragraph `Reversal into the opposite´. Based on the strange-Selves, the person is either too far within the positive sphere or too far within the negative sphere, even if he/she is acting no more incorrectly than the healthy people around him. Looking at it from the side of the strange-Selves, it appears thus: Such like dictators, they allow us to experience some sort of ecstasy whenever we were being good and sacrificed a large number for them. Somebody could say: Why not. I sacrifice myself for my own good, for my own ideals. Therefore I am the beneficiary. That is partly correct, and as mentioned 315 The third side - the 0 - remains unmentioned here. As a reminder: * means an absolutization of something Relative. 317 S. Freud saw it similarly. 316 259 before, the strange Self is not only the bad. The person is also doing something good for him-/herself, more exact, for what he/she thinks is his/her own Self even though it is not. But if a person sacrifices him/herself for the ideal*, he/she will receive only a substitute but not the actual reward and more often than receiving the substitute he/she will experience frustration, oppression or depression. REMARKS ABOUT OTHER DISORDERS In the following chapter, I will only briefly discuss some mental disorders. Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder "Today I know that I had 'absolute' claims as an obsessive-compulsive patient." (Ulrike S.) A short summary of the known facts: “Psychoanalysts believe that obsessive-compulsive disorders (OCD) are being developed when children start to fear their own Id-impulses and use defense-mechanisms to reduce the resulting fear. ... The Id-impulses usually appear as obsessive thoughts, and the defensemechanisms appear as contra-thoughts or obsessive behavior. ... It is probable that a combination of genetic tendency, disorder of the cerebral metabolism and psychical causes (such as stress) is the reason for an outbreak of obsessive-compulsive disorders. An isolated, singular cause is still unknown.” 318 U.H. Peters states: “The symptoms illustrate compromises between drives, their restrictions, the demanded expiation of the super-ego and masked substitute-satisfaction, between which the ego cannot decide (ambivalence)."319 I view the connections in a very similar way, although I would describe them slightly different and more comprehensive 320 based on the underlying concept. I believe that the causes are based on the unsolved conflicts between the actual Self and some specific strange Selves and the conflicts within those strange Selves. The basic idea would look as followed: The actual Self strives to be free, to be unconditionally loved and always maintain to be itself. (Being allowed to have certain sexual fantasies, allowed to be aggressive and bad and so on). However, strange Selves limit that freedom of being unconditioned and only give substitute-love and substitute-freedom under certain preconditions (fulfillment of +sArequirements and avoidance of ‒sA-requirements). If those requirements are not being fulfilled, the strange Selves threaten with sanctions, which cause fear within the affected person. To reduce those fears, the affected person develops an obsession to fulfill those requirements though that usually leads to short liberation only. Psychoanalysts discovered the compromise-character of those mechanisms a long time ago. 318 Aus https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zwangsst%C3%B6rung, 2/2016. Peters, Uwe-Hendrik: Lexikon Psychiatrie, Psychotherapie, medizinische Psychologie, 5. Aufl. Urban & Fischer, 1999. 320 Because everything that has been absolutized can become a compulsion. 319 260 The specific person tries to develop a compromise between the Self and the strange Selves a compromise between his actual needs and tempting promises or threats of the strangeSelves. However, he does not risk or is not able to relativize the strange-Selves because he identified him-/herself with it and views them as his own Self. One may find a better understanding of these internal processes when compared to similar external circumstances, such as comparing the strange Self with a dictator who, like with carrot and stick lures us on the one hand with false promises but on the other hand it scares us and compels us to behave in a certain way (compulsion) if we do not obey and do not have the courage to free ourselves from him. That view does not exclude neurobiological or genetic factors, even though I would not put too much focus on those as long as believable psycho-dynamic hypotheses exist and make causal therapy possible. I want to give a specific example for the different views and approaches. The case example I would like to illustrate and discuss is out of the publication “Zwangsstörungen im Kindes-und Jugendalter” (obsessive-compulsive disorders in childhood and adolescence). 321 That article is about an obsessive-compulsive disorder of a 10-year old girl, which appeared after her grandfather had passed away. The authors describe the disease progression based on scientific criteria along with the guidelines. They named possible causes and certain treatments that “did show a significant improvement but no complete remission of the symptoms”. Although a direct connection between the grandfather's death and the onset of the obsessive-compulsive disorder of the child was evident, the significance of the grandfather's death for the girl was surprisingly not discussed! My guess is that because of the guidelines, dealing with such "final" metaphysical issues did not fit into the concept. But what, if the girl was confronted with unsolved metaphysical questions due to the grandfather's death, which were relevant for the development of her illness? Surely, it would be absurd to seek metaphysical problems for each kind of symptomatic. However, if there are signs of relevance such as there are in the described case, we should not ignore them.322 (Note: When I sent a discussion commentary to the authors of the publishing magazine with my thoughts, I received the typical answer that only scientific discussions would be published.) I suppose that psychiatrists who do not feel responsible for such questions of belief whould allow the choice to patients to seek help from a pastor. However, that does not help, because: • there are barely any people who seek help from pastors when it comes to mental illness and 321 Susanne Walitza et al., Deutsches Ärzteblatt, 11, 2011 S. 173-179. Why one does not comfort the sick girl with the hope that the deceased grandfather lives on in heaven. Or, for the sake of completeness, if evidence of sexual assaults of the grandfather exist, which could also trigger a compulsive symptom that one may believe that there is a superior justice (God), which will bring both in order: the abuses of the offender as well as any existing guilt feelings of the victim. Of course, such instructions should not replace other psychotherapeutic measures but supplement them. 322 261 • the person would be sent away from the pastor as soon as he reckons with 'pathological problems'.323 The dilemma: In such situations, the mentally ill person(s) are left alone with their problems if pastors reject work with mental illnesses and psychiatrists solely work scientifically. What would be an option to solve this problem? We should probably show more courage to open closed theoretical and practical systems (scientific or theological) and risk more multidisciplinarity. Fear The main causes and the psycho-dynamics are very similar to the ones of obsessivecompulsive disorders. Therefore, I did not further describe those. Here are only a few remarks. Fear is not necessarily a bad sign such as living without fear is not always a good thing. Both are Relatives. That also means that no symptom has absolute importance, even if the appearance of fear is relatively negative at most times, while lack of fear is also relatively positive only. The pathological fear has three sources, based on the dimensions: • fear of loss of a +sA • fear of the manifestation of a ‒sA • fear of nothingness. On the one hand threatens the ‒sA, on the other the emptiness (0 *) and on the third the loss of a +sA. −sA +sA 0 c: A +sA and its opponent drive the person in front of themselves, from one to another or into nothingness. How here the inner sA/ It make fear, madness etc. this psycho-terror - in the form of `carrot and stick '(and emptiness) - is also used in totalitarian systems to suppress people. Example of the fear causing by emptiness: "I am absolutely ignorant of, as you say, `the pleasure of doing nothing´. As soon as I no longer hold a book, or am not dreaming of writing one, a lamentable boredom [0*] seizes upon me. Life, in short, seems tolerable to me only by legerdemain. Or else one must give oneself up to disordered pleasure [+sA]... and even then!" (Gustav Flaubert to George Sand).324 323 "Working with pathological dynamics is not within the competence of a counseling pastor and is therefore deliberately excluded." Wilfried Veeser: `Skript des Seelsorge-Grundkurs 1.Block, 2007´. 324 https://archive.org/stream/in.ernet.dli.2015.162241/2015.162241.The-George-Sand---Gustave-FlaubertLetters_djvu.txt, 2019. 262 Burn-Out P is usually too identified with the +*, which he/she sacrifices him/herself for. In other words, P burns for something +* and then burns out. P is full of experiencing a high at first and eventually exploiting his/her Self. At the same time, P needs too much energy to fend off what he experiences as absolutely negative (‒*). Example: Yes, I know from where I came! Ever hungry like a flame, I consume myself and glow. Light grows all that I conceive, Ashes everything I leave: Flame I am assuredly. (F. Nietzsche, Ecce Homo).325 Pain Every It/sA may cause pain: a +sA if it is being lost, a ‒sA or ‒0 if it appears or may appear. It mainly affects the sA that are effective in aspects 7 and 23. When it comes to sA in aspect 23 it is especially about traumata and injuries that affect the absolute-area of a person and/or absolutizations that avert the development of effective protection. S. Freud already ascertained that nothing hurts as much as the loss of a love-object ( sA). [+A however, can never be lost - only the belief in it.] Situations of pain may also occur with positive processes (labor pain, pain when going through a reasonable separation). However, those are usually limited in time, do not become chronic and have positive results. (`Your pain today is your freedom of tomorrow '.) Post-Traumatic Stress Disorders Post-traumatic stress disorders (PTSD) occur: • Objectively through confrontation with death, through serious injuries, through sexual abuse, rape, violent attacks, kidnapping, terror, war, torture, imprisonment, catastrophes, accidents, or diagnosis of a life-threatening disease. It can be experienced personally or through another person. • Subjectively through intensive fear, helplessness or shock. [Cit. DSM-IV, 1996.] There are highly differentiated concepts of treatment that are mainly based on behavioral therapeutic fundamentals.326 I do believe that an extension of those concepts by including good spirituality, or religion would be reasonable for the following two reasons: 325 http://www.georgeleemoore.com/writing/philosophy/nietzsches-concept/3-the-transition-to-style/4-nietzsche-aspoet/, 2019. 326 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-traumatic_stress_disorder#Management , 2021. 263 1) Statistics show that people who are religious or spiritual have better chances of recovery. 327 2) PTSD's have especially to do with relationships between offenders and victims and the context of problems of death. I do believe, that those difficulties are of existential importance (absolute-sphere) for the affected people and are therefore best solved based on good beliefs. Why? Such as the PTSD-therapists suppose, the trauma is best rehabilitated when there is a secure and trustworthy relationship between victim and therapist. The offenders are usually not available. The belief in a fair or maybe even avenging God, however, may relieve the victims more than the options a therapist has. Another difficulty lies in the resolving of the victim´s feelings of guilt, vengeance, and aggression that come along with traumatizations. In the best-case scenario that would mean giving it away to a higher power such as God. More exact: An important problem is that the victim often starts viewing him-/herself as a potential offender or may become too and is not able to unite both roles in a satisfactory way unless he/she gives the problem to a higher authority. This higher authority (God) is able to avenge the sacrifice if the offender does not repent of his behavior and may show mercy if the victim him/herself becomes a perpetrator and regrets his actions. When it comes to the mentioned 'confrontation with death', it is a question of belief if death is the last or not. Why should a psychotherapist convey a negative or no faith at all if there are just as many (or more) reasons for an afterlife? Why should a psychotherapist not convey a belief/faith, that reflects a relieving and liberating possibility?328 Communication Disturbances See Relationship disorders elsewhere. ADHD Some brief therapeutic remarks to attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD): Avoid the black-or-white-thinking regarding medication! Just like medication for other mental illnesses, they should be used as 'mental crutches'. They do not heal but they might save the affected person from a breakdown. If the affected child of the family is overtaxed and the symptoms are no longer able to be compensated, taking medication is usually a reasonable option. However, the dose should be relatively low, so that the symptoms are not completely covered but remain in a certain extent. If you give too much of the drugs, you take away the children the opportunity to develop complex skills themselves. (See also G. Hüther, section "Problem Antipsychotics"). There are very good behavioral therapies available, although they are often too focused on total elimination of symptoms. To me, it seems reasonable to practice symptoms consciously 327 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posttraumatische_Belastungsst%C3%B6rung, 2/ 2016. Ref. German → Luise Reddemann, Wolfgang Wöller Michaela Huber, Ulrich Sachse u.a.; English: Danielle Knafo (Ed.) Living With Terror, Working With Trauma. Jason Aronson, Inc. New York, 2004. 328 264 sometimes, to avoid a fixation on total symptom-elimination and thus to let the child know that it is unconditionally loved beyond any symptoms and performances. A collateral family-therapy is also important, not to seek fault on the parents' side but to relieve them, to strengthen them and to loosen unnecessary and overstraining attitudes. In the sense of 'primary psychotherapy', as described in this work later, attempts of change are ultimately secondary and subordinate to the unconditional acceptance of all involved parties. Alzheimer's Hypothesis: I am convinced that mental disintegration precedes cerebral disintegration. It is known that mental trauma can cause brain changes. In my experience, emotional traumas are a common cause of many dementias. Older people are increasingly confronted with existential problems (loss of meaning, serious illnesses, relatives' deaths, etc.) which are usually not diagnosed as traumas, however, they are often experienced in the same way. In addition to these traumas, any demands can be experienced as negative Absolutes if the person affected can no longer compensate what (s)he could still handle before his/her illness but is no longer able to do so, now. In the terminology of this work, the older person is no longer able to reach his/her +sA, to fend off the ‒sA and to fill inner emptiness (0).329 The sA burn out because they can no longer be served by the person concerned. And with them, his/her spirit goes out. They burn out like dying stars and remain in the brains only as dead nerve cells. Every person has experienced how their thinking and remembering was blocked in an every-day situation, due to certain unsolved problems. Why should that temporary mechanism not become chronic and somatized? It also needs to be mentioned that such psychodynamic hypotheses are rarely pursued because they are not a source of income for the pharmaceutical companies, while billions of dollars are earned only with the pharmacotherapy of dementia. Addiction See `Addiction´ in Metapsychiatry. Others I suppose that many diseases that are not primarily organic, such as psychosomatic diseases in general but also many that have multi-factorial causes such as epilepsy, rheumatism, migraine, irritable bowel syndrome, Crohn's disease, asthma, etc., are less genetic than caused by basic pre- or postnatal psychical reasons due to certain It/sA. 329 Similar J. Bauer et al. in http://www.alzheimerforum.de/2/6/2/dkp.html. 1994. New: Joachim Bauer (2018, in press) `Die Alzheimer-Krankheit als psycho-biologisches Geschehen´. In: Walach, H.&Loef, M. (Hrsg.) `Prävention und komplementärmedizinisch-therapeutische Aspekte der Demenz´. Essen: KVC Verlag. 265 Repetition for Clarification Mental illness may also occur due to the process of trying deep solutions, which is reflected by the term 'progressive illness'. The opinion that a healthy person acts more correct than an ill person or that a healthy person may even be a better human is wrong. In the Christian ambit, there are often misunderstandings when it comes to the connection of 'sin' and illness, which is mostly based on certain parts of the Old Testament. Especially the assumption that an ill person has to be some sort of sinner is very common. Jesus disagrees with this error. We cannot automatically assume closeness to God or strong faith just because someone is healthy and well, just as pain, sorrow or illness does not indicate the distance from God or a lack of faith. But on the other way, there are positive connections between good belief and health as I try to explain in this book. About Anti-Psychiatry The list of `anti-psychiatrists´ is long. I will name the most important ones: Silvano Arieti, Franco Basagli, Fred Baughman, Ernest Becker, Clifford Beers, Lauretta Bender, Richard Bentall, Peter Breggin, Paula Caplan, Ted Chabasinski, Judi Chamberlin, David Cooper, Lyn Duff, Michel Foucault, Jan Foudraine, Leonard Roy Frank, Erving Goffman, James Gottstein, Otto Gross, Jacques Lacan, R. D. Laing, Peter Lehmann, Theodore Lidz, Kate Millett, J. Moncrieff, Loren Mosher, David Oaks, Elizabeth Packard, Sascha Scatter, David Smail, Thomas Szasz, Stephen Ticktin, Robert Whitaker. Some of their publications are listed in the bibliography. The anti-psychiatrists had/have different professions and criticized the established psychiatry in diverse ways. The criticism varied from radical denial to suggestions for improvement. In my view, established psychiatry has not integrated meaningful 'antipsychiatric' ideas to its own detriment. It is also regrettable that psychiatry and anti-psychiatry are contrasted in literature. Therefore I would speak better of `complementary psychiatry' instead of `antipsychiatry'. 266 METAPSYCHOTHERAPY The spirit is stronger than matter. Belief is stronger than knowledge. The Self is stronger than the Ego alone. God is stronger than human and death. What is Metapsychotherapy? Metapsychotherapy means a level above psychotherapy, a level from where psychotherapy can be reflected upon and defined.330 All the insights of humans that are helpful to the psyche, and which are communicated by diverse worldviews331 and sciences, are relevant to Metapsychotherapy. One may also say that all generally-valid solutions (`meta-solutions´) for fundamental (psychical) problems of humanity (`meta-problems´) are also relevant to Metapsychotherapy. Metapsychotherapy not only offers meta-solutions themselves but also facilitates the development of optimal solutions within psychotherapy as a whole. This chapter is based on the following hypotheses: 1. The worldviews essentially determine the human´s psyche and behavior. 2. The different worldviews also determine the different psychotherapeutic directions and the respective therapists significantly. That is, behind every psychotherapy is a determining worldview and the worldview of each psychotherapist will substantially determine his therapy. This raises the question as to what advantages and disadvantages the various worldviews have for psychotherapy that will be discussed, too. 332 In this study, I limit myself to describing the most important worldviews from those I believe are relevant to our theme.333 Billions of people around the world have one faith or another and, for this reason, I believe that a reflection upon the potential benefits, or possible damage, to our psyche, caused by these worldviews, will be helpful. Within the framework of this study, and taking into consideration the magnitude of these topics, as well as my own limited knowledge, my 330 For reasons of simplicity, I will at times speak of meta-therapy rather than meta-psychotherapy. See later also about `Primary Psychotherapy´. 331 - `Worldview (Weltanschauung)´ is the general term here which includes mindset, religion, ideology, the conception of the world, philosophy, attitude, outlook on life, etc. These concepts may be either defined or are private and undefined. By way of variation, at times, I use the one term, and, at other times, another one. - As described in the section Metapsychology, worldviews are a matter of faith. 332 How is it possible for a psychotherapist, who is trained in rational thinking, to understand irrational ways of thinking as are so frequently found amongst those suffering from psychological illnesses? By the example of Freud, Balthasar Staehelin wrote the following: “It was perhaps Freud's apparent compulsion to be a servant of such scientific bias and exclusivity which drove him to make possible his greatest mistake: He was no longer able to listen to a patient impartially but only heard that which was spoken as a confirmation of his philosophical convictions concerning the nature of humankind.“ (p. 22) 333 To discuss the majority of them would be to go beyond the scope of this study. 267 explanations are only brief and subjective but they shall inspire the reader to a constructive discussion. Surprisingly, one finds in the literature only a small number of publications on this topic. The reason for this may well be the current dominance of so-called evidencebased therapies since they correspond with the zeitgeist of science. They are, however, not undisputed.334 J. Wiltschko is one of those who delivers harsh criticism. Under the headline “What is evidence-based psychotherapy?“ he explains:335 “Very important components of psychotherapy are lost in RCTs [randomized controlled trials] and considered to be mere accumulations of confounding variables ...”. Further: “The demand for evidence-based methods is the contemporary end-product of a process which is inspired by developments within the whole of society.“336 This, however, is predominately caused by a materialistic view, which is little suited to psychological issues, as has previously been emphasized. As therapists, we find ourselves in danger of placing the “letter” above the spirit - as did the Pharisees in the Old Testament - although the letter alone kills and the spirit sets us free.337 I hope that, in a few years, we psychotherapists will not need to comply with hundreds of regulations, as the Pharisees did in their day. 338 There is a danger that therapies will predominately concerned with the observation of the relevant regulations, which would have similar consequences as a 'work-to-rule'. Under the headline “Evidenzbasiert trösten?” (Evidence-based consolation?), Dunja Voos wrote: “Many patients suffering from mental illnesses are looking for consolation, support, meaning in life, a trusting relationship and a feeling of emotional security … A child who cries and feels sad is comforted by mother and father ... The parents comfort the child - not because they are following evidence-based methods but because they follow their feelings.“339 One could also say, parents do this out of love (but love cannot be “evidencebased”.) A therapy that does not fulfill these needs seems to be, in my opinion, comfortless in the true sense of the word. This also applies to S. Freud's therapy, when he declares: ”... and I bow to their reproach that I can offer them [the patients] no consolation: for at bottom that is what they are all demanding - the wildest revolutionaries no less passionately than the most virtuous believers.“340 I believe that the guidelines of evidence-based medicine are very valuable, provided that they are only applied to subject matters which are appropriate for scientific analysis. 341 This See also the criticism by G. Vinnai: „Die Austreibung der Kritik aus der Wissenschaft: Psychologie im Universitätsbetrieb“ www.vinnai.de/kritik.html, 2013. 335 Johannes Wiltschko: “Eine Metapsychotherapie als Kontrapunkt zum gegenwärtigen Trend.” (Meta-psychotherapy as a counterpoint to the current trend) in: https://www.daf-focusing.de/wp-content/uploads/Wiltschko-Metapsychotherapie20101.pdf However, I can only agree with some of the conclusions which J. Wiltschko draws. 336 Ibid. 337 2 Cor 3:6. Jesus had many critical words to say about such a Pharisaic spirit. 338 1.) In my opinion, the legal system in Germany is undergoing a similar development, in which, for reasons of the absolutization of random paragraphs, some victims seem to receive less protection than the offenders. 2.) The controlled economy in socialist states is a good example of the consistent implementation of regulations based upon ideologies. 339 Dunja Voos http://www.medizin-im-text.de/blog/2013/1285/evidenzbasiert-troesten/ 2013. 340 Freud, Sigmund, in: Das Unbehagen in der Kultur, (Civilization And Its Discontents)1930. 341 By itself, the term `Evidenz´ in German means `unmittelbare Einsichtigkeit' (immediate intelligibility (Duden). However, the term Evidenz is often used erroneously to represent the English word `evidence´, which stands for proof or 334 268 is only partially applicable to psychiatry. Officially, the recommendations of evidence-based medicine are only meant to serve as guidance. However, the question arises as to who would dare diverge from the opinions of experts, especially as in the case of failure, legal consequences might ensue should the guidelines not be observed. My main criticism is that these guidelines do not include other perspectives and are therefore biased. Since imbalances do not remain without consequences and every extreme promotes its opposite, it is to be expected that a type of psychotherapy that has a one-sided focus on scientific aspects will advance the current, uncontrolled psycho-boom. Thus, according to the magazine `Focus´, about 10,000 healers and about 500,000 Reiki-masters are, at present, offering their spiritual assistance to the German public. 342 But what are the hallmarks of good meta-psychotherapy? A good meta-psychotherapy should facilitate a free choice amongst the diverse psychotherapies, dependent upon the respective person and problem, and allow - or even promote - new, alternative methods. Arguably, every school of psychotherapy will pronounce important truths; however, without considering meta-therapeutic insights, it will soon reach its respective limits. Good metatherapy however, will yet provide support where concrete psycho-therapeutic measures fail. The larger perspective of meta-therapy can establish correct connections and relations and to avoid superficial therapies that are not sustainable. If the conceptual framework is kept rather small and limited in scope, then good solutions may be impeded. This is also true if the solution is solely framed around that which one can scientifically verify. In such a case, we are merely installing a closed box, in which we are trapped and cannot find solutions because the system is not open to a wider perspective.343 Thus, for example, some therapy strategies appear to resemble illness-extermination-programs promoted by the pharmaceutical industry. For me, meta-therapy is the following: Treating people from a higher point/ from above/ from the highest meta-level with respect for the dignity of man. According to Spinoza and others 344 it is a perspective with relation to the eternal (“sub specie aeternitatis”). I am convinced that, from this perspective, decisions are often made differently; moreover, that decision-making is at its best, wherever the absolute ”point of reference” chosen is the right one. In meta-therapy, the most relevant questions are the following: What is the strongest definition of a person? What is our ultimate concern? Which worldview communicates most of love? What absolute point of reference/ (system of reference)345 communicates this the best? In other words: What is the positive Absolute attestation. “Therefore, the German translation 'evidenzbasierte Medizin” is not a correct rendition of the English expression 'evidence-based medicine' ....”. (emphasis added). https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidenz 11/2013. 342 Focus No. 30/11 p. 73. 343 In this respect, I refer again to the theorem on undecidability by K. Gödel. 344 See L. Wittgenstein, Viktor Frankl and C. G. Jung, who refer to this expression, albeit with different emphases. The qote is taken from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sub_specie_aeternitatis. Similar to F. Nietzsche: The philosopher should stand "on the widely spread wings of all time". (About the pathos of the truth). 345 Is this an analogy to the inertial frame of reference in physics? 269 (+A)? Which points of reference make our lives too difficult or make us ill? Which points of reference lead to either no solution or merely a second-rate one? In the following chapters, we will investigate these questions. Once more, I would like to emphasize that the answers to these inquiries are credible at best but not provable. 346 Fundamental Problems Though we want the Absolute - we can, however, remain caught up in that which is Relative. We desire a state in which we, and our world, are entirely positive; however, we witness both: wonderfulness and faults. We long for our salvation and yet we are unredeemed; we wish for immortality and yet we are mortal; we yearn for unlimited lust and yet - we only experience it in part and only at certain times; we pine for the sense that we are loved for our own sake but, very often, we are only loved for our achievements; we crave for freedom and omnipotence and yet, we often feel trapped and powerless; we are eager for companionship and peace but ultimately, we remain alone or ill at ease, etc. From a Christian perspective, one might say: We have lost paradise and now live in this conflicting world. But I believe, all of these problems mentioned, which are deeply, existentially felt by the individual, are already, in principle (rather than in totality) solved in relation to the +Absolute (which is God/ love). But the positive strange Absolutes (+sA) are more attractive and they seemingly satisfy our desires more easily than the +A. On the other side, their price is too high because the actual I-Self is to sacrify for them. It is paradoxical, therefore, that a person considers that which is adverse to be advantageous, and that which is advantageous to be adverse. Basic problems systematically presented:347 • Problems of the dimensions: - The person between the actual +A and ‒A (the absolute, existential problem). - The problems between the actual A and the sA/It. - The problems between diverse sA/It. - The problems within diverse sA/It. Here, one can - following the concept of the `7 synonyms of the Absolute´ - make further distinctions: Existential problems relating to: identity (a2); reality (a3); unity; integrity (a4); unconditionality (a5); priorities (a6); and autonomy (a7). • Problems within the fields of differentiation: The 4 main aspects of differentiation entail the following fundamental problems: 1. Existential problems relating to being (to be or not to be or `being contra´). 2. Existential problems relating to life (life or death or `living contra´, such as `destrudo´). 3. Existential qualitative problems (good /bad, evil/ false; or positive/ negative/ 0). 4. Existential problems relating to being either a subject or an object (e.g. offender/ victim; person/ thing). 346 347 As explained above, even the proofs need to be believed. Classification as described in `Metapsychology'. 270 With regard to the `23 individual aspects´, there are problems corresponding to the respective subject matter. The question which is perpetually at the fore relates to whether the problem has relative or absolute significance for the affected person (or whether it has the same significance as one of the 7 synonymous conceptual pairs). In the following, I will reflect general upon the theory of solutions. Subsequently, I will discuss the various potential solutions put forward by the most common worldviews, as well as the consequences which follow from these that are relevant for psychotherapy. Solutions “Every change begins with the spirit by which it is borne.” Jochen Pohl Hypotheses • I ultimately (!) assume that the positive Absolute (+A) can solve (redeem) everything (except −A). • This absolute solution comprehends all Relative solutions but is not implicitly in need of them. • Relative solutions are first-rate solutions if they are embedded in +A. Solutions proceeding from a strange Absolute are second-rate solutions. • Problems which are taken to be relative can, at times, be solved within the same (relative) system, whilst problems which are taken to be absolute, can only be solved by +A. In other words: relative problems can be solved relatively well using relative means, whilst problems of the absolute sphere cannot be solved using relative means.348 It is surprising to note that, on the one side most experts, from Friedrich Nietzsche to Paul Watzlawick, amongst others, appreciate the importance of meta-positions resp. premises for solutions,349 but on the side of the psychiatric and psycho-therapeutic investigation, such premises have been attributed little importance. In a systematized form, I present the following differentiation: 348 Example of a problem in society: All of us would like to receive the best medical care. However, our health care is embedded within a greater issue: What can the state afford without neglecting other important fields of action? The problems of the individual state, in turn, are embedded within those of the international community; and these, in turn, are embedded within the problems of humankind in general. This means that, in order to avoid implementing overlyexpensive solutions or solutions which are established at the expense of other spheres of action, the most important solution of the first order will be to gain an overview of the big picture, a meta-position, and then to find relative solutions. Thus, it becomes also clear that it is not simply the healing of one or another illness that is at stake. 349 Friedrich Nietzsche: said, “He who has a why to life can bear almost any how.” Paul Watzlawick claimed that psychically speaking, a person could not survive in a world that was not meaningful to him or her. In addition, he said that the “loss or absence of meaning in life was perhaps the most common denominator in all forms of emotional distress....” Own translation of: Menschliche Kommunikation Bern 2000, cit. by Beatrix Gotthold and Christian Thies in: “Denn jeder sucht ein All” Reclam, Leipzig, 2003 p.85 ff. 271 First-Rate Solutions Redemption is free of cost, Solutions must be acquired. Redeemed you find the best solutions. I differentiate between: • One first-rate, absolute solution = unconditional, absolute solution = redemption. It is a spiritual/ love solution. This has two parts: a) Redemption by + A (God). This solution comprehends and integrates all other solutions, even those which are secondrate. It also resolves all opposites, dilemmas and paradoxes.350 b) The person´s +A choice = P wants, in principle, what is good (`fundamental virtue´). (See also `Absolute attitude´ and Absolute and relative will) Otherwise, people only can find relative solutions. I.e. no one can redeem himself or others. (But he does not have to do it, too). • Many first-rate, relative solutions = relative solutions that are integrated into +A . First-rate, relative solutions can also have physical ways of implementation; they, nevertheless, build upon +A. Relative problems can be solved with +A or in a superordinate, relative system. Hallmarks of first-rate solutions (solutions of the first order) include the following: - Freedom: I do not have to solve the problem - just as I do not have to do necessarily anything else! - The solution is not achieved at the expense of others. - First-rate solutions are better and more effective than second-rate solutions. Why is this so? It is because they do not require as much effort in their implementation; they are more harmonious and credible. Although these solutions, coming from an absolute level, fail to not automatically generate a total solution but rather generate a basic one, they will still serve to thwart the development of mental illnesses that concern the absolute sphere of a person, the Self. This, in turn, suggests that only in due to faith in a positive Absolute which I, personally, call God, all earthly problems get mere relative meaning; and furthermore, a person in their existential (spiritual) foundation can not be destroyed. Also, the + A not only provides redemption but simultaneously offers an optimal basis for special, relative solutions. Second-rate solutions by strange, positive Absolutes, however, are, at best, suboptimal, and at worst, predominately negative; either way, they are less advantageous than the +A. Relative solutions are often inadequate since they lack a superordinate meta-level. Analogically, Bertrand Russel and Alfred Whitehead, in their theory of types, claim: 'That which affects the entirety of a class (set), cannot itself be part of this class.' K. Gödel's incompleteness theorem makes similar assertions: 1. There are always unprovable statements in nearly contradiction-free systems; 2. Nearly contradiction-free systems can 350 Already Nicholas of Cusa saw in the overcoming of opposites, the "Coincidentia oppositorum", an essential feature of the divine. 272 not prove their own freedom from contradiction.351 In other words: Solutions of unresolved issues / contradictions in a system are only possible up to a certain point with the means of this system and from a certain point onwards only from a higher-level system / level. Anything that has a systemic character can stand for the term 'system', for example world, reality, human being, psyche, relationships etc. In addition, some keywords: Redemption is a gift, solutions must be worked out. Redemption is more important than solutions. Redeemed one finds the best solutions. If no solution is possible, the more important and simpler redemption is still possible: earthly lack of freedom is compensated by spiritual freedom, earthly contradictions are dissolved by spiritual redemption, etc. Paul Watzlawick argues similarly, "He locates many disturbances of everyday human communication (especially as regards couples) on the relationship level and sees meta-communication as a solution to dissolve them." 352 Or Socrates: Keep in mind that this earthly life is not the last one and that it does not matter how much you achieve here, then you will not be manic in happiness and will not be depressed in misery.353 For what else reason could people experience liberation despite existential threat-situations? [Later, when I juxtapose Causal and symptomatic therapies, it will become clear that this constitutes a somewhat different perspective; but one which corresponds with the previous. Already at this point, I would like to say that a symptomatic therapy can clearly also be a first-rate therapy - in this case, however, it would only be a relative one.] Second-Rate Solutions Synonyms for second-rate solutions: emergency-solutions, temporary solutions, ostensible solutions, solutions of the second order. The foundation of second-rate solutions is a strange Absolute (sA). These second-rate solutions are in no way poor solutions; however, by comparison with first-rate solutions, they are, as their name says, second-rate. The more that the strange Absolute, from which the second-rate solution comes, corresponds with the actual Absolute, the better the secondary solution will be and vice versa. Thus, second-rate solutions range from the suboptimal to nearly unresolved. One might also say that second-rate solutions are neither entirely correct nor entirely wrong. However, in terms of their positive effects, even the best +sA remains a long way behind those of the +A since the above-mentioned existential, fundamental problems persist. Second-rate solutions (answers) are either “absolutistic”, relativistic or negativistic. If the solution is absolutistic, predominately hyper-effects emerge from relativistic solutions, mainly strange or false effects arise and from nihilistic solutions, primarily a loss of first-rate reality occurs. 351 E.g. N.I. Kondakow: Wörterbuch der Logik; deb Verlag, Westberlin, 1978. Keyword `Gödel´. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metakommunikation , 4/2014. 353 In reference to Socrates: "Always keep in mind that everything is transient, then you will not be too happy in happy times and not too sad in sad times." 352 273 Thus, second-rate solutions have hyper/ strange/ or deficient effects; e.g., they have hyper/strange /deficient effects concerning absoluteness, identity, actuality, unity, safety, freedom, and the other aspects. Advantages and Disadvantages One advantage of second-rate solutions is the possibility of developing hyper-effects, e.g. `ecstasy´, euphoria, high, etc. A “disadvantage” of first-rate solutions is the lack of development of those hyper-effects. More on Solutions If we once more proceed on the assumption of an inversion, the situation can be described as follows: Relative entities invade the absolute sphere to become strange-Absolute and strange Self. As mentioned above, the +Absolute is the redeeming - however, the Relative as a dependent entity is, in itself, relatively unsolved. If relative entities now invade the absolute sphere of a person and substitute the Absolute, at this central point, an unresolved complex (= `It´) will develop. This will affect those involved until it is resolved or at least relativized. If the person depends upon a +Absolute position, from an actual Self, then the complex is resolved or at least relativized, and thus defused. In this way, the +Absolute is not a total solution but certainly a solver and liberator in principle. Should a relative problem, in this case, remain unresolved, it may have some negative effects but it does not determine our being. We stand above it. If a problem remains in the absolute sphere as sA however, it cannot be conclusively solved without the aid of the +Absolute. It can only be ostensibly or relative well solved; for instance, it can be repressed. The effects of these unresolved complexes depend upon their nature. These are discussed in the chapter concerning the effects of the strangeSelves/ It. As indicated above, mental illnesses are considered to be an essential consequence of the effects of these unresolved problems. Meta-solution = redemption; this is the state of already being redeemed, now and forever, in principle (not totally), should one so desire - not only when one has fulfilled this or that precondition but quite simply, by allowing oneself to be loved “from above”. Thereby, the person is relieved from burdens in an optimal way, since potential demands made upon the individual can no longer take center stage. Redemption is more important than solution and through redemption, solutions are much more likely to occur. [Example: Solution of the `tragedy of the commons´ problem. See unabbreviated version.] Further Keywords Relating to Solutions - Life is more important than the functional. - Material/ organic disorders are most easily remedied by material means which rest upon +A; mental or emotional disturbances are most easily remedied by spiritual, mental or emotional means which rest upon +A. 274 - Do not adjust the patient to the method of therapy but rather adjust the method of therapy to suit the patient - this notwithstanding, the desires of the patient should not be the supreme authority. - The existential question: “Am I already or do I still need to become?” Answer: “You are, now also try to become!” - The key to open closed doors of the second-rate worlds, is seldom a key of the second order, which thus originates from WPI² itself but is rather a key of the first order; quasi a meta-key, a spiritual key, which, ultimately, cannot be found in knowledge (for knowledge is relative) but found instead in faith, which has access to that which is the Absolute. This is not a devaluation of knowledge but a question of priorities.354 There is more on the Causal therapy and Symptomatic therapy in the section `Psychotherapy´. Comparison with Solutions of Other Authors • P. Watzlawick et al. distinguish between the following solutions: 355 - Solutions of the first order: "Here the non-functioning system is left to itself; For solving the problem, only systeminternal means are taken into consideration ... Thus, in first-order solutions, only individual problematic elements are `repaired 'or postponed ... But from the outside, it has not led to a solution of the actual problem, but only one problem shift or deterioration of the initial situation brought about. Thus, first-order solutions are only applicable for a short time ... ". Commentary: These solutions of the first order resemble, in essence, those which I have termed second-rate solutions. - Solutions of the second order: “… to durably eradicate a problem, it is, therefore, advisable to seek a second-order solution. In this case, the 'sick system´ is no longer left to its own devices, but, from the outside, one can also intervene ... in the functioning of the system. Contrary to first-order solutions, relations between the elements can thus be assessed and analyzed more objectively. The remedying of the problem requires the re-organization of the entire system ...” Commentary: I have termed the solutions of the second order, as they are referred to here, first-rate solutions. The authors also point out that they attempt to resolve unresolved problems from the vantage point of a meta-level, however, they do not refer to a (positive) Absolute. • Parallels to psychoanalysis: I believe that the essential therapeutic effects of psychoanalysis lie in the fact that the individual is made aware of “complexes” which, whilst embarrassing to the affected person and which have therefore been repressed, are now be respected as a part of human existence - in this way, the affected person feels accepted, with all their faults. In his practice, the psychoanalyst thus assumes a loving meta-position; although in theory, S. Freud advocates a different position, claiming that, “the intention that Albeit only in a limited way, the “W²-methods” can indeed serve to solve W²-problems, if the solution is found in the W²hierarchy above the W²-problem. Hierarchies of problems and hierarchies of solutions: see unabridged German version. 355 See: Watzlawick, P., J.H. Weakland, R.Fisch: Lösungen. Verlag Hans Huber Bern-Stuttgart-Wien, 1974. 354 275 man should be happy is not in the plan of Creation.” 356 Amongst the options to protect a person from suffering, he lists, deadening of drives, drive-controlling sublimation (which is only achievable for a few). The aims into which a drive may be converted through sublimation are: art (as “mild narcosis”); religion (as “collective delusion”) and finally, in its “weakest” form, love: “We are never so defenseless against suffering as when we love...”. 357 In my opinion, this is only true in regards to second-rate love, the `libido´; and not in regards to first-rate love, which, by way of contrast, is the strongest force that there is to counter suffering. The possibility of protection through a superordinate positive entity, through a `positive meta-position´, as Freud himself practiced, remains unmentioned. Here I cannot go into detail about the dialectic, which also makes statements about the solutions of opposites. There is extensive literature on this. As far as I know it, almost only second-rate solutions are considered.358 What is Best for the Psyche? “What love and spirit give cannot be extorted.” F. Hölderlin I believe that we, as human, require both - scientifically-sound help and the support which comes from faith. Even if this were to be granted however, the challenges of the therapeutic situation would yet remain. Even if one assumes that all those who help only want what is best for their clients, the question arises as to what precisely is “the best“. • Is that which is subjectively felt to be best also that which is objectively the best? Is the best thing the satisfaction of the patients' subjective needs? This will be wrong in such cases as when: the satisfaction of the patient's needs causes them harm; or when their needs and their satisfaction are artificial, manipulated or ones which are not actual needs, the satisfaction of which will not benefit the patient in the long-term. However, the achievement of satisfaction for actual needs is sometimes connected with negative emotions or even suffering, and therefore frequently causes Resistance. • It is similar to the frequently given advice, that the affected should be good to themselves. However, the good in the long-term may be an attempt to meet the challenges of reasonable conflicts and crises, even though they are often connected with suffering. • Also, the therapeutic aim to remedy the symptoms or even to get health, as described in detail in a different section, is not unequivocally positive: The elimination of a symptom, albeit helpful in an acute situation, might conceal its causes and thus induce more permanent disorders, which may not find expression as an illness, and might not even manifest exclusively in the affected if the alleviation of symptoms come at the expense of other people or of other spheres of life. 356 https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/66884 1. S. Freud 1930: Das Unbehagen in der Kultur; GW XIV, p. 441. 2. The previous recital of Freud´s defense mechanisms originates from a citation that I cannot locate at present. 358 Hegel, Marx and their followers believed that the synthesis achieved by thesis and antithesis would abolish the opposites, while Adorno in particular, in his 'negative dialectics', pointed out differences that could not be abolished. 357 276 • Prolongation of life at any cost? Is a long life truly the very best thing? In some instances, it can be terrible. It seems particularly questionable to force terminally ill people to live on against their repeatedly stated will. 359 • Is reason the very best thing? Is it not tedious, and even impossible, to remain nothing other than reasonable? • Serenity? Would it not be better for us were we allowed to, at times, not be serene, and would these instances not occur time and time again? Are we not serene to a higher degree if we are allowed also to not be serene? • Authenticity? Are we not authentic to a higher degree if we remain true to ourselves, even when we are not authentic? • Success? Are we not condemned to be successful if we are not allowed to be unsuccessful? • Mindfulness? Is it not to be taken into consideration that excessive mindfulness can lead to carelessness? • Objectivity? Is not our objectivity at its highest level when it encompasses subjectivity? This list is by no means exhausted and could be continued indefinitely. In the best-case scenario, these aims are only suboptimal, since they are all associated with preconditions which we can only ever fulfill occasionally and partially. The question remains as to what is the best thing for a person, for their soul. One might also ask: What is the Positive Absolute, the +A? How should be the best spirit, the best attitude of mind (in philosophy, religion, etc.)? In short: What should a positive Absolute (+A) look like? This is a matter of belief. I personally believe: First, the +A should be affectionate and should not make love dependent on any preconditions. The +A should love each person for their own sake, (whilst not necessarily loving all their actions). The + A should be free - and not ask a price like ideologies and some worldviews. The +A should grant every person implicit dignity, value and the right to self-determination. The +A should be, at the same time, both optimistic and realistic. The +A should elevate people and not dominate them. The + A should be always self-consistent. The +A should be accessible to all without any preconditions - this means that it should not only be accessible to the intelligent, the strong and the good but also to the simple, the weak and the evil; perhaps even more so since they are more in need of it. 359 For example: Tony Nicklinson lived for 7 years with Locked-in-Syndrom. He felt condemned to a life which he perceived to be “uncomfortable, undignified and degrading”. In vain, he filed lawsuits at all official channels to be given the right to commit assisted suicide. Similarly, the British Diane Pretty, the Italian Eluana Englaro, who had been in a vigilant coma in a care home for 17 years following an accident etc.. I am well aware of the difficulties associated with such decisions, particularly in view of the background of euthanasia, however, I believe that the dogmatization of an orientation which, in itself, is correct and humane, that: `Every earthly life must be maintained and prolonged at any cost´ may become inhumane at a certain point. In this way, it seems also absurd to hear in the news that “doctors are fighting for the life of the erstwhile prime minister of Israel, Scharon, who has been in a coma for seven years (!)“, given that his condition has now (2014) deteriorated. 277 The +A should allow every person the option to deselect every Absolute, therefore even the deselection of God himself, and thus, in this free attitude toward Absolutes, allow the respective person himself to occupy an absolute position. The +A should be stronger than the people themselves. The +A should assist people in their hour of need, without depriving them of the right to make a decision, nor taking away their responsibility. The +A should forgive everything if the relevant person so wishes. The +A should give people orientation but not direct them. The +A should provide people with meaning which cannot be lost. The +A should not be manipulable but sovereign. The +A should relativize all earthly problems and thereby facilitate their solution. The +A should give people hope in every circumstance, thus also beyond death, without referring to the fulfillment of their hopes solely to the afterlife. The +A should be able to empathize with people and comfort them, just as an ideal mother comforts her child. The +A should give people, first and foremost, freedom and joy, relieving the pressures which weigh upon them, without taking every burden away, in case such an action causes them to weaken. The +A should make the core of every person, the Self, unassailable and indestructible, by making this Self independent of anything that is destructible in itself. The nature of the +A should be such that anyone, at any time, is able to find themselves again within the Absolute. The +A should be good for all people. The +A is "what holds the world together at the core" (Goethe, Dr. Faust, chapter 4). The best thing for our psyche, the +A, is, I believe, love (or else if one is religious: God). 360 I am deeply convinced that the strongest healing force is love/ God - even if it seems “watered down” or hidden behind other names such as respect, sympathy, unconditional acceptance and appreciation, etc. or within various religions, ideologies or therapeutic methods. This is my personal view of the positive Absolute, of God, which does not necessarily agree with some other Christian conceptions. See `Christian one-sidednesses and misinterpretations´, too. Since love/ God possesses the most diverse aspects, every one of these aspects will have a positive effect; on the other hand, its power is lessened if only one of its aspects or attributes is made absolute. In the following, I sketchily try to examine the most important worldviews (eltanschauungen) to see how far they correspond to this ideal of a + A. I will only investigate mainstream worldviews of humanity, with which the belief systems of individuals will agree more or less. In addition, it is to be noted that any assessment of them is, of course, subjective and, at best, credible. 360 See also the passage on love in 1 Cor 13. 278 WORLDVIEWS - FOUNDATIONS OF PSYCHOTHERAPIES (CRITICAL SURVEY) Introduction Definition: “The word worldview means the entirety of all views of an individual or a group of individuals concerning the world; the latter's inherent condition and qualities, its origin, its destination, meaning, value, etc. and the position of humanity within it. Different to insights, worldviews do not contain reasonable elements such as interpretations, ideals and categorical beliefs about a way of life; perhaps even metaphysical and religious views.” 361 Why should we not analyze the most diverse belief systems concerning their effects on the psyche -particularly in this chapter, and discuss how, if at all, they might qualify as a foundation for psychotherapies? The rather unfavorable worldviews, the ideologies, I discussed in the part `Metapsychiatry'. In the following review, I will address some of the essentially humane concepts that are the foundations for various types of psychotherapies; although they are rarely considered as such. An exception is John R. Peteet; Quote: "Therapists’ virtues are vitally important in psychotherapy … Among the individual and cultural factors that shape a therapist’s virtues are spiritual traditions … Arguably these include for Jews, communal responsibility and critical thought; for Christians, love and grace; for Muslims, reverence and obedience; for Buddhists, equanimity and compassion; for Hindus, appreciation of Dharma and Karma; and for secularists, respect for scientific evidence and intelligibility. These have differing implications for treatment …". These should be discussed here. 362 Here, I will address only the most well-known, quasi-official worldviews which are representative of countless individual worldviews. For me, the most important criterion for this analysis is the question regarding the degree to which these correspond to the positive Absolute named above; in other words, the level of love that they communicate. As a therapist, it is also important, however, to understand the patient from the perspective of his worldview.363 The worldviews compete with one another; The various world religions claim to have the right answers to the existential questions of humankind. Of course, it is possible to say: Let everyone seek heaven in their own fashion; why should I question the faith of another person? Surely, it would be wrong to challenge the freedom of belief. On the other hand, one could answer: Why should I not respect the faith of my fellows while, at the same time, advocate a different standpoint? Why should I not seek out, 361 Quoting Peter Möller in: http://www.philolex.de/weltansc.htm 3/2014 J.R. Peteet: `What is the Place of Clinicians’ Religious or Spiritual Commitments in Psychotherapy? A Virtues-Based Perspective´ New York 2013. Underlined by me. https://projects.iq.harvard.edu/files/rshm/files/what_is_the_place_of_clinicians_religious_or_spiritual_commitments_in_ps ychotherapy_a_virtues-based_perspective.pdf,. 363 Similarly, Fritz Mauthner claims that “the worldview of a person depends on the general and temporary condition of their soul.“ Quoted in Peter Möller, in: http://www.philolex.de/weltansc.htm -3/2014 , - whereby the reverse is also true. 362 279 together with my fellows, believable answers to the questions relating to what is best for people? The following assessments of the diverse worldviews have been undertaken, first and foremost, about their effect on the psyche. These are only statements in note form which represent my personal opinion and do not claim to present a complete picture. As sources for the subsequent statements, I predominately refer to the following literature (unless otherwise stated): Brockhaus Enzyklopädie; Schischkoff: Philosophisches Wörterbuch; Lexikon der Evangelischen Zentralstelle für Weltanschauungsfragen;364 Evangelischer Erwachsenen Katechismus; E. Kellerhals: Der Islam; K. Jaspers: Die großen Philosophen; Wikipedia; Koran; Bible.365 Anthropocentric/ Theocentric Worldviews In this respect, I distinguish between anthropocentric, theocentric and christocentric worldviews. Anthropocentric Materialism, Idealism, Esoterism and most of the other Ideologies; In part Buddhism Advantages Disadvantages/Risks Lack of spirituality abs. love/ God is missing. The person is at the The conception of the center. world is too narrow. A person is considered to The person is free be either too big and mature. (“superman”) or too small. The person has Excessive demands! ultimate A person has to perform responsibility. well / redeem himself. The person strives, Their deeds decide on struggles and their fate. performs. Belief in → Pressure to progress, to progress. be successful. Theocentric Islam in part Judaism Advantages Disadvantages/Risks Man becomes too unimportant. God is in the Too little right of selfcenter. determination The individual feels safe. Man becomes too dependent, too small. God has ultimate responsibility. God does what is most important. God is too arbitrary, a man at his mercy. The man leaves God the existential but he has to believe in God. Only in one's own religion would there be salvation and other views would be excluded (exclusivism). Disadvantages both: Man has to fulfill conditions. A person is not loved for their own sake. Anthropocentric: ”In connection with religion, anthropocentrism can be defined as the standpoint that it is neither God, nor gods, who are the spiritual center of the world (as in 364 http://ezw-berlin.de/html/3_166 2/2016. 1. Precise bibliographical references: see the bibliography. 2. Literal quotations are denoted by quotation marks and the source is cited separately. 365 280 theocentrism) but the human person.”366 Main criticisms “Man is the measure of all things.“ (Protagoras) And with this yardstick, man increases and kills himself. A person needs to meet certain requirements. A person carries sole responsibility and is, as such, overwhelmed. One encounters an overemphasis on the adult-l or on certain achievements of humanity. Immanent faith in the progress of humanity (progressivism). Theocentric: “The term theocentrism ... denotes a worldview that is marked by religion; which regards God, or one or several gods, to be the center of our existence in the world ... a person's way of living and thinking is guided by religion. The opposite of theocentrism is anthropocentrism ... “.367 Criticism: see table above and the section entitled 'religions'. “Christianity is christocentric and thereby theocentric and anthropocentric, since Jesus Christ, who is simultaneously divine and human, is at its center. Thus, anthropocentrism and theocentrism are not opposites within Christianity; rather, they are inextricably linked with one another.”368 | Philosophies Philosophies have the same problem as religions: They deal with that which cannot be proven. Similar to religions, they also look at the big picture. “While scientific insights focus on the relevant subject matters for investigation … philosophy addresses the whole of our being concerning the human person as a human person; it addresses the truth, which, wherever it shines forth, touches us more deeply than any scientific insight ... It is not this or that causal relationship which is investigated but rather, it is the meaning which is attributed to the entirety of the matter.” In contrast to theology, the “wisdom of God”, one could consider philosophy as being the “wisdom of the world”.369 | [For an outline of ideologies in the history of thought, and relationships between philosophy, religion and the sciences, see the unabridged German version.] 366 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropozentrismus. 3/2014. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theozentrismus. 3/2014. 368 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropozentrismus. 3/2014. 369 Schischkoff, keyword: Philosophie. 367 281 Materialism Materialism is “a philosophic system which - in contrast to idealism - assumes matter to be the ultimate reality, determining all other phenomena.“ 370 Generally speaking, materialism is atheistic. Naturalism, empiricism and positivism are closely related to materialism.371 These are the philosophical foundations for the most common psychotherapies of today. Criticism of Materialism “Behold! I show you the last man. What is love? What is creation? What is longing? ... thus asks the last man ... The earth has become small, and on it hops the last man, who makes everything small.” F. Nietzsche (`Thus spoke Zarathustra´). It seems, to me, that the basic assumptions underlying today's psychology and psychiatry are still the same atheistic-materialistic premises of Marx and Lenin. Quotation of Lenin: “You cannot argue about the soul without having explained psychical processes in particular: here, progress must consist precisely in abandoning general theories and philosophical discourses about the nature of the soul, and in being able to put the study of the facts about particular psychical processes on a scientific footing ... materialist dialectics ... reflects the most general laws of the development of the objective world and human thought.“ 372 Whether or not Lenin, Marx or their successors admit it, they themselves only assume basic assumptions that can only be believed. Even though they absolutize these theses, they rarely allow their own a-priori to be criticized. Regarding this point, H. Hempelmann writes: “The position of naturalist reductionism is itself metaphysical, thus self-contradictory, thus self-annulling.“373 To that Peter Möller: "The primacy of the spirit convinces me more than the primacy of matter. Creative intelligence, creativity and imagination cannot be explained with the primacy of matter and consciousness as a mere mirror image". 374 375 Materialists leave the people in this world completely alone. A loving, overriding force, like God, is missing. The sky is empty or a mirror in which man only sees himself. But what happens if we do not know how to proceed? Then the man is left to himself and overtaxed after a certain point. Life as a materialist or atheist seems to me too exhausting,376 with too little credibility, neither sufficiently meaningful nor satisfying. It seems to be too one-sided, short-sighted, hyperrealistic/ unrealistic, sterile and soul-less.377 For a materialist, dreams, love, hope, solace, grace, salvation, spirituality, eternity, paradise, soul, God, etc., are of little 370 http://www.geist-oder-materie.de/Philosophie/philosophie.html ,2014. I shall only comment on some of the main aspects of philosophical materialism. 371 Following Schischkoff KW `Materialismus´. 372 https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1894/friends/01.htm, 2019. 373 http://heinzpeter-hempelmann.de/hph/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/%C3%A4pfel.pdf. 2013. 374 Peter Möller in: http://www.philolex.de/lenin.htm 2/2015. I think, God is not in opposition to matter but to its primacy. Even Jesus used saliva and sand (thus matter) to heal a blind person. 375 See also the problem of the `Qualia´ - the subjective content of the experience of a mental state. 376 This statement expresses what happens in general; in individual cases, there are those who make their life all too easy for themselves, at the expense of others. 377 Matthias Krieg: “The materialist is short-sighted by nature.” (Verbal message). 282 importance, since they cannot be proven.378 The materialist resembles F. Nietzsche's 'last man' mentioned above. Psychotherapy, on this basis, has then similar tendencies.Even if materialists do not intend it, their attitude of mind, like that of all ideologues, is susceptible to totalitarian views and systems. They themselves may then become more or less totalitarian and exclusionary. The material endowment of a person, their functionality, their usefulness and their efficiency quickly become the main criteria for their evaluation. This is a phenomenon that affects society as a whole and not only psychology. Performance is to be ever more enhanced, the economy is to grow ever further. Growth for the sake of growth is, however, “the ideology of a cancer cell” (Edward Abbey). Is this not similar to the attitude of `knowledge at any cost´? Criticism of Materialist Science and Psychology in Particular A. Einstein: „It is the theory which decides what we can observe." A purely materialistic psychology reduces the human being to what can be proven and thereby overlooks what life is in the truest sense of the word. 379 About this, Mephisto says in Goethe's Faust: “By that, I know the learned lord you are! What you don't touch, is lying leagues afar, What you don't grasp, is wholly lost to you, What you don't reckon, think you, can't be true, What you don't weigh, it has no weight, alas! What you don't mint yourself is counterfeit.“ 380 This type of psychology not only despiritualizes, exanimates and objectifies the person but even robs them of the right to their implicit dignity, implicit right of self-determination and freedom.381 If psychology regards all that is human as a mere reaction or product etc, then it also denies our primary responsibility and the uniqueness of every individual. Such scientists will, I believe, have little understanding of the subjective and even the chaotic traits of mental illnesses. Rather, they will tend to think in dualistic or digital ways and, as a result, fail to recognize the shades of meaning in the words uttered - or if they do, will aim to further digitize these shades of meaning. As I understand S. Freud's utterance (which I believe to be correct) that: “The laws of logic … do not hold for processes in the id.“ it means that, with science, one will struggle to gain access to the unconscious. Another weak point of materialist science is its closed system of thinking. Man is seen in the limits of input-output and not as one, at least in the Absolute, free. Thus, "pure science" will 378 Predominately, materialism - overall - has the characteristics of a second-rate reality with its advantages and disadvantages. (See also the `Summary table´). 379 Whilst idealists sit, rather, in ivory towers and might thus also allow life to pass by. 380 Johann Wolfgang von Goethe: Faust II, Vers 4917 ff. 381 From my viewpoint, this is ludicrous, since, contrary to all experience, such a “scientist” will consider himself to have proven that a person has no free will. (It is, of course, clear that a person's actions are not exclusively independent). Benjamin Libet: Haben wir einen freien Willen? in: Geyer: Hirnforschung und Willensfreiheit, 2004, p. 268-290. 283 not be able to transgress a limitation that distinguishes the provable and predictable from the unprovable and unpredictable, which is the unique, too. However, these are the innermost beliefs and feelings of a person, that distinguish them from machines and things. However, these are the innermost beliefs of a person, the most personal things that distinguish them from machines and other such beings. One might otherwise think: It is not me, as a person who is ill, nor is it my soul which is suffering but rather, my synapses are affected or my metabolism is suffering - but thus, only half of the truth is grasped and options for therapy are lost- the latter coming predominately in the form of psychotropic drugs, which correct the relevant dysfunction. In other words: Materialism and science, per se, when applied exclusively, neither include comfort nor love, and are, by themselves, weak foundations for psychotherapy. And I accuse the atheists who claim to know that there is no god and no life after death because they rob people in need of their last hopes. I am thinking especially of dying children who hope to see their parents again after their death. Whether science can be undertaken in an unbiased, presuppositionless way, is also questionable. Of course, such issues are already visible when, for example, building the nuclear bomb. What good will all our knowledge, all our growth, the best inventions and the greatest progress do if they are not embedded within a +A (+meta-level); considered in isolation, these could all be used for evil too.| Criticism of Science in General In the following, I will cite some quotations that criticize science in general. • Erwin Schrödinger: In the world of science “there are no sensory qualities ..." Of particular poignancy in Schrödinger's view is “the utter silence of our entire scientific research regarding our questions about the meaning and purpose of the undertakings ... The personal God cannot be found in an image of the world which has only become accessible at the cost of all personal references being excluded. We know: Whenever God is experienced, this is a moment which is just as real as an unmediated sensory perception or as one's own personality.” 382 • "The [...] science, originally competed against ecclesiastical dogmatism, has long degenerated itself into a new system of belief preached by new scribes and parroted by the public." (Bernd Senf).383 Similar Wolfgang Pauli: “Today, we are at a point at which the rationalist position has passed its zenith and is perceived to be too narrow.”384 • ”Science offers access to matter; religion and philosophy, however, offer access to the mind and spirit.” “The movers and shakers (of today) not only bitumize their external environment but also the souls around them.”385 • Richard Lewontin: The self-limitation of science to empiricism, which is predominant today, shows that there is “a prior commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods Erwin Schrödinger: Excerpts from “Das arithmetische Paradoxon – Die Einheit des Bewusstseins”. Quotations from Einstein and Schrödinger took from: http://www.thunemann.de/martin/gott/, 2015. 383 https://de.wikiquote.org/wiki/Bernd_Senf 384 Wolfgang Pauli: Physik und Transzendenz, Hans-Peter Dürr (Hrsg.), Bern u. a.: Scherz, 1986, p. 205. 385 Evangelischer Erwachsenenkatechismus, Gütersloher Verlagshaus 6. Ed. 2000, p.60 and S.13 (no further reference source). 382 284 and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world. On the contrary, it is that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.“ 386 • Arthur Eddington: “Almost all the great classical philosophers - certainly Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, Leibniz, Spinoza, Kant, Hegel, Locke and Berkeley - they all argued that the ultimate reality, often hidden under the appearances of the material world or time and space, is mind or spirit.” Concerning the inherent bias of scientificity, he told a parable of a fisher who would only accept the fish he caught in his net as being fish. 387 • Gerhard Grössing: One is often “confronted with Albert Einstein's statement that the setting of principles (axioms), which are intended to link up the elements of experience in a meaningful way, will not be accomplished through a logical method but only through an 'intuitive (psychological) connection', whereby he meant that the `free creation of the human mind´ is an indispensable part of theory construction.” 388 • Heinzpeter Hempelmann: “The acquisition of scientific knowledge is based upon the reduction of a comprehensive desire for knowledge to a simple, limited question … However, the success of the same will be purchased at the price of relinquishing the quest for knowledge of the whole.“ 389 • Noam Chomsky: “It is quite possible ... that we will always learn more about human life and personality from novels than from scientific psychology.“ 390 • The Noncognitivism argued against the absolutization of knowledge: as did F. Bacon (“knowledge is power”), Lenin, S. Freud (“Our God, Logos”), Maturana (“to live is to know”) and the Cognitivism. But the Noncognitivism argued in my opinion, also too one-sided, according to which the sphere of the subjective is not accessible to any scientific knowledge, since that which is subjective, the psyche, is beyond the two criteria of truth accepted by empirical science: logical and mathematical proof and testing through observation or experiment.391 More precisely, one might need to say: The field of the subjective, such as the psyche, can only be ascertained through the methods of empirical science, and only relatively well. • F. Nietzsche: "Reason is the cause of our falsification of the testimony of the senses.“392 • I. Kant had already pointed out in his "Critique of Pure Reason" that questions of metaphysics cannot be answered with the help of human reason. Taken from Armin Risi „Glaube und Wissen“ In: http://armin-risi.ch/Artikel/Philosophie/Glauben_und_Wissen.html. 12/2013. 387 https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Richard_Lewontin, 2019. 388 Gerhard Grössing: Die Information der Physik: Subjektal und objektal. In: http://www.nonlinearstudies.at/files/ggInformationDerPhysik.pdf S.6, 10/2013. 389 Heinzpeter Hempelmann: Eine kritische Analyse der Reichweite und grenzenwissenschaftlicher Aussagen am Beispiel der Neurowissenschaften. In: http://heinzpeter-hempelmann.de/hph/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/%C3%A4pfel.pdf 390 Chomsky, Noam: Language and Problems of Knowledge: The Managua Lectures, Lecture 5, 1988, p. 159. 391 Aus: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kognition 2/ 2014. (Emphasis mine). 392 “Twilight of the Idols" Part 2, Section 36. 386 285 • More recent discussions are presented by Rupert Sheldrake in his book: 'The Science Delusion”. • The knowledge of 'intuitionistic logic'393 (K. Gödel) and `fuzzy-logic´ (L. A. Zadeh) also belong in this context; L. A. Zadeh: „As complexity rises, precise statements lose meaning and meaningful statements lose precision. [...] The closer one looks at a 'real world' problem, the fuzzier becomes its solution."394 Question: What could be more complex than our soul life? 395 • The fact that with every increase in knowledge, ignorance also increases - or both can turn into one another. In this respect, I would like to briefly touch upon realism and functionalism, since they have quite important roles to play in materialist philosophy and respective psychotherapies. Realism “The mental action or process of acquiring knowledge or understanding through thought, experience and the senses, of a reality which exists independent of consciousness.” 396 As explained in detail in the section `Metapsychiatry´, I believe that our world supports itself as first and second-rate realities; as do we as people. Only a first-rate reality can be unambiguous; the second-rate, however, can only exist as relatively unambiguous realities or even ambiguous realities. The term `realism´ however, cannot distinguish between these two spheres of reality; and misunderstandings ensue if this is attempted. So what does the phrase: “I am a realist” mean? Most likely, it means that “For me, the reality is the defining authority.” The reality, however, is not unambiguous. Similarly questionable is the statement: “I am realistic.” Would it not have been realistic for those in the Third Reich to greet people with `Heil Hitler´? A “realist” will tend to portray reality either hyper-realistically by ignoring its fuzziness and contradictions, or by presenting it all too vaguely. Materialistic psychotherapies generally define the `adaptation to reality´ as the objective of the therapy. Functionalism Definitions: “Function: Variable factor which is dependent upon another for its value.” 397 Functionalism considers, in particula, the conscious mind to be a function of the sense organs.398 `Functionalism states that mental states are functional states; A functional state is defined 393 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intuitionistic_logic 2/2021. https://beruhmte-zitate.de/autoren/lotfi-zadeh/ 395 Zadeh: „I expected people in the social sciences-economics, psychology, philosophy, linguistics, politics, sociology, religion and numerous other areas to pick up on it. It's been somewhat of a mystery to me why even to this day, so few social scientists have discovered how useful it could be." 396Taken from www.duden.de 397 Großes Fremdwörterbuch Keyword Funktion. 398 According to: Schischkoff, Keyword Funktion. 394 286 by responding to a specific input with a specific output.´399 Generally speaking, materialists are also functionalists. Therefore, similar to psychotherapists of this provenance, materialists tend to form an opinion of a person according to their functionality, or even to make this the primary aim of their therapy. However, a person is not primarily a functionary. According to Schischkoff, a functionary is a person “whose occupation consists of performing functions, i.e. of `functioning´.” “As a personality type, a functionary is considered to be excessively compliant and risk-averse with a propensity for routine.“ 400 Schischkoff quotes Alfred Weber, who refers to the functionary as the “fourth man”; a specialist, whose ambition drives him to “identify with his functions, even if he has been forced upon by foreign will. As a consequence, the personality is split into a functionary's character and a … residual person, with the functionary's character being capable of performing extremely inhumane actions. Thus, Weber explains the potential for totalitarian governance.”401 I believe that if we do not consider life, with its dysfunctionalities, to be more important than functionality, we will not only hinder our lives but functionality itself, since the functionalist will react in either hyper-functional or, more frequently, non-functional and dysfunctional ways. Entire societies may perish as a result of the prioritization of functionality and efficiency. In the same way, we will harm our patients in the long term if we believe that it is necessary to urge them towards embracing functionality as a priority. It is with dread that I think of the possibility of a future in which we merely function but no longer live our lives; merely adapting to reality rather than shaping it. Academic Language and Academic Activities “... I believe that everything, even the best, becomes one-sided if the opposition is lacking.” Eugen Bleuler to S. Freud 402 The ordinary people will hardly understand theology, psychology and psychiatry. This can be compared to the sentiments of a participant of a psychological or theological discussion about the human being, who has the sense that “These people are speaking also about me as a human being and yet I cannot understand them.” But in matters of theology, psychology and psychiatry, we do not discuss specific issues such as in debates about astrophysics but matters which affect us all. However, these kinds of discussions are often held in attitudes that are closed to the general public, in particular to those affected. The use of certain technical terms is necessary and yet many are avoidable; If one had often listened to what ordinary people say, as Luther suggests ("look the people in the mouth"); then the loss of connection to them would be prevented. Many of the published papers in this field are biased, as evidenced by the following statistic: 399 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funktionalismus_%28Philosophie%29 12/ 2013. Meyers Großes Taschenlexikon. 401 Schischkoff, KW: Funktionär (Functionary); s. Bibliography. 402 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/article-abstract/488689 400 287 Though 99% of all studies with positive results for antidepressants are published, this is only the case for studies with a negative result in 26%. The important issue here, however, is not only to establish one's independence of the industry or other interest groups; what is at stake, rather, is the internal independence of the individual doctor or psychotherapist. Whoever wishes to have a career in today's world needs to publish a large number of papers. Thus, at one time, innumerable articles describing the effects of psychotropic drugs were published but, a few years later, it is amazing to read that a team of researchers could not tell the difference between the effects of placebos and antidepressants in terms of mild to moderate depression."403 Concerning the academic activities undertaken within psychological departments, see G. Vinnai's criticism in: “Die Austreibung der Kritik aus der Wissenschaft: Psychologie im Universitätsbetrieb” (The Expulsion of Criticism from Science: Psychology in University Departments) - also for `Fragen an die Neuropsychologie´ (Questions for Neuropsychology), see the unabridged German version, and in section Neuroscience in psychotherapy. Idealism There is not one philosophy of idealism but many diverse trends that have this in common: the “perspective that considers objective reality as being determined by idea, spirit and reason, and also regards matter as a manifestation of spirit." Idealistic basic positions hardly play a role in the sciences in general and psychology in particular at present but they are all the more rampant outside of these in the form of Esotericism, fanatical ideologies and spiritistic streams. Materialism and Idealism • Juxtaposition in key words Materialism versus idealism positive: more concrete, `real´, provable and demonstrable, clearer, more down to earth negative: too nearsighted, flat, sterile, too-heavy resp. lack of advantages of idealism. Idealism versus materialism positive: more far-sighted, more imaginative, more soulful, more intuitive negative: more abstract, world-fugitive, aloof (E.g. → Hölderlin) resp. lack of advantages of materialism. While the human being in the “flatland of materialism” (Franz Werfel) has no height, the idealist tends to lose his grip on the ground. • Materialism ↔ Idealism They are in opposition. But they are only opponents at first glance, they are also conditional on each other. In the history of ideas one often finds how both worldviews alternate. (See also → Interplay of opposing sA as ideologies) 403 Both bibliographical references in H. Schauenburg, Deutsches Ärzteblatt https://www.aerzteblatt.de/pdf.asp?id=64412, 2009. 288 Humanism I will examine two overlapping definitions as a basis for this section: 404| • Humanism “points to … an ideal image of a person who can freely develop their personality based on an all-rounded theoretical and moral education.”405 • “Humanism … is a well-reflected anthropocentrism, which starts from our human consciousness and focuses on the appreciation of the human person ...”406 “Anthropocentrism can be considered to be a connecting element of old and new approaches [of humanism] ...“407 Goethe´s Humanism A. Keyserling characterizes Goethe's humanism as follows: “It is not the work nor the fruit but rather, the process of bringing fruit that is how the entelechy develops ... The development of the personality through objectification and shaping of the original disposition was Goethe's way of life ... The famous novel, Faust, comes to an end with the words `Whoever strives with all his might, that man we can redeem´.”408 Goethe had, according to W. Leppmann, the “educational ideal of an autonomous person who completes himself or herself.”409 C. G. Jung expressed a similar viewpoint with regard to `individuation´.410| Immanuel Kant Immanuel Kant explains the categorical imperative as an ethical behavior that one must “act only in accordance with that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it become a universal law.” Is Kant's categorical imperative a misguided absolutization of duty and reason? Indeed, I think so. Here are several typical quotes. Kant: “Duty! Thou sublime and great name which … demands submission ...”. 411 Kant calls for “a religion of reason, the principles of which are based purely upon reason. ... For Kant, God himself is a necessary `postulate´ of practical reason, however, this statement does not involve belief in the 'objective reality' of the same ... `The true, sole religion contains nothing but laws ... on whose unconditional necessity we can become This section discusses the so-called idealist humanism. About `materialist humanism‘, the points made in the section on `Materialism’ are also valid here. 405 https://www.uni-due.de/einladung/Vorlesungen/epik/humanismus.htm, 2013. (The 2016 edition is no longer available) 406 According to Schischkoff, KW Idealismus (Idealism). 407 Wikipedia KW Humanismus, 1/2016. See also http://ezw-berlin.de/html/3_166.php `Humanismus´ (Humanism). 408 Taken from: Arnold Keyserling, In: http://schuledesrades.org/palme/books/denkstil/?Q=1/1/3/109 3/2016. 409 Wolfgang Leppmann: Goethe und die Deutschen - Vom Nachruhm eines Dichters. W. Kohlhammer Verlag, 1962, p.193. 410 See also my critique of the absolutization of `individuation´ and maturation, loc. cit. 411 Friedrich Kirchner in: http://www.textlog.de/1926.html 3/2016. 404 289 conscious and which we therefore recognize as revealed through pure reason (not empirically).“412 Present-Day Example Rudolf Kuhr: “Humanism ... is a means and an end in itself, and urges a person to work upon themselves like no other orientation. Therefore, since this is arduous, most people, thus far, have chosen a religion that promises them salvation through an external agent, as does Christianity ... (It) misleads a person to deal with their inner conflicts outside of their own person. Thus, they ask God for help (God is with us!), rather than solving their own conflicts with the aid of psychology ... The human person is the problem of other human persons and the world - and also the solution.”413 | Criticism of Humanism This is understood to be the criticism of the anthropocentric, secular humanism, which is, as such, the foundation of the predominant psychotherapies. Such humanists have substituted God with a super-ego (+sA “Humanum”), which is less loving than the +A (God); indeed, one which will even, on certain occasions, deal mercilessly with people. If humanity is the final instance, what is with my inhumanity, which also exists? If human reason is the final instance, what shall I say about my irrationalities? Could they be integrated, or do they need to be repressed, dissociated or even opposed? Secular humanism demands too much of a person, since it must label that which is inhumane and evil as taboo, must dissociate from it and oppose it. Since the inhumane and evil is inherent in human beings, however, and can only be partially but not principally "conquered", an unsolvable conflict arises within us, which may have potentially bad effects if we take humanism too seriously. The philosopher John Gray criticizes this form of humanism, believing the fundamental conviction of humanists, the history of humankind as a history of progress, to be a superstitious belief. “Humanists say: Whilst the goal might be presently unattainable, we can nevertheless head towards it. These are siren songs ... Every perceived progress is ambivalent. One can accumulate knowledge but not ethical improvements ... The increase in knowledge increases a person's power, for better or for worse ... Self-determined life is a modern fetish. Whoever means to change the world through will-power, comes dangerously close to terrorism in the name of reason or of the common good, as shown by the Jacobites during the French Revolution or the Bolsheviks under Lenin, Trotsky and Stalin ...“414 In my opinion, we are not to `bid farewell to humanism´, as recommended by John Gray's book of the similar title but to take our leave of its absolutization, which is however only 412 Wikipedia https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religionskritik 2/2014. Rudolf Kuhr: Warum ich kein Christ bin; In: http://www.humanistische-aktion.de/christ.htm 2/2014. (Question: If Mr Kuhr had a daughter who was terminally ill - would he say the same thing to her? I sincerely hope not.) 414 The magazine “Der Spiegel” in conversation with John Gray: DER SPIEGEL, taken from http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-69277681.html 9/2010 413 290 possible if that which is inhumane, aggressive, evil, egotistical or any other negative aspect of a person (of which we all bear within ourselves) is not made out to be a mortal sin, nor considered to be unpardonable, and thus made into the fundamental cause of an illness. This is only possible however if one embeds the humanist ideology into a larger, more comprehensive structure, which can integrate and compensate for these negative qualities of humankind, without applauding them as being good. This more comprehensive structure could most readily be called love. Then, however, one now encounters the problem that human love will be absolutized and overextends the human being and may then harm people. If we had previously postulated the necessity to be humane and progressive, we are now condemned to be full of love and forgiveness. In my opinion, without an authority which transcends the human person, thus without a transcendent, loving authority, which I have also termed A, every other mindset becomes an absolutized ideology and therefore, at best, suboptimal. Humanism and Christianity Relevant for both are the following values: Human dignity and the fundamental rights of all humans; equality before the law, protection from despotism, freedom of religion and conscience - these are values that are anchored in the Declaration of Human Rights by the United Nations. However: “For many centuries, the Christian churches were guided less by the belief in human dignity but more by sin ... Only the baptized, dogmatically orthodox Christian was deemed to be worthy to be granted dignity. But heresy, unbelief or heathenism was deemed to invite any kind of persecution, torture and inhumane treatment. It was only the Renaissance, humanism and the Reformation which brought human dignity back to the fore ... This fostered the modern idea of human rights: Every person is worth more than their achievements. Whilst he may himself violate his dignity, no state or church power may deny him of this. It must always be understood that there is a difference between a person and their actions.”415 So what is the difference between humanism and Christianity? Humanism is anthropocentric. The Christian message is, at the same time, anthropocentric and theocentric. Whilst love and humanism are very important amongst us humans, they are yet imperfect and require the love of God in our midst. According to humanism as an ideology, the divine humanism is irrelevant. Humanism must make do with the human humanism, for which the humane becomes the last authority, although it is problematic in itself. “The Christian message not only contains the divine challenge to love our neighbor ... but, above all, the assurance of unconditional divine love and forgiveness ... The Christian faith relativizes moral conduct. This means that God, the gospel, is stronger than the law; grace is stronger than our sin; and we are liberated from the compulsion to be good. And yet, though the radical commandment of love will still ensure that one can never be satisfied with one's 415 Evangelischer Erwachsenenkatechismus s. Bibliography p. 368/ 371. 291 achievements, it does not signify that the value of a person is dependent upon that which they have accomplished for society [dependent upon a person's humane attitude].”416 “Karl Barth said that, first and foremost, one would have to speak of God's humanism: of God's love for people ... Secular humanisms are, effectively, dispensable. They are merely `abstract programs´ in the face of the assurance that all human beings are children of God, as it is proclaimed in the Gospels."417 However, I do not consider secular humanisms to be superfluous. But also not as dangerous as the well-known quote “Humanity without divinity ends in bestiality”.418 This probably means that an absolutized humanity, which in the long term suppresses everything animal and evil in humans, can turn into `bestiality' because such humanity subjugates us and makes us aggressive.419 Expressed more precisely: This absolutization of humanism leads to “hyper-humanism” (pro-position), anti-humanism (contra-position) or indifference (0position). In each of these cases, a person is living against their human nature, since the latter is neither purely humane nor exclusively evil. About the Anthropocentric Belief in Progress Here, I will present just a few hypotheses: • Belief in progress in the sense of progressivism can be found in materialism as well as in idealism. • Humankind is not in a position to implement such an (absolutized) belief in progress. Such ideologies of progress give rise, first of all, to utopian dreams, and then, they generate suffering. • I believe that we, as people, can only achieve relative progress. Put more precisely: Progress is a positive Relative and bears the characteristics of the same: it is neither absolute nor negligible but diverse, incomplete, conditional, secondary and dependent (Asp. a1-a7). This also means that all these relative advances also have disadvantages. Therefore, an important question is whether the advantages or disadvantages outweigh. • With every progress, there is the potential for its misuse - all the more so if the progress is considered to be absolute (dynamics of the pro- and anti-positions). Examples: today, one kills “better” and faster; the digital world has great advantages but also disadvantages. Medication in general, and psychotropic drugs in particular can alleviate much suffering; however, they are also greatly abused, etc. • Therefore, belief in progress in an appropriate form would neither be progressivism nor not any faith in progress but it would depend upon the type of progress made and the sacrifices made for the sake of progress, etc. • Medical progress, the objective of which is merely the prolongation of life or recovery at any price, would be as questionable as analog technical progress at any cost. 416 Evangelischer Erwachsenen Katechismus, Gütersloh, 6th edition. 2000. p.381. [Addition by the author]. Wikipedia: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanismus 2/ 2014. 418 Quotation by F. Schleiermacher or Grillparzer. (This means that being human without dependence upon God, will lead to the human person becoming an animal). The French Revolution may serve as an example of this. 419 As one knows, that too much of a good thing can turn into bad. 417 292 • Anthropocentric attitudes feature a form of belief in progress which necessitates the possession of a humane and sensible mind. However, we are not always humane and sensible, as mentioned before (nor do we always wish to be so). They appeal one-sidedly to the Ego strength of a person but we are often weak and, at times, powerless. We should emancipate ourselves, individuate, and finally grow up and take on responsibility. However, we are and often remain dependent, immature and afraid of certain responsibilities and commitments; and, at times, this may well be the most appropriate option. 293 Religions and Spiritual Movements Overview Religions are the strongest spiritual powers since they focus on that which is unconditional, absolute. This is why they can have exceedingly positive but else, in the case of their abuse in particular, extremely negative effects. All world religions have a basic tendency to favor that which is humane. (KW “world ethos”, H. Küng). I have compiled the points which seem to be important to me, concerning the three world religions, in the following table:420 | Islam Revelation / Holy Scriptures Declared by Salvation through: Must / unconditionalities Accession through: Quit by: Life after death Quran is to be taken literally since it came directly from Allah. Muhammad Allah / one's own actions “Five pillars”: declaration of faith (5x /day) prayer, alms-giving, Hajj. 1x saying the declaration of faith Barely possible, at times threats of death penalty. Very worldly ideas, not very attractive for women. Buddhism The speeches of Buddha Buddha One's own actions, self-salvation Christianity New Testament, which is not in itself holy but depicts God/ Jesus. Jesus Jesus and one's own desire Every action generates karma, bad karma needs to be worked off. Free will Arguably free Voluntary, unconditional. Officially: Through baptism. 421 Arguably free Free Reincarnations (for me, too stressful) Finally Nirvana (for me, too deindividualizing) Eternal and good. Advantages In principle, humanistic and caring. In principle, humanistic and caring. Jesus as the one who redeems and provides orientation. There is no coercion and the guidance is good. All people have the same and greatest value; God loves all people. Free “attitude toward Absolute”. Whatever is regretted can be forgiven. Disadvantages Allah is too far away, too arbitrary. A person's right actions are too important, this is too demanding. There are some aggressive statements in the Quran. Not enough equality. There is no God, little support, a person's right actions are too important; this is too stressful. Seemingly, a disadvantage: one's own good works have only relative significance. 420 The following description of the most important religions necessarily only includes that which seems to me personally most essential for our topic. Moreover, there are diverse directions in all religions, which for reasons of space I will disregard at this point. 421 I myself do not consider this to be compulsory. See e.g. Jesus' assurance given to the criminal, who was crucified with him and who was probably not baptized, that he would “be with me in paradise today”. 294 A Story Three brothers [representing the three monotheistic religions] set forth to seek their fortune. After a few years, they meet up again. The first one reports: “I am the king of a kingdom full of order, with 700 rules and God is with me.” The second one says:”I am the king of a kingdom with a world-spanning idea of social justice and the sovereignty of God on this earth.” The third brother says: “I live in the kingdom of love.”422 It is good that the choice is free. None of the three can prove that life is best in his land. I would personally move to the land of the third brother. Suggestion: Read the Old Testament, the Quran and the biography of Muhammad, and the New Testament and the biography of Jesus - and then assess. About Islam Islam means submission to the will of God. At the center of the process of salvation is the Quran. The Quran is regarded as the literal revelation of Allah to Muhammad mediated by the Archangel Gabriel ("Dictation Understanding" of the Koran). In addition to the Koran, the Sunnah (see below) plays an important role. 423 Islam specifies five fundamental duties that all Muslims have to adhere to and which constitute the `pillars´ of their faith = the “Five Pillars” of Islam:424 1. Belief in Allah and Muhammad as His Messenger. 2. The five daily prayers. 425 3. Charitable giving to one's fellows. 4. Fasting during Ramadan. 5. The pilgrimage to Mecca. Polygamy is permitted. Muhammad had nine wives. He consummated his marriage with his third and favorite wife, Aisha, when he was himself over 50 years old, and she was 9 years old.426 In his lifetime, he has executed many of his opponents. “Family law (marriage, divorce, custodianship) is strictly regulated in favor of the man.”427 “On Judgement Day, he (Allah) will judge people: Unbelievers will face hellfire and believers will be promised the umbrageous paradise with its virgins (Huris) ... The Quran attempts to cover all spheres of life by way of legal regulations.“428 422 One could also apply this story to behavioral therapy, psychoanalysis or metatherapy. According to https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam and https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koran, 2017. 424 © 2004 Islamisches Zentrum München. 425 The 1st and 2nd are to be spoken in Arabic. 426 Taken from: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aischa_bint_Abi_Bakr, 2014. 427 Großer Brockhaus, KW Islam. 428 Meyers Großes Taschenlexikon, KW Islam. 423 295 “The jihad constitutes an important Islamic principle of faith, as it is one of the fundamental commandments of the Islamic faith and a duty imposed upon all Muslims. Some Sunnite scholars add the jihad to the five pillars of Islam as a sixth.”429 In different, relevant writings, “jihad” has different meanings: armed struggle (primarily against `unbelievers´ and apostates) or merely peaceful effort. Those termed “unbelieving” are all those who do not believe in Allah and Muhammad. Personal Opinion • That which I perceive to be positive in Islam is as follows: The strong social aspect; in particular, caring for the poor and weak. The depiction of a God who is, overall, benevolent towards people. The fact that Allah is often portrayed as the “merciful”. There is an idea of a good life after death (though admittedly, it does not quite correspond with mine). • The following points are somewhat more elusive or even negative, from my perspective: It´s difficult for me to imagine that I can regard myself as a likeness of Allah, or that Allah descends from heaven and serves me or that Allah on the cross dies for me. In Islam, those who profess another faith, as well as those who live with no faith or according to an alternative lifestyle, such as atheists and homosexuals, are excluded. I cannot imagine that I would be loved by Allah if I believed in other gods, or that he would forgive me if I converted from Islam to Christianity. Neither can I imagine that Allah would wish that I shall love my enemies. In my view, the role of women in Islam seems to be overly negative. Often, believers are called to join the “jihad” (which might mean holy war after all?). For me, Allah is a God who is too remote and arbitrary. In Islam, people die for Allah; in Christianity, it is the opposite - Jesus dies for people. I feel that there are too many demands, too little freedom and too little right to selfdetermination in this religion. Leaving the religion carries, at times, the threat of death. Whenever I read the Quran, I find comforting verses - as I do when reading the Old Testament - but I also find a great deal that frightens me, since, from the viewpoint of the Quran, I would have to be regarded as an “infidel”. (See e.g. Sure 2:24, 89, 190-193; Sure 8:12, 55; Sure 47:4, 10 and other verses targeting “infidels”.)430 Jesus, however, does not frighten me, nor does he frighten people of other faiths and no faith.431 Muslims cannot have certainty of faith because of the teaching of the Quran, as opposed to Christians. I also see Jesus as a role model example, whereas I can barely identify with Muhammad's 429 Wikipedia: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dschihad , 1/ 2016. See Abdel-Samad, Hamed: Der Koran - Botschaft der Liebe, Botschaft des Hasses. Droemer, München, 2016. 431 This is true, excluding some sayings that I believe were not originally uttered by Jesus, owing to the fact that several decades have passed between Jesus' utterances and their recording in writing. Those who spread his message were, I believe, ordinary people who, at times, also misunderstand what was being said. (More on this later). 430 296 lifestyle, which is as “Sunna”, the second foundation of Islam, alongside the Quran. Ch. Schirrmacher's opinion is expressed in the following statement: “As long as Muhammad and the caliphs' exhortation to do battle is not declared to be invalid for all times, Islam will not be able to slough off its problems with violence.” [RP.online 9/1/2015]. I would like to add the following: "As long as Christian theology does not nullify appeals to fight as they are in part attributed to the Old Testament´s God and (rarely) the New Testament (Lk 19:27), Christianity will face similar reproaches." About Buddhism There is no God in Buddhism. By anthropocentric means, Buddhism attempts to overcome anthropocentrism. “Buddhism teaches: Life is an endless chain of rebirths, in which good and bad deeds are worked through. The main commandments of Buddhism are: do not kill, do not steal, do not lie, and do not commit adultery.”432 "From a Buddhist perspective, the self is not a constant entity but rather a process which is marked by a continuous becoming, changing and passing away ... Mindfulness (also consciousness, realization) is the practice of remaining entirely in the here and now, and to perceive all that is present, both clearly and consciously but non-judgmentally."433 Karma means action, work or deed; it also refers to the spiritual principle of cause and effect where intent and actions of an individual (cause) influence the future of that individual (effect). Good intent and good deeds contribute to good karma and future happiness, while bad intent and bad deeds contribute to bad karma and future suffering. The philosophy of karma is closely associated with the idea of rebirth ... karma in the present affects one's future in the current life, as well as the nature and quality of future lives - one's saṃsāra.”434 “Buddhism's highest aim is to escape from this cycle, by not producing karma - so that our actions no longer leave a trace in the world. In Buddhism, this is termed as the entry to Nirvana.”435 In recent decades, Buddhist beliefs and techniques have gained greater significance in some psychotherapist schools of thought. “The journey is the destination” The motto: 'The journey is the destination‘, which plays a special role in Buddhism, could be a motto for many worldviews and societies, where personal fulfillment, Individuation (C. G. Jung) where progress, growth, etc. become the prevailing maxims. In my view, these are programs of self-redemption which will not grant peace of mind to an individual. Do not most worldviews come down to a compulsion to reach a certain goal? 432 Michael Hamerla: http://www.rp-online.de/panorama/deutschland/die-erloesungswege-des-buddhismus-aid1.2637929 12/2011. 433 Wikipedia: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhismus 10/2013. 434 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma 2019. 435 Wikipedia: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhismus 10/2013. 297 What happens if the person cannot progress further, or even retreats when he is pushed back, whilst the maxim that he must proceed along a certain path remains in his heart? Does he not fall into despair? Now, one could say that even if he retreats, he will remain on the path. Whilst this is true, he must, at the very least, attempt to proceed. At times, however, this is not possible, since there are occasions when one is utterly powerless and cannot see the way forward. 436 Perhaps, this problem becomes particularly prominent at an advanced age, when one finds, as I am now discovering, that one has not grown any wiser, even though one may have developed intelligence and gained experience. [Keyword: Here too, whenever the path has been followed to its conclusion, we encounter the problem of the socalled `pilgrims' death´.] Harmony and the equilibrium of the soul as a goal In Buddhism, and also in Chinese philosophy, these goals play an important role. Of greatest importance here, is the equilibrium and harmony between two forces which are juxtaposed as polar opposites and yet dependent upon one another in the commonly used symbol: YinYang ☯. (For details, see M. Lurker, Wörterbuch der Symbolik). Discussion • The positive aspects of Buddhism, in my opinion, are as follows: It appears to be undogmatic and peaceable. It advocates the overcoming of greed, hatred and delusion (three “mind poisons”). It highly rates the inner life of a person (the practice of meditation). It does not shy away from calling people's suffering by name. It speaks of a perspective beyond death; earthly life is not all that there is. 437 I see a parallel between the character of that which is second-rate (WPI²), as described above, and the Buddhist teaching regarding the Ego-illusion and the illusion of reality. • The following points, in my opinion, are elusive, or even negative: There is no loving God (anthropocentrism). As a philosophy, which is what Buddhism really is, it is too pessimistic. Ultimately, a person must redeem themselves. Their way of life determines their karma in the next life, which, depending upon the respective school of thought, might occur - as in the case of bad karma - by way of rebirth as an animal, demon or another being. The number of reincarnations and the permanent requirement to exert great effort would overexert me entirely. The prospect that the essence of a person is dissolved in the Nirvana is negative, in my opinion.438 The continuous striving for equilibrium would, for me, be tantamount to walking the 436 "He who does not know the destination cannot have the way" (Chr. Morgenstern). The Christian standpoint not to attribute absolute significance to earthly things seems to be quite similar to the main objective in Buddhism to reach Nirvana. In contrast, in the Christian religion, however, it is about giving the earthly only a relative meaning and thus not dependent on it. 438 This is contrary to the Christian faith, which promises liberation and confirmation of one's individuality. 437 298 tightrope; in terms of dealing with my aggression, the permanent pursuit of harmony would suppress my aggressions too much. Hinduism In its nature, Hinduism is polytheistic and knows many gods ... In the `one Godhead in three forms´ (Trimurti), the three main gods are united: Brahma represents the creative principle within the universe, Vishnu the maintaining and preserving, and Shiva the destructive principle. Alongside the main gods, there are innumerable other gods associated with Hinduism, of which many are only venerated locally ... The belief in reincarnation is common to the Indian religions of Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism. The type of reincarnation depends upon the nature of the karma, i.e. the moral qualities of the actions undertaken in the past. It was from this belief in reincarnation that the Indian idea of an individual's salvation from the cycle of existence arose (samsâra), whereby one achieves salvation from the endless return of death and rebirth.439 In my opinion, this religion, like other religions discussed above, also contains too many preconditions for my essential selfhood. The caste system in India, which has not yet been overcome, was promoted by Hinduism. Esoterism and Similar Ideologies Here, esoterism represents various spiritual, non-Christian movements. M. Poehlmann formulates the reasons for their increase: “Numerous ideological movements are making an effort to restore the unity of worldview and religion, of reason and faith, which had been lost in the context of cultural secularisation. In their aspiration to provide a relevant interpretation of the meaning and universal validity, they resemble the religions.” He further regarding esoterism: ”The person is perceived to be a potentially spiritual being, whose inner core is divine, which is the motor and impulse for the spiritual evolution. Esoterism searches for methods and practices which enable higher knowledge, expansion of consciousness and spiritual growth.”440 Esoteric ideas and practices are very important, first and foremost, to spiritual healers but also to some psychotherapists. For me, as mentioned above, they constitute an antithesis to the scientific orientation of official psychotherapy and make up for its deficiencies, albeit with many superstitious concepts. One could view them as fulfilling a similar function to the retreat into imaginary worlds of fantasy and media. 439 Largely taken from: http://www.rp-online.de/panorama/deutschland/die-vielen-gesichter-des-hinduismus-aid1.2636663 Serie - Weltreligionen (2): Die vielen Gesichter des Hinduismus; and Michael Hicke: http://www.klassenarbeiten.de/referate/religion/hinduismus/hinduismus_55.htm (no date provided). 440 M. Pöhlmann in: Evangelische Zentralstelle für Weltanschauungsfragen (EZW) http://ezw-berlin.de/html/4154.php; 2011. 299 About Christianity In this religion, I feel best. If we imagine people who - ideally - trust that they are deeply protected, that they are unconditionally lovable and everlasting and that everything Relative has only a relative meaning - what can destroy these people? How much easier they will overcome their emotional crises! How many expensive defense and fulfillment mechanisms will become superfluous? If we believe we are redeemed, we are beloved for our own sake; If we trust that we have permission to be who we are, we would no longer need +sA and not be afraid of ‒sA.441 Dieter Claessens and Erik Erikson, amongst others, have described the importance of a `basic trust´.442 Basic trust develops through love (in religious terms: God). Almost all famous psychotherapists, including S. Freud, Eugen and Manfred Bleuler, G. Benedetti, A. Gruen, as well as others, consider love (towards the patient), or the person's unprejudiced acceptance by others, to be the essential therapeutic attitude; resp. the lack of such love in childhood to be the determining pathogenic deficit of the patient and every good psychotherapist accepts the dignity and freedom of their patient without reservation - that is, in spite of every failure and flaw of the affected. It is all the more surprising that, in all the literature of which I am aware, there is neither a discussion about diverse psychotherapeutic schools of thought, nor an investigation concerning the ideologies or religions behind such ideas, to see whether or not they postulate a number of preconditions, which if fulfilled, enable access to such unconditional love, such implicit self-being, and which if not fulfilled, might evoke a similar pathogenic deficit as that which is induced in childhood. As long as pure science alone is practiced, and only that which can be evidenced is valid, such a discussion cannot take place since such basic premises as love, basic trust and God cannot be proven. They are then deemed to be irrelevant, even if they are obviously not so in practice. But it is also important to question critically what one calls 'Christian'. “Christian” One-Sidednesses and Misinterpretations Perhaps the greatest danger to Christianity is a false church. In note form, I will present my opinions about some of these points: 443 • Like all people, Christians sometimes also prefer to dismiss bitter truths or to absolutize or distort a particular issue. The underlying motives may range from fear to arrogance and are very human. The Church itself has always had a tendency to absolutize overadaptation, morality and even itself. Protestants overemphasize achievements, Free Church members 441 There is a danger however, that those affected might believe that one's health only depends on one's strength of belief and, vice versa, that one's illness is indicative of one's lack of faith. 442 Dieter Claessens: Familie und Wertsystem, [1962], 4th edition, Duncker & Humblot, Berlin 1979. Erik H. Erikson, Der vollständige Lebenszyklus, Frankfurt am Main 1992. 443 In so doing, I will abstain from voicing some surely much-needed criticisms of churches and their practices, for reasons of space. Nevertheless, I believe that churches are currently playing a relatively positive role. 300 overemphasize a literal understanding of the Bible and conversion and, in general, Christians tend to devote themselves entirely to the service of others and disregard self-love. Selfdenial is preached instead of self-love. After decades in the Church, I have only heard one sermon about the meaning of self-love but several hundred others that we should do more for our fellow human beings. The ideal Christian - so the message seems to go - must be pious, diligent, altruistic, moral, virtuous and somewhat asexual; and he must not, no matter what the issue, be aggressive or angry. Fortunately, the list of requirements, as far as I can ascertain, has been reduced; possibly because people were leaving the Church, sensing that the proclaimed message was burdensome and no longer liberating. • Often, this erroneous attitude exists amongst Christians: Many sins can be forgiven except those which have been deliberately committed. In other words, evil actions which were committed unwittingly can be forgiven but not that which was committed in full consciousness. • Some believe that every evil person will go to hell since the Church has taught this doctrine at times. Jesus however, died for sinners and the first person to whom he promised entry into heaven was not a good person but a criminal - the very one who was hanging on the cross next to Jesus. (A similar message can be found in the parable of the prodigal son.) • The Church is either equated with God or else, confused with religion. • Christianity is equated with humanism and pacifism. Whilst Christianity is humanistic and peaceable, it does not absolutize these values. This is why even the “evil” and aggressive parts of humankind can be incorporated into a person. • Misunderstandings occur when terms are mentioned such as: `humility´, `selflessness´, `giving up the self´. (See also the section concerning the Self). • Discipleship is regarded as being imperative. • Faith in God becomes absolutized. (Even by Luther?) Or else, belief in God becomes a performance. I believe that the basic will to do good, already constitutes that which is absolute from humankind's perspective. (See also: The absolute attitude of the I and Absolute and relative will.) • The attempt to prove God, since his credibility, by itself, does not seem sufficient. • The belief that if we were to only believe and pray enough, all hopes for good would be fulfilled (health, peace instead of war, etc.), purporting that: “A person who is ill has not enough faith.” • The opinion: “God has died for us” or “God has sacrificed his son for us so that we might live.” These are concepts that are prone to be misunderstood since God has neither committed suicide nor killed Jesus. I believe that both are still alive. • The belief that God regulates everything. • The belief that Jesus can only be understood under certain conditions, for instance, when one has the right kind of faith, or when one knows the Old Testament, etc. • Overuse of the term `holy´: Many Christians call things to be holy such as: the Holy Land, a holy people, holy men and women, holy father (the Pope), holy Scriptures, etc. - but they have been only sanctified of God, they are not holy in themselves. I believe, only God is holy. • The opinion that the Bible is (as is the Quran) to be taken literally (biblicism). In connection 301 with this is the following point: • All Bible verses are considered to be of the same importance: The Old and New Testament, the gospels and the epistles, etc. I have little doubt that Paul would “rend his garments“ if one places equal value on his statements, as on those made by Jesus. The sequence of credibility is for me the following: the Holy Spirit or Love > the New Testament (statements made about, and by, Jesus in the gospels) > experience > reason > Paul and other epistles > the Old Testament.444 The Church does not dare to correct some questionable Bible verses attributed to Jesus, despite the fact that they clearly contradict his messages found in other verses, and that they have always been a bone of contention. In particular, there are four passages in Matthew's gospel (Mt 8:12; 18:8ff; 22:13; 25:41) and in Luke's gospel 19:27, which appear to be threats rather than statements that are in accordance with love.445 Similarly, there is no clear distancing from other, similarly-toned, and much more frequently occurring passages in the Old Testament. • Some people consider themselves to be Christians and misuse the name of Christ. In the name of God, wars are fought, people are oppressed, etc. (Keyword `Christianism'). Sadly, it is not often taken into consideration that the wolf in sheep's clothing is a wolf and not a sheep and that not everyone who calls himself Christian is actually a Christian. How often do we hear the argument that it was the “Christians“ who were responsible for the crusades, the inquisition, etc. However, such “Christians“ cannot claim that they were acting on the authority of Jesus, who even challenged his listeners to love their enemies; whilst in some religions, using force against one's enemies and against `infidels´ is not at all excluded. • Some claims sole representation, in the sense that experiencing God and finding the truth can be found only in Christianity; or else that salvation comes solely through faith in Jesus Christ. By way of contrast, others believe that all religions have the same value (theological pluralism). I have personally found the greatest amount of love within Christianity (this corresponds, roughly, to the attitude of `inclusivist theology´). 444 When prioritizing criteria of importance, the reasons why I placed Jesus' utterances, as they have been handed down, beneath the criterion of Holy spirit or love, are the following: By no means were Jesus' disciples always guided by the Holy Spirit, but rather, they did things which blatantly contravened the directions given in other verses (e.g. Peter dealt with Ananias and his wife Sapphira in such a hardhearted way that both died, simply because they had kept a little of the money which they were to give to the fellowship, Acts 5:1–11). It is instances such as these which give us an insight as to why the disciples and their successors have handed down some of the teachings of Jesus in another spirit. Therefore, one should be somewhat skeptical towards the Bible verses which do not seem to correspond to this spirit of love. However the “spirit of love” is, in no way, always a comfortable one! 445 Scholars have been hesitant to remove or mark as questionable some derogatory remarks made by Paul about women, such as “women should remain silent in the churches”, or verses discussing the “works of the flesh”, of which we are told that those who practice such things will not enter the kingdom of heaven (Gal 5:19ff; Rom 1:28ff; Tit 1:10ff). These statements are not in keeping with the spirit of Jesus and have caused a lot of damage. (KW: verbal inspiration, the inerrancy of the Bible). 302 Christian Fundamentalism, Religionism Christian fundamentalists demand Christians have to be Bible-believing and practicing, have to be born-again and converted.446 They think that one has to pray in a particular way, with a particular frequency; one has to take the Bible literally and to adhere to other imperatives which ultimately amount to self-redemption. “It is only we who are chosen and redeemed the others are not so!”, is their belief. Here, Christian fundamentalism approximates other fundamentalisms.| Criticism of Religion In the following, the main focus will be a criticism of the Christian religion (for the main sources, please see footnote).447 Brief remarks made by myself are denoted by the use of a cursive font and placed in square brackets: [ ]. Well-Known Critics of Religion Ludwig Feuerbach (1804 - 1872) • God is a projection of the human mind. Feuerbach calls for us to remove the projection and to re-appropriate the energy which has thereby become available for the humanization of humanity. [In so much as one is unable to prove that love is not a projection, neither can one prove that the contrary is true.] • Religion is consolation in the beyond, (escapism). [Comments, see below.] Development of the projection of God according to Feuerbach: the suffering of the individual → the wishes of the individual (happiness, fulfillment) as well as the instinct of selfpreservation and imagination → Projection: God. __________________________________________________ ____________ Karl Marx (1818 - 1883) • Refers to Feuerbach's theories, religion is a creation by people, religion is simultaneously an expression of the hardship of people and a protest against this hardship. • Religion causes people to be passive and therefore to suffer misery = "opium for people" • This passivity serves to benefit those who possess, as well as the powerful. [However, Jesus stirred people up and found harsh words to use against those who have and the powerful.] • Marx calls for a better distribution of possession within society (communism), which would obviate the need for religion and it would automatically disappear. [This ideology has already failed.] __________________________________________________ __________ 446 According to a cartoon found at the Convention of the Evangelical Church: Kirchentag München. http://www.geschichtsforum.de/f78/die-bekanntesten-religionskritiker-und-ihre-ans-tze-33596/; and Weinrich, Michael: Religion und Religionskritik; Göttingen, 2nd ed. 2012. 447 303 Friedrich Nietzsche (1844 - 1900) • The natural and historical sciences have rendered religion implausible. • Christianity calls for a “slave morality”. [Human being, however, was made in the image of God and Jesus condemned the absolutization of morals, the “law”.] • The will of humankind should replace God. [See the section concerning `Absolute attitude ‘.] • The “death of God” - is a lengthy process, in which God dies out in the conscious mind of humankind. [I do not believe that this will happen.] • Nietzsche believes that by overcoming religion man has the chance to become a "BeyondMan" (“Übermensch"), with new creative abilities. [In my opinion, this is a utopian Belief in progress; it is also prone to misunderstanding and open to abuse → NS-ideology. In part, this criticism of Nietzsche is valid: Where are the redeemed Christians?] __________________________________________________ __________ Sigmund Freud (1856 - 1939)448: • Religion is similar to a childhood neurosis: the relationship between the child and its parents is like the relationship between the individual and God. [I think the comparison is correct but not in a pathological sense because even as an adult I am sometimes like a child and I am glad to hope that God will comfort me like a mother.] • Man suffers from blows of fate over which he has no control. He personifies these as "God." → Emotional Relief. [To me, this appears to be reasonable.] • Religion hinders an individual's development into an adult since he or she can always blame the supernatural for everything that happens to him or her. [In my opinion, this only applies to misunderstood religiosity. Christian religion accepts childlike aspects of us. We would be overstrained if we always had to act as adults.] • He calls for the growing maturation of personality of the individuals so that they can take responsibility for their own lives. [See also my criticism concerning `Individuation´.] • Education to reality is necessary, to assessing the reality of the external world and acting upon it accordingly. [See sections concerning `realism´and `functionalism´, within the chapter about `Materialism´.] Contemporary Dawkins et al. • In his book “The God Delusion”, R. Dawkins suggests that many ills in the world are caused by religion. “Imagine ... a world with no religion. Imagine no suicide bombers, no 9/11, no 7/7, no Crusades, no witch-hunts, no Gunpowder Plot, no Indian partition, no Israeli/Palestinian wars, no Serb/Croat/Muslim massacres, no persecution of Jews as 'Christ- 448 As found in the original: S. Freud: Gesammelte Werke, Vol. 7, p. 129139; Vol. 14, p. 323380; Vol. 15, p. 170,197 304 killers‘, no Northern Ireland 'troubles' ...“.449 [1. There are, no doubt, religions that promote aggression and refuse to renounce violence. Dawkins would need to differentiate more clearly. 2. Not everyone who calls himself a Christian is a Christian. 3. Even a peace-loving religion can be misused.] • Even some of the statements contained in a new textbook about psychotherapy and psychosomatic medicine, published in 2008, are entirely undifferentiated and theologically insupportable, from which the following extract is taken: “In the tradition of the Christian and … Jewish religion, ever since their expulsion from paradise, humankind has been bent on doing evil since his youth. Following the pattern of original sin, he does evil, even though he knows to do well, as Paul indicates, and must expect God's punishment in return. He or she can only confess that they are sinners, attempt to do well and hope that God will redeem them. Topics such as sin, the expectation of punishment, the fear of punishment, the hope of forgiveness and salvation are implanted within occidental people groups and play a particularly decisive role in the case of mental disorders. Also, Christianity demands that we deny ourselves the satisfaction of our drives, and, in particular, to endure the actions of others as followers of Jesus, instead of being aggressive; Christianity demands not to take revenge upon attackers but rather, to love our enemies. Human virtues such as poverty, humility and chastity comprehensively describe the renunciation of instincts."450 • H. Schnädelbach even speaks of the “curse of Christianity” and laments a devaluation of this life, a devaluation of the physical and its consequences including repressive sexual morals, celibacy and self-harm.451 Concerning the Criticism of the Christian Religion 1. Surely, the critics are right when they point out “Christian” or ecclesial imbalances and misinterpretations including those mentioned above, as well as others. (→ “Christian” one-sidednesses …) 2. However, many critics mean a particular ecclesial doctrine and practice, or passages of the Old Testament, yet rarely discuss the person of Jesus himself. I suspect that most critics have not read the New Testament.452 3. A large number of people resent God or refuse to believe in him because he allows so much suffering in the world (→ Theodicy ). However: a. As parents, we allow our children to cause suffering to themselves, and this only goes to show the level of suffering that is caused by humankind himself. b. With regard to the remaining types of suffering (environmental disasters etc.), I believe that we are all meant by `Adam´ and `Eve´, and that we too once decided to leave God's 449 See bibliographical references (p23). G. Rudolf and P. Henningsen, taken from Psychotherapeutische Medizin und Psychosomatik. ed.by Gerd Rudolf and Peter Henningsen 6th edition. Thieme Verlag 2008, p.76. What a misinterpretation! When God says we should not "sin", it is not a threat but orientation. He also loves us when we are angry, aggressive, etc. Paul says, “You are called to be free!”. (Gal 5:13) 451 Herbert Schnädelbach In: »Die Zeit«, No. 20, 11.5. 2000. 452 Friedrich Nietzsche was probably an exception, who presented a rather contradictory and at times very positive image. 450 305 paradise in order to do our own thing, which means that we now have to live in a world which is less than perfect (the so-called expulsion from paradise and its consequences).453 (→Theodicy). c. God is almighty but not everywhere active. For the reasons mentioned above, he also allows other powers to be at work. For similar reasons, not all of our prayers are fulfilled. 4. Some accuse Christianity of being opposed to pleasures of the body and senses (or such interpretations as are often presented by the Church). Whilst such utterances are frequently attributed to Jesus, I cannot find them recorded in the Bible. On the contrary, the first miracle of Jesus consisted of the transformation of water into wine. 5. Some accuse Christianity of neglecting earthly things, and instead, of consoling people with thoughts concerning the afterlife. Jesus however, was very much concerned with the improvement of our earthly lives, and, above and beyond this, opened up valuable new perspectives. 6. Since the Church (and also Paul) often fought against reason, some believe that Jesus did the same. However, it was only the idolization of the reason that he opposed. 7. I assume that God can neither be proved nor disproved but find that this open question is not let open by most critics; rather, their own opinion is expressed in a fundamentalist fashion, similar to religious fundamentalist opinions. What is lacking is the attitude that says: “This is my belief or my experience but I could be wrong.” Rather, the beliefs of dissenting voices are discredited as “neurotic” (Freud), “delusional” (Dawkins) or “illusionary” etc. A discussion is not sought out, and the same can be said of fundamentalist religious circles. 8. Misidentification: The ideas which people hold about God do not concur with the person of Jesus. As with everything else, the name of God can be misused for the most varied reasons. However, in such discussions, it is rarely said that “this or that crime was committed abusively in the name of God.” As said, one should not name the wolf in sheep's clothing as a wolf, even if he represents himself as a sheep. 9. Often, critics do not differentiate between the statements found in the Old and New Testament. For Christians however, it is the statements made in the New Testament that are decisive. 454 10. Often, critics do not differentiate between the recorded utterances made by Jesus and those which are attributed to Paul. Paul, however, is merely an interpreter and not Jesus himself. His assertions, therefore, are subordinate to those made by Jesus. 11. That the individual is described one-sidedly as a sinner, is often criticized, and, on the side of the Church, there are times that this does occur. However, the saying, “we all make mistakes,” is a platitude. Nevertheless, I greatly appreciate it when someone tells me that all 453 If one followed this interpretation, the term `expulsion´ would not be accurate. Rather, one would have to speak of leaving paradise. See also Plato's idea that we must have been at home in a higher world before. (Quoted after Nietzsche and criticized by him). 454 Thus, when compared with other religions, the most important scripture of Christianity is identified as being the “Bible”; not the “New Testament”. 306 my mistakes will be forgiven and that they, in no way, affect my value. I, likewise, tell my children the same. 12. It is often criticized that Christians believed in original sin (similar to the karma law). From Jesus, such statements are not known.455 13. Some criticize Christianity for making people underage and passive. But others give the opposite criticism: that a person is completely overwhelmed by the demands of Jesus (the Sermon on the Mount, love of the enemy, etc.). 14. Some criticize the belief - and in my opinion rightly so - that the New Testament or even the Bible as a whole is the (direct) Word of God. Muslims also believe that this is true for the Koran, but not the Christians of the Bible. I believe that the Bible bears witness to God, but also contains statements of a very human spirit. 15. Some criticize - and in my opinion rightly so - the false interpretation that the death of Jesus was a necessary sacrifice to reconcile God to humankind - as if God had to be placated through the death of a person. I believe that Jesus voluntarily sacrificed his earthly life but not his heavenly life, just as I would, hopefully, sacrifice something, that I value, for people whom I love, without giving myself up entirely. 16. Many confuse the Christian message with the Church. The Church has made many mistakes and is not identical to the Christian message. There was nothing that Jesus criticized harsher than the established Church of the time - and perhaps also the Church of today? With justification, one may pose the same question as R. Reich: Whether Christianity survived “not only because of but despite the Church”?456 17. Many believe that a Christian has to be extremely spiritual and go to church every Sunday. However, the freedom to be oneself, whoever one is - which, to me, also includes attitudes and actions that run contrary to the commandments - is over the commandments. 18. Many believe that as a Christian one has to love one's neighbor and sacrifices himself. But it says, "Love the neighbor as yourself." 19. One question for the critics: If you were God yourself, what would you do differently? Here is a general answer: I would not tolerate suffering (which would mean maintaining paradisical conditions at all costs). But what if we did not want to live in the paradise that you, the hypothetical god, has created - even if it would be the best of all possible worlds? In such a case, would it not be good to grant us the freedom of choice, even if hardship and suffering were linked to this choice? CRITERIA OF SUBOPTIMAL WORLDVIEWS General A worldview seems to be suboptimal ((or even bad) if the following criteria can be detected: • it is purely anthropocentric, theocentric or atheistic; 455 Amongst Paul's writings, in particular, it is Rom 5:12 that is prone to misunderstanding. Reich, Ruedi. In: Zur Ökumene verpflichtet´. Ed. by Eva-Maria Faber, Schriftenreihe der Theologischen Hochschule Chur, Vol. 3, Academic Press Fribourg, p.41, 2003. 456 307 • it harms or sidelines people; • it only considers people of the same worldview to be good, and all others to be evil; • it represents any form of ideology; • it absolutizes parts of earthly life, or even earthly life as a whole, and neglects to point beyond the earthly sphere, • it imposes strange Absolutes upon people, thus depriving them of their freedom; • it baits with a reward for obedient behavior - or it taboos relative Negative and threatens with it; • it does not correspond with the spirit of love; and • it places objects above people and healing above salvation and redemption. Comprehensively: A worldview appears less than optimal whenever it is based upon something other than the +A or when it denies or relativizes it. In such cases, the individual either has no Absolute, or a strange positive Absolute, which will give them either insufficient love or none whatsoever and sometimes may seem to be a `stressful strategy of self-redemption´. A suboptimal worldview possesses the same characteristics as second-rate realities, such as listed in columns I and K of the Summary table. Examples Compulsions in Worldviews Many worldviews include preconditions that need to be fulfilled before people is allowed to be themselves. In such cases, they do not speak of unconditional love for people but rather about an (or many) imperative(s). More precisely, these are worldviews or concepts that include pre-requirements, with the result that they only correspond in a limited way to the idea of unconditional acceptance and love for people - or even oppose it. Thereby, they represent only sub-optimal or even adverse foundations for life and also for psychotherapeutic measures which build upon them. In particular, these include, first and foremost, all ideologies or ideologically-founded attitudes, as well as several religions. 457 As has been previously mentioned, I do not consider them to be bad or even evil in themselves but rather, to be less than helpful or even relatively unfavorable. In such a way, a hierarchy that is advantageous for us, as people, is distorted by inversions: We are no longer free but rather, we have to accomplish something to become free. We become `must-people'. We have to do something or the big void threatens us. Referring to this issue, Georg Büchner wrote: “The MUST is one of the damning words with which humankind has been baptized."458 That means even the best things in life, like love, become dubious or even bad when enforced. From a Christian perspective, one might add to Büchner's statement: “One of the redemptive words, with which we have been baptized for all intents and purposes, is: `You do not need to do anything - God will always love you!´, `You may try the good but you do not have to do´.” 457 458 An overview of ideologies is contained in column E of the Summary table.. It was in a letter to his fiancée, Wilhelmine Jaeglé, in January 1834, that Georg Büchner wrote this. 308 The Self-Definition of the Person is Disturbed Materialism defines a person based on the matter. In idealism, a person is defined based on ideals that need to be accomplished. In humanism, a person's core identity must necessarily be humane. Also, most religions have fixed and constrictive definitions regarding what is necessary to be human: In Islam, a proper person is defined as being a person who submits to Allah,459 (besides other matters); and in Buddhism, the Self as an absolute personal identity dissolves into Nirvana. Further possible disadvantages correspond to the disorders listed in column I of the `Summary table´. Concepts of Self-Redemption Definition: By `self-redemption' I mean salvation that depends exclusively on the human being - thus demands more than a basic goodwill (→`Absolute attitude') from him. Many ideologies and worldviews link the main solutions (absolute sphere) only to the person. The person thus becomes the sole redeemer of himself and his problems. Thereby, the person has ultimate responsibility, above and beyond the Absolute. The person demands too much of themselves but has the deceptive feeling that he would be able to gain control of it all if only he could apply sufficient effort: Depending upon the method, we would merely need to be sufficiently analyzed, think sufficiently positively, meditate and believe etc., in order to gain health and happiness. Though a person might hope to gain control of it all one day, he is effectively demanding too much of himself in principle. No childlike or playful aspects remain; effort, competition and struggle determine his life, and this is only interrupted by occasional highlights. The last metaphysical support of a person thereby lies within himself. In my opinion, it would be best - and easiest - to leave the main responsibility to God; our responsibility, which is nevertheless important (!), only comes after that.460 However, all psychotherapies which operate without a superordinate, loving authority (God), must necessarily place the Ego-strength (one's own or that of another) at the center of their efforts. Up until a certain point, this is acceptable. However, what is if this Egostrength is not sufficient to master our problems, which is often the case in existential and traumatizing situations? The affected has, in a general sense, too much responsibility concerning the Relative but which has been absolutized. Concerning other Relativa, he occasionally has too little responsibility and yet, at the same time, has no recourse to +A, which would facilitate the assumption of an appropriate level of responsibility, without demanding too much of the respective person. “Advantages” of Self-Redemption “The Arab term: Islām ... means `submission (to God)´, `complete surrender (to God)´." https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam, 12/ 2016. In Christianity, God devotes himself (without surrendering) to us, and a person is “defined” as having been made in the image of God - an identity that he does not lose, even as “sinner” who he is usually, too. 460 Notwithstanding, the responsibilities connected with the so-called absolute choice do not conform to this pattern. 459 309 • A person who achieves that which is demanded of him will have many compensatory advantages, primarily in the short term. Thus, as they compare themselves to others, he or she may feel chosen, uplifted, particularly secure etc. (= “+hyper-effects”).461 In the long term, however, the disadvantages of the sA will dominate. • The advantages of the different worldviews correspond with the (seeming) disadvantages of a first-rate reality, or even of the +A. • It is interesting to note that almost all of the ideologies refer to the advantages, rather than reminding us of negative `final things´ (transience and death); it is however, the religions that point to these aspects. OPTIMAL WORLDVIEW “It is entirely conceivable that life's splendor forever lies in wait about each one of us in all its fullness, but veiled from our view, deep down, invisible, far off. It is there, though … If you summon it by the right word, by its right name, it will come.” (Franz Kafka, The Diaries of Franz Kafka, 1921) Revision of the Inversions When I have described, in the section entitled `Metapsychiatry´, inversions as being one of the main causes of mental illnesses, and understood these to be the confusion of the Absolute and Relative, then an optimal worldview would need to revise these inversions by establishing an actual positive Absolute (+A), which regards all that is Relative as relative and integrates it - and which, however, will not dominate P and can be freely chosen. Is God the Positive Absolute? `God that is the great, the crazy one, who still loves people.´ (Adapted from Kurt Marti.) 462 In the section `Metapsychology‘, I discussed the correlation between the Absolute and the Relative (A and R). One hypothesis asserted that the Absolute determines the Relatives. Depending upon the respective Absolute in question, that which is relative will either fare better or worse. This also means that people will either fare better or worse, depending upon the spirit that determines the earthly; and will fare best if this spirit fulfills the criteria of a positive Absolute, such as I have listed in the section `What is the positive Absolute´. In my opinion, God is the only one who satisfies all of the criteria that I apply to the +A. 463 In this, Jesus is, for me, the most credible representative of God, as well as of unconditional 461 Individual, potential advantages are expressed in particular in the so-called hyper-forms and can be found in the Summary table in column N under ↑. In original, Kurt Marti writes: “God, that is the great, the crazy one, who still believes in people.” (Gott, das ist jener Große, Verrückte, der immer noch an Menschen glaubt.” 463 This is my personal view of the positive Absolute, of God, which does not necessarily agree with some other Christian conceptions. See `Christian one-sidednesses and misinterpretations´. 462 310 love. In this, Jesus is, for me, the most credible representative of God, as well as of unconditional love. This love is revealed, first and foremost, within freedom and orientation; freedom is being placed above orientation. In other words, freedom and orientation are two descendants of love, whereas freedom is the larger, and guidance the smaller child. In religious terms, God, who is himself love, will also permit us the freedom to reject his orientation, even to reject himself; since love without freedom, without the freedom to choose, is not love. Therefore, examining the French proverb L'amour est l'enfant de la liberté, I believe that freedom is a child of love, and not vice versa, as the proverb claims. God and the Individual; The Paradise and the World As mentioned above, I see God as being absolutely positive. It is only the absolutely negative (−A) that is entirely contrary to him. That which is earthly, our world, and therefore also ourselves, are situated between +A and −A. The individual has, as frequently mentioned, an `optional Absolute´, the `Absolute attitude' but is, in all other respects, in a relative or secondrate position. What does this mean? Originally, in paradise, God and we were connected in harmony. We were his creation, as now; At the time however, we were more authentically, and not quite so - as we are now estranged and mortal. We were a part of that which belonged to God, we were one with him - and yet, we were still absolutely free to oppose him or to vote him out. After we had done so, in the symbolic figures of Adam and Eve, and decided to be our own gods, we left the original first-rate reality and stepped into the present, a second-rate reality: the “world”. This means that we humans who were originally, directly connected with God and who thus lived in “paradise” - now live in a world in which we are controlled by strange Absolutes that we chose. We will thereby adopt a predominately second-rate position in the world, even though we have retained absolute freedom to choose, just as before. This, fortunately, means that we have not lost our connection with God but that we have entered in all other spheres a second-rate situation with its respective characteristics, as has the rest of the world and that all needs redemption. 464 | God does not exclude our world nor ourselves. The only thing that God excludes is the −A. It is only us who have excluded God, either in part or completely. Is God, therefore, still present in the world and in us, too? I believe it but we suppress him by our sA. The sA however, do not love the world and ourselves for our own sake! God, though, loves us for the sake of ourselves and, Jesus enables the return (`revision´) of the first-rate reality. Sören Kierkegaard seems to have been of a similar opinion if he means, that the kind of despair that is not-wanting-to-be-oneself, which constitutes a `sickness unto death´, can be overcome by becoming oneself in true faith. 465 Unlike Kierkegaard however, I do not identify the problem of not-wanting-to-be-oneself as the ultimate sickness unto death but rather, I 464 465 For characteristics of that which is second-rate, see also columns L and M of the `Summary table´. Großer Brockhaus, KW `Existenzphilosophie‘. 311 would define it as being the absolutely negative attitude of a person, as mentioned; that is their will to embrace the −A, as a matter of principle. No Fear of False Gods and Devils “Sin boldly but believe and rejoice in Christ even more boldly.” (M. Luther) Note: Luther's statement addresses those who are too conscientious and too afraid to sin. His words are not meant for those who neither believe in God nor know responsibility. We should have no fear of false gods and devils, since, as mentioned, there is only one single absolute Negative: the unconditional –A, and it is up to us whether we want to embrace it or not. All other negativity is, ultimately, solved by God. One can only believe this, without being able to prove it, and yet one can experience it. From this perspective, there is no deadly sins, no emotional trauma, no severe illness, no misfortune, no rape, nor any death that is definitive, unforgivable or irremediable. Does Metapsychotherapy mean that we have to avoid the sA, since they are too dangerous and might make us ill? Almost the very opposite is true: We should not consider them to be overly important since it is when we consider them to be too important that they become a domineering factor. One might then say that it would be of the greatest importance to relativize the sA. But also the relativizing of misabsolutizations is not the most important thing. On the part of the individual, the most important solution to the problem is already accomplished when one adopts an attitude which seeks out that which is good, as a matter of principle. (→ Absolute attitude). It would be wise then, but not obligatory, to repeatedly remind oneself of God's absolute assurances. The sA would then occupy their true position: a position in which they are relativized (automatically by God) and no longer carry the importance which they were given. We no longer need to draw from our depleted reserves to achieve this or that, at any cost. Rather, we would then be less stressed, more relaxed and less fearful; and from this position, we would be more likely to solve the as yet unresolved, relative problems, leaving others unresolved, without being plunged into a crisis. Christians also often forget this “meta-solution”. Then they think: “I have to pray more!”; or else “I have to think of others more!”; or “I have to be more grateful!” or “I need more faith in God!“ or “I have to improve myself!” or other imperatives. These opinions are sometimes good but when taken absolutely, they can have the opposite effect - and can end up dominating us and even making us ill. Resistance to the “Revision”466 • Resistance can occur in the form of fear, induced by the freedom to choose: That which often hinders a solution is the fear of a decision and its consequences. Also after the teachings of Kierkegaard, freedom makes fear into people. Freedom is, simultaneously, 466 I mention only keywords here. For a more elaborate discussion, see chapter `Resistance´ in the section `Psychotherapy'. 312 the greatest gift to people and the greatest burden. Dostojewski's grand inquisitor intended to take this fear away from people and eliminate freedom. He wished to eliminate the burden of personal responsibility, the agony of choice. • Given that our power is relativized, admitting one's limitations, weaknesses and powerlessness to oneself cause people to be frightened and develop resistance. • There is resistance in the fact that people often feel frightened whenever they are to rely upon something which is invisible, even if it appears credible. • Given that changes and therapies may hurt, then resistance can develop. The birth of the Self causes pain, but, as with all other births, it is a necessary part of the process. • There is also resistance in the form of misunderstandings, abuse and misinterpretations (as listed above). • Although the inversions provide short-term benefits, it would be good to forego them but this creates resistance. For more on the topic of Resistance in psychotherapy see there. Who is a Christian? `Love your neighbor and love yourself´ or `Love your neighbor and kill yourself´? It is common to think of a Christian as being someone who is always good and virtuous, who is rather asexual, who does not like to drink alcohol and who submits to the Pope and the Bible; someone who is self-sacrificing, and who is not only constantly required to work off and make up for their own sins but also for `original sin´; someone who has to suffer and who if they are entirely consistent, will be struck dead at the end of their life and, in return for their efforts, will be allowed to enter heaven. “People who believe in Jesus are no better than anyone else. However, they are in a better situation. They do not need to justify themselves, they are already justified due to Jesus' love. They do not need to prove themselves, they have already been proven: ... they do not have to make themselves bigger than they are. They are already the greatest thing that a person can become, they are children and heirs to the living God. They do not need to feel sorry for themselves, they have someone who is suffering with them. They do not need to comfort themselves, nor to encourage each other and make one another strong, they have someone who will build them up. They do not need to be the one who explains, redeems or loves their lives. They now have the best redeemer and lover of life. ... They are not perfect but perfectly loved!” (Axel Kühner)467 Christians are people who act on the authority of Jesus Christ. They are able to experience freedom and what it is to be truly loved. Nothing can separate them from God's unconditional love, be they alcoholics, thieves, prostitutes, tax collectors or failures. They can be aggressive, evil and egotistical; however, for their own sake, they are told that they should look after themselves and others, since, even though everything is permissible, not everything is beneficial. Questions: Should we not, first of all, strive for heaven rather than for the next good deed?” 467 Axel Kühner taken from Neukirchener Kalender, 18.5.2010. 313 If I redeem myself, would I then not have too much stress? Does not the loving relationship between God and ourselves have a great similarity to the relationship between parents and their children? Are not children primarily loved for being themselves, and only after that comes the morality?468 468 Neither: 'Food comes first and then morality´ (B. Brecht). 314 PSYCHOTHERAPY "Be convinced that these strange characters have no power over you; only the belief of them being hostile towards you can make them hostile towards you." E.T.A. Hoffmann: The Sandman. Notes / Introduction Owing to the nature of this work, in this chapter I only comment upon specific psychotherapeutic topics that overlap with "metapsychotherapeutic" topics. In terms of concrete therapeutic references, please see section "Remarks for Patients", in this section and also respective matters in the section "Psychiatry”. I propagate a “primary” form of psychotherapy, the goal of which is to strengthen and unburden the Self of patients. I, therefore, focus, in particular, on patients who, in themselves, do not possess enough selfstrength to solve their own problems. Definitions of Psychotherapy Usual Definition: • “Psychotherapy is the use of psychological methods, particularly when based on regular personal interaction, to help a person change and overcome problems in desired ways. Psychotherapy aims to improve an individual's well-being and mental health, to resolve or mitigate troublesome behaviors, beliefs, compulsions, thoughts, or emotions, and to improve relationships and social skills. Certain psychotherapies are considered evidencebased for treating some diagnosed mental disorders.”469 • I consider the term “psychotherapy” in a broad sense, the way it was originally intended: psychḗ = `soul´ and therapeúein = `taking care of someone´. Therefore I connect everything that is beneficial for our soul with psychotherapy - unconcerned as to whether or not it is scientifically approved. I consider this older understanding of psychotherapy appropriate and comprehensive. However, the increasing influence of science has compelled psychiatry and psychology to become increasingly one-sided. Why? The constraint of psychotherapy to use only “scientifically approved methods”, is in contrast to the nature of the psyche itself, which can only be partly scientifically explored and can, therefore, only be treated to some extent with scientific methods. It is for this reason that psychotherapy should also deal with existential problems and issues that are not provable. As has already been mentioned: the disadvantageous separation of the `scientific´ psychotherapy on the one hand and, on the other, the pastoral care practiced by the Church, creates a situation that supports the rising of the esoteric and leaves many patients without help. 469 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychotherapy 12/2016 315 DIFFICULTIES IN PSYCHOTHERAPY How should the optimal therapy be? Simple, trustworthy, free of charge and lasting – like love and the deliverance/ salvation that love offers. But as simple as it may seem, there are two difficulties to which I would like to draw attention: 1. “Persistence of the strange Absolutes” (sA) and 2. “Resistance”. The problem of ”Morbid gain” that is connected to it, I discussed within the chapter `Metapsychiatry´. Persistence of the Strange Absolutes (sA) The spirits that I've conjured, I could not banish them again. (Goethe, `The Sorcerer's Apprentice') The earlier mentioned “redemption” is, in the first place, spiritual, and is, in actual fact, very simple, as has already been mentioned. However, the mental disorders underlying It/sAcomplexes are materialized and manifest themselves in the material world. The behaviors that patients had become accustomed to for months and years had become automatic. They have gained life and momentum of their own which, in the majority of cases, is lost only very gradually. The situation in which we find people with such complexes is comparable to that of a prisoner who has left his cell after several years and yet is still bound by old forces and habits.470 Although a spiritual "revision" (better: remembering God) robs the sA/ It- complexes of their power only in principle but not totally. As said, it does not do so immediately because of their materialization it takes, similar to the drug withdrawal, sometimes months or years until they have lost their influence.471 Resistance "I fear I might die if I dare to be who I really am.” (A patient) View of the Psychoanalysis Psychoanalysis has done much to shed light on this phenomenon. According to S. Freud, `resistance´ is defined as an “aversion to `reveal any repressed 470 This mechanism is both individual and commonly to be understood. In classic literature, there are examples too. E.g., of the serfs who, after their release by Tolstoy, returned to servitude since this was the way of life which was familiar to them. Or the sorcerer's apprentice in the like-named ballad by Goethe, who cried out: “The ghosts I called I can not get rid of now.” (own translation) 471 It is not difficult to choose the +A (God), however it is a challenge to escape the effects of the complexes. Comparison: An ice block does not disappear immediately as soon as the water has become warm - not even in our soul. (See also section above) 316 information from within the unconscious mind´ and, in consequence, to a patient's recovery and healing.” 472 Own Definition In my understanding - mainly from a metatherapeutical point of view - resistance is a phenomenon that applies not only to psychoanalysis. I am not only referring to the patient's resistance against his recovery/ therapy but also to the resistance against all which is reasonable and sensible in general, whereby this type of resistance mentioned last include the first. Regarding resistance in a strict sense, I see a great degree of consensus with psychoanalysis, however, I relate the emergence of this resistance to the role of the sA (and A). Thereby it is possible to understand that resistance emanates from the side of the patient as well as from the side of the therapist.473 Resistance may arise - in my understanding - wherever strange Absolutes (sA) or strange Selves (sS) are to be relativized.474 More precisely: Resistance may arise wherever one feels threatened by a possible loss of the advantages of the +sA/sS or has to accept a ‒sA/sS. This is important for a better understanding of resistance. If one attempts to relativize the sA and sS, it wouldn't be hard - but for the earlier stated reasons, we consider the one or other sS/sA to be vitally important. This means that this resistance should not only be understood to be the threat of a possible loss of an object's positive aspects but rather, one needs to take into account the fact, that this object was absolutized. If it is something negative that has been absolutized, it will seem vital to the person concerned to avoid or combat it but not to relativize. In both cases, the affected will resist the relativization of the strange Selves (sS ) and the strengthening of the actual Self since their strange Selves have to them, paradoxically, become more important than their actual Self. For this reason, the patient will fight that which would restore his health and will foster that which makes him ill. The concerned is due to relativize what he mistakenly believes is his life ("let go" = withdrawal) and accept what he considers to be death. But both are difficult. The following image elucidates the precise of the resistance. +sA –sA Resistance arises at two "points": 1. Resistance (horizontal line) arises when an individual experiences an absolutized positive* (+sA) is to be relativized (up arrow) and thus feels threatened by a sense of loss. 2. Resistance also arises if an absolutely perceived negative* (‒ sA) - that one had sought to avoid by all means - is to be accepted as merely relatively negative (down arrow and the horizontal line below). (0 is not considered here). 472 The information is taken from U.H. Peters and W. Loch, page 164 ff. (see bibliography). This understanding is up to date. For example, see Wöller, Wolfgang; Kruse, Johannes: Tiefenspychologisch fundierte Psychotherapie. Key word `Widerstand´. 474 As described above, sA represents general and sS (strange-Self) internalized, strange Absolute. Since it is irrelevant for this topic whether the problem is considered to be a general or a personal one, I refer to them as sA, or as sS. 473 317 The relevant person (P) needs to perpetuate the resistance as long as he is unable to balance his sense of loss with a growing strength of Self. In other words: The person will resist the therapy (and the consequential changes) as long as he has not found a better Absolute than the previous one. 475 If the pressure becomes too forceful to give up the resistance, the patient may resort to a contra-sA or a different sA. If the external or internal pressure grows to surrender, the patient increasingly feels cornered. He will employ ever more costly Defense mechanisms to perpetuate his sA. Nevertheless, both, resistance and costly defenses are important/reasonable temporary solutions as long as there is no effective solution. They should thus be accepted by the therapist and the patient. At the same time, the therapist needs to point out solutions that are more profound and will prove more efficacious. In the section 'Psychotherapy of Schizophrenia', I´ll come back to this topic. Resistance against what? 1. Resistance is directed against the perceived loss of advantages offered by the sA/sS. Resistance is directed against the perceived loss of an, albeit unstable, equilibrium. Resistance is directed against the perceived loss of a substitute-Self that is considered to be vital, including substitute-identity, substitute-securities, substitute-integrity, substitutereality, substitute-autonomy, etc. In summary: resistance is directed against the perceived loss of all +* aspects (and therefore also the + sides of counterparts of ‒sA and 0). 2. Resistance is directed against `disadvantages´ of the +A or Self!476 = Resistance against love, God, the Self, right therapy, truth, and so on. If I'm well, maybe I'll get less attention, I may feel guilty, I may get more responsible, the "free-fall height" may become too great, etc. The patient gets withdrawal, catharsis, pain and responsibility instead of drugs or thrill. There are parallels regarding the resistance against God, resp. the Self and resistance against therapy. Jörg Müller „A large number of people are searching God but many also fear to find him.“ Or a prayer: „God take away my illnesses but don't touch their causes.“ 3. Resistance against the relativization of a ‒sA. Resistance also occurs if a ‒sA, an absolutely negative experience, which one has avoided at all cost, shall be taken only relative negative and therefore acceptable.477 With a view to the fact that there are different realities, the following statement seems consequential: Attempting to shift from a second-rate reality to a first-rate reality, a person (P) needs often to go through a zero point (a point of powerlessness and uncertainty) which will frighten him. There is a saying: “Even a dog will bite you if you take his bone and do not offer a piece of meat in its stead.” 1. and 2. depend upon each other. 477 A more detailed discussion of this topic can be found in the unabridged German version. 475 476 318 Resistance and Defense Defense is directed against that which is experienced as being negative. Resistance is directed against that which is subjectively negative but objectively positive. Thus, one could define resistance as a special defensive mechanism (DM) - that is, resistance as a defense against that which is experienced as negative, in spite of it, in fact, being positive. However, this would lead to misunderstandings. Using the example of debt, the defense would be a repression of the fact that one is in debt. Resistance would be directed against saving money.478 Desire and Resistance The double-character of the Inversions causes ambivalent tendencies within us because we are putting resistance against things that are objectively better for us and are wishing for things that are objectively disadvantageous for us. But fortunately, the original “healthy” aspirations and desires don´t perish because of that. In certain phases conflicting tendencies are in a costly balance: We wish the objective positive and at the same time the objective negative. Or we want and fear the good and the bad equally. We wish to recover our health and yet, we do not. We desire to be free and remain captive. We become fearful whenever we attempt to change an expensive balance. We lack the courage to “die and become”. However, we should not be afraid. We fear to die but we will merely die a lesser death and then come into our real life. Desire and resistance may coincide whenever we fail to love ourselves for the sake of ourselves. Why? It is Desire and resistance may coincide whenever we fail to love ourselves for the sake of ourselves. Why? It is because we love ourselves primarily for the sake of our achievements. If we fulfill our expectations and accomplish our aims, we feel exuberant and have a strong desire to experience more success. At the same time, however, the fulfillment of our new expectations will become rather too exhausting, causing us to resist the challenge to accomplish our aims. In this way, we fluctuate between the desire to be loved for the sake of ourselves or our accomplishments, and our resistance against the one or the other. Thus, we may oscillate between the most diverse inner conflicts or find that something is superb and at the same time it threatens to tear us apart. But from a secondrate perspective, this problem cannot be solved. P would have to adopt the first-rate perspective in order to find a solution; however, the patient would then need to relinquish the benefits of a P²-position. 478 E.g., see the relevant section in Wöller, Wolfgang and Johannes Kruse: Tiefenpsychologisch fundierte Psychotherapie. Schattauer, Stuttgart, 2005. 319 Difficulties and Resistances on the Side of the Therapists “What is the difference between a neurotic, a psychotic, and a psychiatrist: The neurotic builds castles in the sky, the psychotic lives in them and the psychiatrist collects the rent.”(Anonymous) Could it be that some psychiatrists do not want to give up this `rent´? As recounted previously, difficult situations and resistance against optimal therapy may be caused by therapists as well as by patients. It is important to note the difficult, competitive situation in which psychotherapy finds itself due to current esoteric trends, as well as due to the successes of psychotropic drugs, which I will address later. In addition, the therapist will generally feel obliged to follow a particular psychotherapeutic school of thought, which may effect difficulties in the course of the therapy. Current psychotherapeutic schools of thought are heavily influenced by rationalism and empiricism, which has corresponding advantages and disadvantages. 479 Some difficulties on the side of the psychotherapist, however, may, in principle, be the same as those found in the patient. These will merely be mentioned here, while potential difficulties caused by the diverse psychotherapeutic schools of thought will be discussed in greater detail at a later point. A working hypothesis claims that the therapist, similar to the patient, is largely influenced by that what he believes what is absolute, relative or void. For us therapists it is often common to absolutize quick-win solutions, our role as a helper, health and functionality - and for some of us male therapists, it is too important that our female counterpart is pretty, intelligent, young and privately insured. Regarding the situation of `psychology, psychotherapy and psychiatry today´ with prevalent fears and resistances to change, please see the relevant chapter below. In the following, I will in keywords outline current schools of psychotherapy and illustrate their potential advantages and disadvantages. 479 While people used to have to be moral - especially and under the influence of misunderstood religiosity - we must now above all be rational and adult. 320 PSYCHOTHERAPEUTIC SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT (CRITICAL OVERVIEW) The most important directions of psychotherapy (PT) are only briefly reflected on here, just to show basic similarities or differences to my concept.480 Overview-table Classification analytic and depth psychology behavior therapy Systemic Therapy humanistic humanistic spiritual christian Anthropocentric Foundations Anthropocentric Secular Method Psychoanalysis (PsyA) Individual Psychology Analytical Psychology Psychoanalytic Self-Psychology Object-Relations-Theory Attachment Theory Structural Psychology Relational and Intersubjective Psychoanalysis Neuropsychoanalysis Daseinsanalysis Hypnosis Katathym-imaginative Psychotherapy or Guided Imagery Transactional Analysis Behaviorism Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) Systemic Therapy Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy Logotherapy and Existential Analysis Gestalt-therapy Person-Centered Therapy (PCT) Psychodrama Integrative and Embodyment Psychotherapy Founder/Representatives Sigmund Freud Alfred Adler C. G. Jung Heinz Kohhut Melanie Klein, S. Ferenczi, M. Balint John Bowlby, Mary Ainsworth Jaques Lacan R. D. Stolorow and others M. Solms, M. Mancia et al. L. Binswanger, M. Boss Milton Erickson Hanscarl Leuner et al. Eric Berne Thorndike, Watson, Skinner et al. A. Ellis, Beck, Kanfer, Lazarus et al. Satir, Haley, Jackson and others A. Ellis Viktor Frankl F.S. Perls, P. Goodman Carl R. Rogers Jakob L. Moreno See corresponding text. anthropocentric spiritual Analytic psychotherapy C. G. Jung, Viktor Frankl Transpersonal-psychotherapy S. Grof, F. Vaughan, A. Maslow, R. Walsh, R.D. Laing, Ch. Tart, R. Assagioli, K. Wilber christocentric foundations (anthropocentric-theocentric) Analytic Wilfried Daim Depth Psychology Eugen Drewermann Biblical Michael Dieterich Pastoral Care Pastoral Psychologist Pastoral Psychology Pastoral Psychologist For me, this is primarily a theoretical debate, since, in practice, many therapists will ignore norms and restrictions of the conventional medicine and rather follow the promptings of their hearts. 480 321 Anthropocentric, Secular Psychotherapies “You can’t, if you can’t feel it, if it never Rises from the soul, and sways The heart of every single hearer, With deepest power, in simple ways.” Goethe, Faust. These are psychotherapeutic schools of thought, the basis of which is commonly an anthropocentric view of man and, in terms of philosophy, materialism. With regard to their epistemological foundation, they are frequently rationalistic and empiricist. Therefore, one might term them 'secular psychotherapies' or, more precisely, 'secularistic psychotherapies'. Discussion • The deliberate self-limitation of psychology to accept only an anthropocentric, scientifically founded image of mankind necessarily restricts the potential of a respective therapy. According to Karl Jaspers, philosophy looks at the whole, while science attends to the particular and the detail.481 Thus, secular psychotherapies are, in a certain sense, unrealistic since they merely appreciate the part of reality that is verifiable. All other matters are of little or no relevance. However, there is a further problem: A person cannot redeem himself, he can only solve problems within the limits of his resources. It seems to me that all earthly beings, including us humans, can only help, save, redeem and love one another in rather limited ways: ultimately, we are all alone. This bitter truth is, however, covered up by most ideologues. Who is it that gives opium to people? Surely, it is not Christ, nor a type of Christianity that truly follows his teachings but rather, most ideologies, even those which propagate materialism, by proclaiming the illusory message that man or progress itself might, at some point, solve humanity's problems. In truth, a stark, bleak, cold and sterile worldview is put forward, in the light of which a human is reduced to mere matter and that, which makes him man, is taken from him. • The one-sided aspiration to pursue scientificity makes the scientist blind to the meta-level, that is to say, that the scientist is unable to perceive potential solutions for which there are no proofs. These psychotherapies will not go beyond pure rationalism and objectivism. • In secular psychotherapies, patients with existential and spiritual problems will feel worse understood.482 • Anthropocentric psychotherapies believe that the solution to all psychological problems can be found in the individuals themselves (self-optimization and self-redemption). This means that secular psychotherapies ultimately rely on the individual's I-strength, which is, in my view, inferior to Self-strength. This places the therapist and patient under too much 481 From Schischkoff, keyword: Jaspers. In 2009, Marion Sonnenmoser investigated complaints about psychotherapists. The most common complaint (43%) was that the therapist did not show enough empathy so the patient could not develop confidence in him. http://www.aerzteblatt.de/pdf.asp?id=66315, 10/2009. 482 322 pressure since both are required to meet specific demands under all circumstances. • Secular psychotherapies rarely disclose the philosophical foundations on which they are based.483 • The interplay of guidance ("law") and love (grace) is not solved. In other words: An absolutization of love (in religious terms: God) is missing, which would provide an optimum of guidance but subordinate this guidance to love - this is an attitude that we try to adopt in relationships with our children. But, if the guidance which is given then becomes one-sided or a priority, this might overwhelm the patient. However, if, by way of an emergency solution, this guidance is avoided or denied, the patient remains unchallenged. • Secular psychotherapies contain or create paradoxes whenever they attempt to use science in order to give patients rationality against that which is irrational and metaphysical, or else whenever they attempt to use objectivity to treat that which is mostly subjective in man - his psyche. Wherever such paradoxes arise, they will promote disease. • Secular psychotherapies promote their opposites: spiritualism and Esoterism. • Secular psychotherapies struggle too much against that which is merely relatively negative or for that which is merely relatively positive; on the other hand, they give up too quickly when faced with existential issues or repress them. • Secular psychotherapies tend to absolutize mental health and functionality. • Secular psychotherapies are based on a relative or second-rate image of man, which will not provide an optimal basis for therapy.484 • Secular psychotherapies tend to avoid suffering and crises. Too little attention is given to the work of mourning. • The unconscious is to become conscious, unfavorable behavior is to be replaced by favorable etc., however, a meta-level which might relativize the issues at hand is not offered. This is a disadvantage, since, firstly, the unconscious should well at times be preferable to the conscious, and unfavorable behavior should at times be preferable to favorable; and secondly: Even if the conscious and favorable behavior is objectively the best, the affected may be unable and overtaxed to achieve these goals. • Since, in materialism, the existence of a free will is negated, this will have a paralyzing effect on psychotherapies: In this way, culprits rapidly become victims, too. • Secular psychotherapies have a tendency to standardize complex issues. Even a mundane question such as: "How can I best get to the next city?" cannot be answered mechanically, let alone life's questions. Concrete answers/ solutions always depend on the individual person and the specific situation, in spite of all experiences. • Secular psychotherapies are always in danger of manipulating others. The patient becomes a case and the psychiatrist becomes a technician. • Secular psychotherapies themselves display similar defense mechanisms that they mean to reduce for their patients: the repression of existential questions, rationalization, regression toward a claim of sole legitimate representation, projections, exclusion (co-operation only 483 Example: Klaus Lieb, Bernd Heßlinger, Gitta Jacob: Psychiatry and Psychotherapy. München-Jena. 2. Edition, 2006. In the otherwise excellent book, similar to the psychotherapy guides, there are no philosophical or metaphysical explanations. 484 Characteristics of this human image can be read in column L in the `Summary table´. 323 with other sciences), etc. However, I think it is wrong to devalue secular and atheistic views from the outset. A type of atheism which is guided by humanism is often better than a misunderstood belief in God. In addition, most therapists have a large amount of empathy which might, at times, make up for weaknesses in their theories. Nonetheless, secular psychotherapy, when rigorously applied, can only be sub-optimal at best, since it overtaxes (rarely subchallenges) both the patient and the therapist. The existence of an absolute, positive spiritual power is rejected. Thus, a basic trust that would point the patient to a being beyond himself is ignored, and ultimate responsibility for his well-being is imposed on the patient himself. This will only succeed if he is strong enough to deal with the problems. But if the problems are greater than the powers available, the system will be in crisis. This applies both to relevant intrapersonal as well as interpersonal and thus also to therapeutic situations. Whilst atheistic conceptions despiritualize the image of man as well as the corresponding therapy and mechanize both, one may well find also misunderstood spirituality in those concepts. Whilst atheistic therapists will tend to avoid questions that expose to us our helplessness, for example in the face of incurable disease or death, some spiritual therapies or beliefs give those affected false hopes. (See also criticism of Materialistic positions in the part 'Metapsychotherapy'.) Materialistic or Idealistic Psychotherapy? Further differentiation of psychotherapies that are guided by anthropocentrism into materialistic or else idealistic therapies is somewhat arbitrary, according to some psychotherapeutic schools of thought. However, the relevance of such an undertaking lies in the fact that psychotherapies with an idealistic basis are able to consider matters that cannot be proved (ideas, mind, etc.). Whilst analytically oriented psychotherapies (psychoanalysis, depth psychology) and behavioral therapies start out from a materialistic basis, the psychotherapies that I have listed under the headline "spiritual-integrative" tend to rather idealistic and/ or relate, in part, to religious positions. Psychoanalysis and Depth Psychology I will briefly deal with individual topics that are necessary for the understanding of this work. [In the process I comment on some points in square brackets and explain other things in a separate section.] Psychoanalysis Psychoanalysis assumes that psychical conflicts, which are not solved, can make sick. The unresolved psychical conflict or the unprocessed trauma goes into the unconscious, changes itself and appears in a different form (ciphered, symbolized) - as a dream or a symptom for example. The symptom thus becomes the symbol of the unresolved/ unprocessed unconscious conflict/ trauma. In early psychoanalysis, it was recognized that the suppression 324 of important drives (esp. sex drive) can lead to psychical disturbances,485 and conversely a making conscious and repealing of this prohibition also removes its negative consequences. [According to my terminology, the latter corresponds to a relativization of a negative strange Absolute (‒sA). I believe, however, that the crucial 'therapeutic' mean of psychoanalysis is less to discover unconscious complexes and to make them aware but to attribute the worst to every human being - such as killing the father or to have sex with mother, and those desires to understand as human and normal and accept the patient in this way. For even if they are not these desires similar abysses are in each one of us (so the theory). In this, Sigmund Freud is fully in agreement with Jesus, even if Freud did not intend that.] According to Th. Auchter and L. V. Strauss: Freud is concerned primarily with the goal of saving mental energy and maintaining mental balance. According to Freud, the balance between the pleasure principle and the reality principle is central. The psychoanalysis "sensitizes humans to trace the meaning of their action and life by an `infinite analysis´ by a continuous questioning and reflection. To this extent, psychoanalysis is a form of the incessant search for truth, as Freud put it.”486 [“This never-ending quest for truth”, this never-finally-to-a-goal-coming, which corresponds to the Confucian and Buddhist motto: “The route is the goal", seems to me - and probably also to most people who take it seriously - too exhausting and frustrating.] S. Freud saw, following his three-instances-model (i.e., tripartite), these fundamental conflicts: a) Ego against the Id b) Super-Ego against the Id c) Ego against Super-Ego and Id.487 According to Mentzos, all psychical conflicts are variations of the basic conflict between autonomy and dependency.488 [I distinguish between an absolute basic conflict between +A and ‒A and relative conflicts, especially between +A and the sA, the sA among each other and conflicts within each sA or It.] Critics of Psychoanalysis Selection of Literature I will only mention the reviews, which I also acknowledge. • The 'New Viennese School' sees the person as a physical, spiritual and mental unity. It accuses Freud's psychoanalysis of neglecting the spiritual dimension of the person since 485 Georg Groddeck understood the symptoms above all as a symbolic expression of the life impulses (of the It, as he understood it) suppressed by morality. 486 From: Thomas Auchter and Laura Viviana Strauss: "Kleines Wörterbuch der Psychoanalyse" Göttingen (Vandenhoeck & Rupprecht) 1999. 487 Freud called the I = Ego and after latin the It = Id. 488 Mentzos p. 120 and pp. 131ff. 325 without this the person could not constitute a human whole. "The whole of the human soul is viewed atomistically within the psychoanalysis by being thought of as composed of individual parts, the various impulses, and these in turn from partial drives ... In this way, however, the soul, the human person, is somehow destroyed (its entirety). The psychoanalysis virtually depersonalizes human beings but not without personalizing … the individual parts (namely to make independent, self-sufficient, pseudo-personal entities).” ... Furthermore: “Human nature is therefore interpreted by psychoanalysis as being driven from the outset." Next, Freud would have betrayed the Ego to Id, so to speak because he made the Ego to a mere epiphenomenon of the Id. Freud would assert: 'The Ego is pulling itself out of the swamp of the Id by Super-Ego´s tuft of hair.´”489 • H. Wahl: Freud propagated a "reality-education". Freud "would not go beyond the bravely resigned adherence to the reality principle ...".490 • Ernst Bloch: The psychoanalysis is too backward looking. • "Good story but bad science" (Zimbardo). 491 • “Psychoanalysis is confession without absolution.” (G. K. Chesterton)492 • Otherwise see e.g., E. Wiesenhütter: "Freud and his Critics".493 Other Criticisms 494 See also the discussion about the secular PT and Criticism of Materialism. • The psychoanalysis knows no transcendence, so also no +Absolute. Freud: "Whoever asks after the sense of life is sick because the sense of life does not exist in an objective way." 495 • Love is presented as libido. God does not exist, he is an illusion. • The psychoanalysis basically describes only the second-rate processes. That, what I name first-rate, I cannot find. • The further developments of Freudian psychoanalysis also represent anthropocentric selfsolution concepts, which, in my opinion, overstrain people. People have to deal alone with their problems. Especially with regard to severe mental disorders, such as the psychoses, these therapeutic concepts seem to be too weak as they build on Ego-strength and less on Self-strength. S. Freud may have had therefore a reason to be skeptical about psychotherapy of psychoses. (To this more at another place). • Psychoanalysis characterizes the person based on pathology. The three main instances are ultimately instances of a strange or ill person. They are therefore defined accordingly. According to psychoanalysis, the Ego has the task of establishing the mental balance between the instances (to get the Id and Super-Ego in the "grip"). Freud: "An action of the Ego is then correct if the requirements of the Id, the Super-Ego and the reality are fulfilled at 489 Viktor Frankl: Der unbewusste Gott, quoted by Dieter Wyss , p. 276-278. H. Wahl p. 290-291. 491 Shortened especially according to Zimbardo, p. 413 ff. 492 www.quotes.net/quote/35717 493 See bibliography. 494 The other criticisms are also partly found in the literature. 495 S. Freud cit. from: Thomas Auchter and Laura Viviana Strauss: „Kleines Wörterbuch der Psychoanalyse“ Göttingen (Vandenhoeck & Rupprecht) 1999, p. 154. (Translated by the author). 490 326 the same time, in other words, if the action reconciles their demands with each other.”496 [What an effort and tightrope walk (!) if the Ego has to mediate between the Super-Ego, It and reality. It is more favorable when Ego/resp. I, Id and Super-Ego are subordinated to the Self of the person. This is only possible when they have no absolute meaning. Then the person does not get panicked if the Id crosses the line and cannot be made guilty by the Super-Ego, nor does the person demand the Ego to bring everything under control or balance. In this way Id, Super-Ego and Ego/ I are accents but not dominants.] • The enmity between father and son as described by Freud in the Oedipus complex is only one possibility of an unresolved problem between father and son, a kind of anti-complex. Another possibility is the symbiosis between father and son. The third possibility is the indifference between the two. Especially the latter two are now more common than the Oedipus complex. These possibilities apply to all the relationships and not just the ones between father and son. • Dilemmas of the theory: It is a contradiction when Freud wants to illuminate with his "God Logos" the unconscious, from which he says on the other hand, that the unconscious is not subjected to the laws of logic. • Before Freud, the drives were suppressed by morality, after Freud, they are suppressed by rationality. • S. Freud has also expressed different views on the phenomenon of freedom and marked it generally as unscientific. [Question: Why should P be treated with an ultimately pessimistic therapy?] Summary in Keywords Positive: Old gods at Freud´s time, such morality and parents, were rightly unmasked and dethroned by psychoanalysis and thus people were freed from them. [But for this the "God Logos" has been established.] Psychoanalysis propagates the unconditional acceptance of all the drawbacks of the patient; It is very differentiated with many new insights and, in spite of the claim to scientificity, goes beyond this. 497 It is against false taboos and does not know any subjection to the zeitgeist. Negative: Partly pseudoreligious, too pessimistic, too demanding, never ending as analysis, missing spirituality, missing +A, too much looking back. Psychology is explained negatively. Positive and healthy aspects get too little attention; Too one-sided consideration of sexuality and aggression (Freud), neglection of the subject. Language too materialistic, mechanistic, and so on - so people are partly denoted as objects (for example: psychical ‘apparatus’, 'objects') and things are personalized. 496 S. Freud: Abriss der Psychoanalyse. Fischer Verlag (Paperback), 1983, p. 8. (Translated by the author). (Remind: For Freud is I = Ego and Id = It) 497 The philosopher Slavoj Žižek complains in parts rightly in Geo 5/2006, that only the psychoanalysis compared to the other psychotherapies has a philosophical background. 327 For the comparison of anticathexis in psychoanalysis and in this work see Anticathexis (in `remedies of defense´) or in the unabridged German version. Later Psychoanalysts Here are some keywords:498 Freud's main focus is on the drive theory. Sandor Ferenczi, Michael Balint and Melanie Klein placed the early-child relationships to reference persons at the center of their theories = object-relations theories. According to Melanie Klein, the former reference persons ("objects") can either be loved or hated, which shows parallels to Freud's libido and destrudo [and a parallel to +sA and ‒sA.] Heinz Kohut developed a self-psychology. He studied how many objects a person needs to build and maintain the psychical functioning of his Self. Kohut assumed that "the goal of the self is to achieve cohesion of self-life". The Self needs the empirical knowledge of satisfying self-object experiences. A lack of sympathetic resonance of the parental self-objects can cause a disturbance of the Self. 499 Erich Fromm: Neurosis originates where human avoids his freedom. Franz G. Alexander: "... proceeded from the observation that neurotics are generally not only overly morally in some way but and on the other hand are just as hardly morally. He recognized that both the immorality and the neurotic pseudo-morality are two sides of one and the same coin and that they are in a functional dependency relationship. 500 [This corresponds to the pro- and contra- position of the Its of the asp. 12.] C. G. Jung emphasized the archetypes in his teaching. Criticism to it from W. Schmidt (?)501 `the archetypes are the new gods of C. G. Jung. Only the reference to them gives life its meaning. The last metaphysical hold of a human being lies within himself. Psychology becomes a worldview. The idea of the archetype is a mentally hypostatized product of abstraction.' Regarding to C. G. Jung´s statements: "Become who you are," "Recognize yourself".502 Criticism by Trüb: Jung looks for `the essential determination of man ultimately in the process of psychological self-reference´.503 (See also my criticism concerning `Individuation´.) Primary Therapy of A. Janov I particularly mention this therapy by Arthur Janov because I refer to some of his thoughts, although his theories have never been recognized by official psychotherapy and have become less and less important in the last 20 years, at least in Germany. In the early 1970s, his book "The Urschrei" appeared, to which I refer.504 498 Sources: Dieter Wyss `Die tiefenpsychologischen Schulen...' and Wikipedia, 2014. According to Mertens. 500 Wyss p. 473 501 I can not find the source again, but the quote corresponds to my opinion. 502 Wyss p. 399 503 Wyss S. 43, 302, 399. 504 Janov, Arthur: Der Urschrei. Ein neuer Weg der Psychotherapie. Frankfurt: S. Fischer, 1982/1993. (The Primal Scream. 1970) 499 328 There he describes his 'primal therapy', which, similar to the Psychoanalysis of S. Freud, assumes that neuroses arise by repressed memories of traumatic experiences from childhood. However, Janov did not only talk about early traumatization but also about periand prenatal traumas, here, in particular, a rejection of the fetus by the mother and / or the father. The primary needs of the unborn or infant of unconditional acceptance and love were not satisfied, and so a "primal pain" arose in it - the cause of later neurotic disorders. This primal pain must be made conscious and lived through once more ("cathartic experience") - usually linked with the so-called `primal scream´ to release the 'true self'. Later it would be entirely easy to live. Janov: `It is a herculean task to be what one is not. To be yourself is the simplest thing to do.´505 Discussion: - I also believe that you have the easiest life with your true or original Self, which you do not have to earn but you have it already. - Janov connects the 'true self', just like me, with being a child. But on the other hand, I think that this being a child in itself is problematic, if this is the primary therapeutic goal and this `child´ is not protected in a larger whole (for me `God '). Otherwise it is alone and vulnerable and the therapist is not always present and overall for this role too weak. - Janov tries to reduce the defense mechanisms or make them superfluous but generally, he sees them too negatively. I see their role as second-rate and try to strengthen them so that they are available in an emergency. - Janov transfers the causes of neuroses, the primal pain, into the prenatal or perinatal sphere not foremost into early childhood. This is somewhat similar to my theory, according to which, as described in the part `Metapsychiatry´, I see the primal pain as the pain of the loss of paradise. - Unconditional love and recognition are central to Janov, but without religious affiliation. For those affected too weak because no one can love completely unconditionally. - Relativization of authorities: Old gods, as they can be represented by morality, parents and so on are rightly dethroned. The concerned learns that nothing will happen to him and that he does not die if he has overthrown the morality, the parents or other things - on the contrary, he feels liberated and good. Do we not all have the longing to be allowed to be free and absolutely loved: without responsibilities, without necessary achievements, without fear? Are not the most beautiful moment in our lives these, in which we simply let go, like in an orgasm, nothing more to control, no defense mechanisms needed and we sometimes scream out like with primal scream? 505 Janov developed his theory after he had initiated a regression in a patient by making him scream for mama and papa. After the patient screamed for them, he collapsed with a "penetrating death cry" but afterward he felt like a new-born baby. Some Christians experience their spiritual rebirth similarly. They cry for God, who is stronger than mama or papa. 329 In my opinion, primal therapy has insights that should not simply be dismissed as unscientific - perhaps because it sheds light on the sphere that science alone cannot illuminate? We also try to create in our psychotherapies a similar atmosphere for our patients in which they can feel free, safe and understood like beloved children. Have not therapists repeatedly recommend we should love the "inner child in us", and called this "rebirth" like the "reincarnation therapy" following the Buddhist religion? Even the Christian religion speaks of being (spiritual) newborn when we dare to be God's children (not the child of our parents!). But how might establish psychotherapy, which understands itself as science and therefore favors above all measurements, examines and controls, can agree with such an uncontrollable method as the "primal-scream-therapy"? Dear reader, imagine how it would have been if the "primal-scream-therapy" would have entered our practices and clinics. Who would have accepted the whole moaning, talking and shouting of rebirth? We, psychotherapists, hardly dare to hug a patient or cry with him. Other opinions: Bert Hellinger about his own therapy with Janov: "It affected me. But on the other hand, you will have incredible freedom at such a moment." But see also at the very negative criticism by Hansjörg Hemminger.506 More Recent Literature W. Wöller and J. Kruse distinguish four paradigms of psychoanalysis: 507 1. The drive-psychological paradigm: aggression and sex drive are regarded as motivating forces. 2. The ego-psychological paradigm, which mainly concentrates on the defense mechanisms and other Ego functions. 3. The self-psychological paradigm: According to Kohut changes in therapy are not primarily the result of interpretations or insight but of empathy. 4. The object-relationship theory paradigm: This assumes that all mental structures are results of past object experiences: external object relations become internalized object relations. "These internalized object relations form a world of representations. In this context, the term `representation´ means that real inner images, that are created by interactions with important other persons (objects) no matter if real or imagined interactions. Those representations have an object aspect (object-representation) and a selfaspect (self-representation). … Intrapsychical and interpersonal aspects are closely intertwined."(p. 26) According to Kernberg's object-relations-theory, the representatives are organized into good and bad depending on how these satisfy needs. In the beginning, they are undifferentiated good or bad self-object units which later on only gradually differ from each other. (p. 17) 506 507 Hansjörg Hemminger: Flucht in die Innenwelt - Primärtherapie als Meditation der Kindheit. Ullstein 1980. Wöller, Wolfgang und Johannes Kruse: Tiefenpsychologisch fundierte Psychotherapie. Schattauer, Stuttgart, 2005. 330 As mentioned in `Metapsychiatry´ we owe to Winnicott the concept of the true and false Self. According to Kohut, a lifelong need exists for reflection through so-called empathic selfobjects. The authors emphasize the importance of the next reference person, such as a mother or a therapist and so on, who reacts to the infant (patient).508 [In short, we all need love. Where, however, should get the affected receive love if the important attachment figures have love deficits too or the society is loveless?] Wöller and Kruse recommend a variety of perspectives in therapy: the perspective of conflict-orientation, the strengthening of the Ego-functions, the perspective of a possible traumatization, the perspective of the transference relationship, the problem perspective and resource perspective, as well as a perspective that has solutions instead of problems in its center. (p. 29) [In the present work I try to present even more varied perspectives that can be integrated into a "meta-dimension", the + A but that is missing in the above-mentioned concepts.] Behavioral Therapies In this chapter, I limit myself to a few aspects of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). [As before, I comment positions, which deviating of me, in square brackets.] Keywords on Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT): 509 CBT is based on cognitivism. Cognitivism is a branch of psychology, which is primarily concerned with information processing and higher cognitive functions of man. Cognitivism has a materialistic basis. The cognitive therapy methods, including cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and rational emotive behavioral therapy (REBT), assume that the way we think determines how we feel and behave. The aim of the therapy is to communicate to the client, that thought-errors and irrational assumptions have negative consequences. Therefore, it is important to identify and correct negative thoughts. This shall lead to the development of more precise and more adapted thinking and behavior. Concerning the discussion with CBT here, I also refer to the Criticism of materialism and to 'Discussion about secular psychotherapies'. Since these criticisms essentially apply to the CBT, I will not repeat everything here again. The discussion between cognitive and non-cognitive standpoints can be followed in corresponding publications.510 I want to add additional criticism of the known cognitive therapy of depression by 508 Wöller, Wolfgang und Johannes Kruse ebd. Also in D.W. Winnicott: Reifungsprozesse und fördernde Umwelt, Fischer-V., Frankfurt a.M. 1985. 509 From: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kognitive_Verhaltenstherapie and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitivism_(psychology) 2014; http://www.lernpsychologie.net/lerntheorien/kognitivismus 2014. 510 See e.g. In Wikipedia under these keywords. 331 A. T. Beck.511 Due to the schemata learned during childhood - according to Beck - information-processings of depressive persons are flawed. This leads to the following 11 thinking distortions:512 1. ALL-OR-NOTHING THINKING: You see things in black-and-white categories. 2. OVERGENERALIZATION: You see a single negative event as a never-ending pattern of defeat. 3. MENTAL FILTER: You pick out a single negative detail and dwell on it exclusively. 4. DISQUALIFYING THE POSITIVE: You reject positive experiences by insisting they "don't count" for some reason or other. 5. JUMPING TO CONCLUSIONS: You make a negative interpretation though there are no definite facts that convincingly support conclusion. 6. MAGNIFICATION (CATASTROPHIZlNG) OR MINIMIZATION: You exaggerate the importance of things … or you inappropriately shrink things until they appear tiny. 7. EMOTIONAL REASONING: You assume that your negative emotions necessarily reflect the way things really are: “I feel it, therefore it must be true.” 8. SHOULD STATEMENTS: You try to motivate yourself with shoulds and shouldn'ts, as if you had to be whipped and punished before you could be expected to do anything. “Musts” and “oughts” are also offenders. 9. LABELING AND MISLABELING: This is an extreme form of overgeneralization. Instead of describing your error, you attach a negative label to yourself. 10. PERSONALIZATION: You see yourself as the cause of some negative external events which in fact you were not primarily responsible for. 11. SELF-WORTH: You make an arbitrary decision that in order to accept yourself as worthy, okay, or to simply, feel good about your- self, you have to perform in a certain way. Discussion Like Beck and others, I also assume that such 'thinking distortions' can cause diseases. They are similar to the sA/ It complexes in this script. There are, however, the following differences in the concepts: I regard these unfavorable schemes as only relatively unfavorable, even if they have an absolute character for the person concerned. Even if they are generally rather unfavorable they can also be relatively favorable since they can have an important function or a meaning for the person concerned. This view means that it should not be a primary therapeutic goal to identify 'negative thoughts' and to correct them to develop more accurate and adapted ideas. More in detail: (1) As said, these `false thoughts´ might be favorable and meaningful for the person concerned. (2) Even if they would be objectively unfavorable to the person, it may be the case that he is not capable of correcting these "deficiencies in thought" and then faces a therapeutic claim that overburdens him and thus possibly intensifies his symptoms. This is often the case when the affected (especially as a child) is confronted with overstraining ideologies against which he has no chance. For that reason, in a particular 511 512 From: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kognitive_Verhaltenstherapie 2014. http://mysite.du.edu/~chmorley/Beck.pdf (Citation abridged by author) 332 case, I would not only rate some relatively unfavorable schemes and mental deficits as positive, but even advise to exacerbate or exaggerate them - especially if they are taboo by the person or the environment (and also by his therapists). This type of procedure is also the basis of paradoxical interventions. They have the goal to break open fixed attitudes, even of us therapists, and to show alternatives. But as much as they go in the right direction, even they do not produce a real independent meta-level because these paradoxical interventions are ultimately used now with the aim to achieve the therapeutic goal. What in both cases is missing is a, of all therapy-targets independent, meta-position, a +A, which states that all therapy goals have a value but ultimately are only of relative importance. Should we not embrace and console someone who is not doing well and we like him and only after that consider what one could do but not have to do? Behavioral therapy does not embrace, it lacks love. The approach of the CBT resembles some "Christian" advices, e.g., "If you only live properly, believe or pray enough, then you will become healthy." In the sense of this work, one could also formulate, that the CBT and similar secular therapies try to expel a sA by a new sA. These new sA are here first of all Ego-strength, correct cognition, health, functionality, correct behavior, ratio, reality and objectivity. (See also: absolutizing of Health, Functioning etc. in `Metapsychiatry'.) When certain symptoms occur, such as phobias, very good results can be achieved with the aid of cognitive behavioral therapy. Some symptoms, however, will be difficult to eliminate through reason. Every psychiatrist knows how ineffective rational arguments are against the delusions of a psychotic. On the contrary, the more one appeals to reason and logic of the patient all the more the latter retreats into his insanity because he does not feel understood in his irrationality - he cannot feel understood! Likewise, quite reasonable and objectively correct corrections of the negative views of a severely depressed one will hardly succeed, instead even make him more depressed from a certain point onward.513 Summary • CBT is a much differentiated therapy with good success in phobias and other mild mental illnesses. • CBT is anthropocentric with all its advantages and disadvantages. The main disadvantage: man is left to rely on himself (self-redemption concept). • CBT appears like a too symptomatic therapy. • Learning and functioning are absolutized. Man, however, is more than this and can achieve more than only with knowledge and logic. Man is also irrational by nature. In this concept, his irrationality receives a too negative evaluation and must be countered or negated/repressed by CBT (unconsciously). "Rational arguments often prove to be ineffective despite the client's insight." (J. Teasdale) • CBT is too psychologistical, too operationalized. 513 One also knows this mechanism from everyday life when one is sad, but a well-intending fellow man wants to prove how beautiful the world is. 333 • The by Beck mentioned errors in reasoning (see above) are too one-sided (negatively) evaluated. • In Beck's concept, among other things, the opposite to depression (mania) as well as their common background are too little considered. Positive Thinking (Mental or Psychological Positivism)514 Criticism It is only reasonable if this method has only a relative meaning (in the sense of a healthy optimism), which also allows its opposite and is used in the right situations. (It may be just as meaningful to practice negative thinking, especially when one thinks that a negative have to be suppressed or combated.) Otherwise, I see the following disadvantages of the method of "positive thinking": too anthropocentric, too self-redemptive, too demanding, too unrealistic, too manipulative, too one-sided and narrowing (negative thoughts are undesired or forbidden). After a certain time, it becomes disadvantageous. The loss of reality and disappointments are preprogrammed and lead to self-accusation and depression according to the motto: "If you do not succeed, then you have to blame yourself ... the trainer [therapist] remains infallible" (O. Neuberger). Similarly, my criticism of "The Work" by Katie Byron515 and similar programs for self-optimization. The 2007 award-winning Norwegian film "The Art of Negative Thinking" shows impressively what overstretched positive thinking looks like. Rational-Emotive Behavioral Therapy (REBT) Created in 1955 by Albert Ellis. It sees itself as humanistic psychotherapy, as "comprehensive, integrative, active-directive, philosophically and empirically based psychotherapy". It has, according to its own data, an explicitly formulated philosophical background (stoicism, epicureanism, skepticism, existential philosophy, constructivism and linguistic philosophy). It builds on the so-called "abc model": A triggering external or internal event (a = activating event), such as the death of a family member, is evaluated by certain conscious or unconscious beliefs, assessment patterns, attitudes or habits (b = beliefs) which are activated in the triggering situation. This assessment of the events as a consequence (c = consequences) then evokes emotional reactions and behaviors (for example grief, worries, anxiety). This means that the evaluation of an event (b) determines the emotional responses and behaviors. According to Ellis, mental disorders are caused by "irrational" beliefs and evaluations. He calls convictions “irrational” if they are subjectively burdensome and if they hinder the realization of one's own life goals. "The aim of the procedure is to recognize the irrational ... evaluations and to change them. 514 515 To be distinguished from philosophical positivism. In opposite to "The Work," I would call my approach "The Relief". 334 This is supposed to help the patient to a more 'rational' life-style ... ".516 My review: • Overall like the criticism of cognitive behavioral therapy. (See above). • Although the REBT covers philosophical perspectives, it is too anthropocentric and has the disadvantages as I described in 'Discussion about secular psychotherapies'. Dialectical Behavioral Therapy (DBT)517 Dialectical behavior therapy is especially for the treatment of borderline personality disorders (BPD). The therapist should find a balance between understanding and change (dialectical strategy). Apparent contrasts in the patient's world are to be resolved and integrated. The manual includes therapeutic elements of cognitive behavioral therapy, social psychology, neurobiology and aspects of far-eastern meditation and spirituality. The skill training takes place regularly and consists of the five `modules': internal mindfulness, interpersonal effectiveness, emotion regulation, distress tolerance and self-acceptance. My review: • Overall very differentiated and partly also philosophically based therapy offering good successes in treating borderline disturbances. • The Buddhist elements of the therapy are too anthropocentric. • Similar disadvantages as CBT. (Otherwise also see criticism of 'Secular psychotherapies' and Buddhism.) Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT) Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy has been evaluated by methodologically demanding studies. They show that MBCT as a relapse prevention is more effective than the usual treatment and at least as effective as anti-depressant maintenance therapy. It may also be an effective method for chronic depression and insomnia. 518 • See criticism CBT, anthropocentrism and Buddhism. Metacognitive Therapy (MCT) MCT refers to the human capacity to be aware of and control one's own thoughts and internal mental processes. "Metacognitions are beliefs about cognitions, cognitive processes and processes of attention-management. They determine which strategies a person takes as a reaction to internal events and control and monitor their adequate use ... In the metacognitive theory, positive and negative metacognitions are distinguished. Positive metacognitions describe the usefulness of a particular strategy and are responsible for the selection of the same. Negative metacognitions, on the other hand, are beliefs about the uncontrollability of certain processes ... or their dangerousness ... These problematic strategies are summarized under the term `cognitive attention syndrome (CAS) '.The 516 Source of the citations: 1. . https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rational-Emotive_Verhaltenstherapie 2/ 2014. 2. Becker, Vera; 1989 s.Lit. 517 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialektisch-Behaviorale_Therapie by Marsha M. Linehan, 2/ 2014. 518 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs15202-012-0288-7 6/2012. 335 purpose of the MCT is to abolish the CAS and to change the associated metacognitive beliefs. Patients gain flexible control over their cognitive and attention processes ... ." 519 Discussion: Despite its claim, metacognition remains in a similarly closed system as the BT (behavioral therapies), a slightly larger box instead of the smaller one. Instead of eliminating irrational patterns of thought, the goal is to change unfavorable beliefs to gain control of the thinking processes. Otherwise criticism as with CBT. Behavior Therapies in the Future? Our computers may soon have more optimized counseling and behavioral programs than the best behavioral therapist. The computer is already superior to humans in playing chess. Like a chess computer, this `CBT-PC' will always know the best answers for millions of problems. The patients are then treated and reprogrammed like machines - there are programs to increase self-esteem, against depression, against stress etc. This means, after receiving a large number of data the computer will give a more scientific based and functionally better advice than the therapist. Not that such programs are bad but the best computer will have no answer to the crucial and existential questions: Who am I? What is happiness? Is there God? Is there a life after death? Does my wife love me? Does life have a meaning? This means that from a certain point onward, the most optimal but sterile, bloodless responses of a computer or an equally acting psychocrat are no longer useful. They miss the mark or have opposite effects. Humanistic Psychotherapies 520 The humanistic psychotherapies are often referred to as a 'third force' besides depth psychology and behavioral therapy. They are based on a holistic view of the human being who strives for meaning, self-realization and personal growth in his life. Among others the following methods can be named: • Logotherapy (V. Frankl) • Systemic psychotherapies • Conversational psychotherapy • Integrative psychotherapy and Gestalt therapy • Psychodrama. Frankl's Logotherapy Logotherapy "aims at activating the noetic layers of personality to enable the patient to find the meaning of his existence and thereby free himself from the neurotic life reactions." “Logotherapy is founded upon the belief that it is the striving to find a meaning in one's life that is the primary, most powerful motivating and driving force in humans.” 521 519 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metakognition 2/ 2014. Also here only keywords from: http://www.wikiwand.com/en/Humanistic_psychology / http://www.aghpt.de/, 2 /2014. 521 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logotherapy, 2/2018. 520 336 Systemic Psychotherapy I personally consider a systemic viewpoint in analysis and psychotherapy as essential. A 'weak point': System members are seen as too context-dependent. Then, they have no own Absolute after the concept of this theory. I dealt with this topic in the chapter `Personal system- and relationship disorders´ more closely. Integrative Psychotherapy and Gestalt Therapy It intends to integrate analytical, humanistic, behavioral and systemic approaches. It is differential, eclectic, integrative, inter-methodological and various schools incorporating. "Gestalt therapy is a form of psychotherapy which emphasizes personal responsibility, and focuses upon the individual's experience in the present moment, the therapist–client relationship, the environmental and social contexts of a person's life, and the self-regulating adjustments people make as a result of their overall situation. It was developed by Fritz Perls, Laura Perls and Paul Goodman." 522 “The core of the Gestalt Therapy process is enhanced awareness of sensation, perception, bodily feelings, emotion, and behavior, in the present moment. Relationship is emphasized, along with contact between the self, its environment, and the other.”523 Discussion: see 'Criticism of Humanism', Buddhism. Salutogenesis Antonovsky, the founder of salutogenesis, puts a so-called "coherence feeling" at the center of his answer to the question "How does health arise?". Antonovsky defined the `Sense of Coherence´ as: "a global orientation that expresses the extent to which one has a pervasive, enduring though dynamic feeling of confidence, that (1) the stimuli deriving from one's internal and external environments in the course of living are structured, predictable and explicable; (2) that the resources are available to one to meet the demands posed by these stimuli; and (3) these demands are challenges, worthy of investment and engagement."524 The sense of coherence has three components: Comprehensibility, manageability, meaningfulness. “According to Antonovsky, the third element is the most important. If a person believes there is no reason to persist and survive and confront challenges if they have no sense of meaning, then they will have no motivation to comprehend and manage events.”525 These characteristics of a salutogenetic orientation are to strengthen people with appropriate methods. 522 Deutschen Gesellschaft für Integrative Therapie, Gestalttherapie und Kreativitätsförderung, http://www.dgik.de/ 2/2014 and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gestalt_therapy 1/2021 523 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fritz_Perls 1/2021 524 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salutogenesis, 2/2018. 525 Ebd. 337 "For example, a headache becomes a hint which offers a chance to return to the flexible center (of the human).” If, however, the headache is suppressed by a drug, no signal (indicator/ indication) is given to cure. Figuratively, instead of fighting the fire, the fire detector was switched off."526 Discussion: + : No fixation on pathology, resource-oriented. ‒ : As described elsewhere, the creation of a basic trust has to find within the person himself. Otherwise as described in the secular psychotherapies. Resilience Research 527 Resilience research (resistance-ability) took its starting point in the investigation of trauma victims and their vulnerability. Thereby the following factors were identified that allow adults to process traumas: - They deal with stress effectively. - They have good problem-solving skills. - Having problems they ask for help. - They believe there are ways to deal with life problems. - Their relationships with friends and family members are tight. - They talk about the trauma and their feelings with friends and family. - They are spiritual/ religious. - They see themselves as survivors instead of as a "victim". - They help others. - They are trying to get something + from the trauma. - They are supported by friends and family. Discussion: No fixation on pathology, resource-oriented, spiritual-religious resources are taken into account. Body Psychotherapy and Embodiment Regarding the move away from pure cognitive behavioral therapy towards integrative and body psychotherapy, I would like to quote W. Tschacher and M. Storch: 528 “For years… it has been observed how the cognitively oriented therapy approaches are reforming with the inclusion of non-cognitive aspects… (Dialectical-behavioral therapy: Linehan, 1993, schema therapy: Young et al., 2005). There are also approaches to a 'general psychotherapy' that seeks to integrate all proven mechanisms of action ... (Grawe, 1998). In the “third-wave approach” of behavioral therapy (Hayes et al., 2004), attitudes and views are adopted that had been developed in the field of humanistic psychotherapy schools in a non-academic and research-free manner since the middle of the 20th century (Kriz, 2007). In addition, there are elements of the systemic approaches 526 Source: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salutogenese 2/2014. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resilienz_%28Psychologie%29 2/2014. 528 Tschacher, W. & Storch, M. (2010) Embodiment und Körperpsychotherapie. https://www.majastorch.de/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/1106_Embodiment-Koerpertherapie.pdf In A. Künzler, C. Böttcher, R. Hartmann & M.-H. Nussbaum (Ed.), Körperzentrierte Psychotherapie im Dialog. Heidelberg: Springer. 527 338 (von Schlippe & Schweitzer, 1996), which ... led to the contextual or constructivist perspective in cognitive behavioral therapy (Mahoney, 2006)" And elsewhere: "The first body psychotherapeutic schools emerged as a kind of spin-offs within psychoanalysis from the 1930s onwards by Wilhelm Reich (vegetotherapy) and later Fritz Perls (gestalt therapy), Jakob Moreno (psychodrama) and their numerous students and successors." In many publications on the theory of embodiment this information is seldom given. Instead, one speaks of a new wave of cognitive therapy. I can't help saying that this is probably neither the last nor a new “wave”. (See quote above). When Tschacher and Storch go on to say that embodiment is meant "That the psyche is always embedded in a body ..." and only against this background "a complete theory of psychology becomes possible" - then the question remains open, in which again the psyche and body are embedded, before one can speak of a (somewhat) complete psychology. I suspect that by then there will still be some paradigm shifts in psychology and I predict that with the next "wave" one will discover that psychology and psychotherapy also have to consider spiritual and religious issues. Table: Advantages and disadvantages of anthropocentric psychotherapies (Keywords) BT (Behavior Therapies) disadvantages Less causal, too superficial and short-term effective, too manipulative, too normative, too other-directed. (on symptom level) Some problems are only postponed. targeted, verifiable Healing more time consuming or overstraining. and predictable Danger: Like cortisone: straw fire. Symptom away but disease remains. advantages advantages more causal as BT advantages see above 529 notes covering method; suitable for mild cases and as a supplementary therapy for severe diseases. Analytical methods disadvantages notes Too pessimistic; it lacks spiritual dimension; the ego is overtaxed, selfsalvation; therapist difficult to question; more complicated, more elitist. suitable for Zimbardo: too unscientific, too speculative; vague concepts, central moderate cases. hypotheses not provable, thus irrefutable; too back-looking. The illness is explained from a negative point of view and positive, healthy aspects too little considered; to one-sided consideration of sexuality and aggression; the male model as norm. All secular, purely natural scientific psychotherapies disadvantages notes Only a second-rate human image, demanding ego-strength, danger of overburdening. ↓ sources of faith/ spirituality; Thoughts and feelings are seen too much as objects (reification). The objective, measurable, calculable, functional, feasible and the symptom elimination is emphasized; Too one-sidedly, mechanistic perspectives and words. As materialism sterile, cold. ↓ feelings, faith, love, inner world, humanity. Behavior, function more important than life. 529 Also see H. E. Richter: `Der Gotteskomplex´, p. 75ff. 339 Neuroscience "One thing I have learned in a long life: that all our science, measured against reality, is primitive and childlike." Albert Einstein 530 Critical remarks: Today, psychiatry tries to explain mental processes or diseases with brain functions. For example, I read something about the consequences of a mental trauma: "PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) can be developed by someone who was confronted with an extreme degree of anxiety, dying and pain ... The sensory perceptions ... can lead to sensory overload.531 The almond nuclei ... are then overburdened."532 Does this take us any further? Yes, a bit! But should a primary psychical process, how I assume it, not be primarily explained and cured in the psychological field? I fear that most mental processes and conditions in the future will only be explained neurobiologically, which, on the one hand, creates illusionary security but, on the other hand, ignores the main therapeutic options. I follow the criticism of Felix Hasler: “Explanation models from brain research penetrate former territories of the humanities and the cultural and social sciences far beyond the boundaries of natural sciences. The brain research of our days is very confident in proving the non-existence of free will, in discovering biological markers for criminal behavior or in finding neuro-molecular causes of anxiety, compulsive disorder and depression. Not today but in the foreseeable future, such big-caliber problems are to be solved. ... The fundamentally false impression is made that brain research is well aware of the biological processes underlying our experience, thinking and action. And therefore medicine should be able to intervene in the brain in an `evidence-based´ and goal-oriented way if something goes wrong. For example in the case of a mental disorder. A dramatic shift towards biology has long taken place in the classical `bio-psycho-social model of mental illnesses´. The most striking feature of this scientific-ideological orientation is the increasingly out-of-control practice of prescribing psycho-pharmaceuticals."533 Heinzpeter Hempelmann argues similarly: "Neurosciences allow - finally - precise statements about human thinking. They must, however, not forget or even withhold that their hopefully lasting - success is based on a decisive reduction of their thirst for knowledge. Obviously, they do not ask philosophically. ... This perspective is very limited. It looks at the human as a brain, more precisely: as a nervous system. And it examines this nervous system from the point of view, what can be chemically and electrophysiologically represented by different potentials. It does not ask about the essence of thought, the essence of man as a thinking being, the essence of mind, the sensations, the consciousness. It does not even claim to be able to answer these questions as science - I speak ideal-typically here! - for this is the task of philosophy ... This limited perspective leads - while paying the price of a 530 http://nextaz.com/info/Albert+Einstein The possibilities of sensory overload can also be explained well psychologically → Vulnerability-Stress-Theory. 532 From Zeit online http://www.zeit.de/2011/44/C-Traumatologe 10/2011. 533 Felix Hasler: Neuromythologie. Transcpript, Bielefeld. 3. Ed. 2013, p. 7-8. 531 340 reduction of the initial question - to very precise and quantitative results with claims to high scientific validity. Neuroscientists can give us very precise information about, which electrical potentials are shown in certain regions of the brain due to certain signal stimuli but they cannot tell us what the man´s essence/nature is".534 Since the access to a spiritual-psychical influence is much easier and probably ultimately even more effective and incidentally also cheaper, I think that corresponding psychotherapy should be prioritized. I believe that most of the causes of mental illnesses, which are found in the neurobiological field, are second-rate causes - which, in turn, are results of primary (in my opinion psychospiritual) causes. This opinion is also supported by the possibility of brain- and even gene changes due to stress and traumatization!535 Also, the recent recognition of epigenetics stating, that different genes can be activated or deactivated by certain circumstances,536 relativizes a one-sided emphasis on organicbiological influences.537 See corresponding literature to criticism of the `Human Brain Project' which aims to capture neural networks of the brain by computers and is supported by the EU with 1 billion €! (Similar in the USA).538 Spiritual / Religious Based Psychotherapy Spirituality in Psychotherapy? I quote M. Richard and H. Freund, who present this topic from today's point of view: 539 "Academic psychology … has always been understood as a secular science. In its rapid development in the twentieth century, it increasingly occupied interpretations and fields of action, which until then had been reserved for theology and ecclesiastical institutions. Up until the 1980s the clinical psychology primarily investigated the negative effects of religion and it was only later when it highlighted health-promoting aspects, too ... A few years later C. G. Jung (1940) argued that almost all psychical problems have a religious dimension and that religion should therefore be constructively integrated into psychotherapy. Other pioneers of psychotherapy such as Viktor Frankl and Carl Rogers also recognized the existential value of religion in the field of crisis management (Demling, 2004). Newer psychoanalytic authors discuss that it is significant for mental health to be able to believe something (Britton, 1998). The renaissance of religious/ spiritual concepts from the context 534 Heinzpeter Hempelmann http://www.iguw.de/textsammlung/view/article/von-aepfeln-und-birnen-geistern-undgehirnen-elektrischen-potentialen-und-potentialen-der-freiheit.html 535 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgenerational_trauma, 9/2018; https://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/aug/21/study-of-holocaust-survivors-finds-trauma-passed-on-to-childrensgenes , 8/2015. This means that what has been inherited by genes can be based primarily on psychological and mental damage. 536 In short, you could say that genes can be closed with a snap or opened. 537 Perhaps former psychiatrists were right when calling psychoses mental diseases and not brain diseases. 538 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Brain , 2016. 539 http://eh-tabor.de/fileadmin/eh-tabor/forschung/MIRP/Vorträge_Veröffentlichungen_MIRP/Artikel_Richard_Freund 3/2012. 341 of Buddhism and Far Eastern religions has recently been observed in behavioral therapy ... In summary, it can be seen that the image of the psychotherapist initially drawn as religiouscritical or indifferent does not coincide with the empirical findings in Germany ... It is time to overcome the previous shadow existence of this topic in the scientific-therapy-discussion and turn to it more and more ...540 Existing approaches such as the buddhist psychotherapy (Ennenbach, 2010), the transpersonal behavioral therapy (Piron, 2007) or the concept of the 'IGNIS Academy for Christian Psychology' (Halder, 2011) are leading a shadow-existence ...”.541 Although many psychotherapists protested against the existing directives in the 'Bonn Declaration' already in 2006, little has changed in Germany. However, there are more and more authors like M. Seitlinger, D. Heil, P. Schellenbaum, E. Frick, J. Kornfield, H. Jellouschek, J. Armbruster, M. Utsch, E. Frick and others in recent German literature who recommend the consideration of spirituality in psychotherapy.542 "Third Viennese School" of Psychotherapy I have already mentioned Viktor Frankl's Logotherapy. Frankl, Caruso and Daim form the socalled third Viennese school of psychotherapy. Of these, Wilfried Daim has a religiously based approach.543 Theoretically, he is very close to me because, like me, he places the Absolute, which he identifies as God, at the center of his considerations. However, there are some differences in our concepts but it is not the place to address them here. Daim sees himself as a psychoanalyst who, in a certain sense, belongs to S. Freud but also, in contrast to him, on crucial points. Dieter Wyss describes this contrast. He means, according to Daim and Caruso, the spirit is displaced by the drives, while according to Freud the drives are displaced by the spirit and thereby the neurosis develops. With this reversal of the original approach of psychoanalysis, however, according to Wyss, the problem of the relation between spirit and drive is not resolved. Wyss continues: Both is possible - drive can be displaced by spirit and spirit can be displaced by drive.544 To stay with this choice of words: I see the emergence of the "neurosis" above all in the suppression of the absolutely positive spirit by absolutized Relatives who act as "strange Absolutes" (sA), which can be of more spiritual or impulsive or otherwise nature. Ps. Wyss misinterprets Daim's religious perspective as a moral position. Transpersonal Psychology An overview is given by the following quotations: "The transpersonal psychology and the transpersonal psychotherapy, which is based on the first, expand the classical psychology and psychotherapy by philosophical, religious and spiritual aspects … Transpersonal 540 Emphasised by me. Institutions such as the Klinik Hohe Mark (Oberursel), de'ignis Fachklinik (Egenhausen), Magdalenen Klinik (Georgsmarienhütte), Klinik Sonnenhalde (Riehen/ Switzerland) or Klinik SGM Langenthal (Switzerland) have introduced christian content to their treatment programmes since a couple of years. 542 Seitlinger, Michael (Hg.): Was heilt uns? Zwischen Spiritualität und Therapie. See bibliography. 543 See: Daim, Wilfried: Tiefenpsychologie und Erlösung; Herold publishing company, Wien, 1951 544 Wyss, Dieter: Die tiefenpsychologischen Schulen ...“ p. 409. 541 342 psychology examines consciousness states 'beyond' (trans) of personal experience ... The main founders and theorists of transpersonal psychology were Stanislav Grof, Anthony Sutich, Frances Vaughan, Roger Walsh, Abraham Maslow, Ronald D. Laing, Charles Tart, Roberto Assagioli and Ken Wilber."545 "Issues considered in transpersonal psychology include spiritual self-development, self beyond the ego, peak experiences, mystical experiences, systemic trance, spiritual crises, spiritual evolution, religious conversion, altered states of consciousness, spiritual practices, and other unusually expanded experiences of living. The discipline attempts to describe and integrate spiritual experiences within modern psychological theory and to formulate new theory to encompass such experience."546 Discussion: Transpersonal psychology's essential criticism about university psychology: Western science does not recognize the transrational and transpersonal spheres as real, existential, spiritual levels of consciousness, and therefore must press all the spiritual experiences through the bottleneck of monistic materialism.547 The "transpersonal" theories expand the theories of university psychology around spiritualreligious aspects, which, however, mainly have Buddhist and Hindu backgrounds. See discussion about Buddhism in the part `Metapsychotherapy'. Pastoral Psychology The word 'pastoral' is difficult for a layman. It means (Catholic) pastoral care. "Pastoral psychology reflects religious and ecclesiastical practices from a psychological point of view in order to gain new perspectives and extended possibilities for action. It examines human and social sciences theory and practice from the theological perspective as concerns their anthropological premises. It promotes dialogue between theology and human or social sciences."548 "It works interdisciplinarily and multiperspectively. Insights from theology, psychology and sociology are interlinked and made fruitful for church practice."549 Pastoral psychology is meant to be theology and psychology. Discussion: It is certainly fruitful when theology and psychology work together. In reality, however, theology rather subordinates itself to the university psychology as regards psychological questions and does not discuss pathological phenomena, while on the other hand, religious questions are largely negated by the mainstream of today's psychology. Pastoral Psychiatry "Pastoral psychiatry is concerned with pastoral care in the context of psychiatry. Many things between 'spiritual healing' and 'psychiatry for theologians' have already been referred to by the term 'pastoral psychiatry'. In 1973 a professorship for the subject was established 545 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transpersonale_Psychologie and https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transpersonale_Psychotherapie ,´ 2/2014. 546 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transpersonal_psychology 2/2018. 547 Aus: http://www.visionaryart.oliver-sorin.com/2/2014. 548 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pastoralpsychologie3/2014. 549 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pastoralpsychologie3/2014. 343 at the Ruhr-University Bochum in Germany, which was occupied by the theologian Thomas Bonhoeffer until 1996."550 • I am not aware of any study about the backgrounds and therapy of mental illnesses having been published here. Pastoral Care "Pastoral action is not to be confused with psychotherapeutic action. However, psychotherapeutic methods are also used in pastoral care. In particular the pastoral psychology influenced by Carl Rogers and the Dutch pastoral care movement in Germany lays emphasis on a close exchange between pastoral care and psychology ... In the middle of the 1960s the pastoral movement came from the Netherlands to Germany and led to the development of pastoral psychology ... In the 1980s Eugen Drewermann ... developed his depth psychological interpretation of the bible, especially in the three-volume work `Psychoanalyse und Moraltheologie´. At the same time, Michael Dieterich developed biblical therapeutic pastoral care, which spread rapidly particularly in the pietistic and free church groups ... All fields of activity [pastoral care] have the task to accompany people in matters of life and faith. This happens in a personal conversation, depending on the situation, as well as through prayer, consoling and encouraging words from the bible, through blessings (e.g. laying on hands) but also through social support ... In biblical therapeutic pastoral care (BTPC), for example, biblical and psychological or psychotherapeutic approaches are complementary or permeate each other."551 Samuel Pfeifer and his Academy for Psychotherapy and Pastoral Care also work on pastoral care and psychotherapy/ psychiatry. Helmut Jaschke's "Christian oriented psychotherapy" and "Hagiotherapie" by Tomislav Ivancic have similar intentions. • Short remarks: - The concept of biblical therapeutic pastoral care seems to be too dogmatic to me in some points. - Samuel Pfeifer separates the modern psychiatry too strictly from biblical pastoral care in his book "Die Schwachen tragen". Soteriogenesis It assumes, like me, that man owns somatic, psychological, and spiritual spheres that are connected and thus offer different possibilities of therapeutic approaches. • Regarding the pathogenesis of mental disorders, I see great differences but only a few as concerns their healing. 550 551 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pastoralpsychiatrie3/2014 Extracts from https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seelsorge 3/2014. 344 Self-Help Groups with Spirituality [The citations are from www.aa.org and http://www.cleanandsobernotdead.com/Pages/promises.html ] Our patients also find spirituality, away from the official psychotherapeutic mainstream, in the following non-professional and very successful anonymous self-help groups such as: Anonymous Alcoholics (AA), Workaholics Anonymous (WA), Relatives and friends of alcoholics (AL-Anon), Children of alcoholics (Alateen), Drugs / Narcotics Anonymous (NA), Anonymous Messis (AM), Sexaholics Anonymous (SA), Borderline Anonymous (BA), CoDependents Anonymous (CoDA), Emotions Anonymous (EA), Anonymous eating disorders (sA and OA), Gamblers Anonymous (GA), family members (Gam-Anon), and Internet and Technology Addicts Anonymous (ITAA).552 The anonymous groups are not a religious organization and do not recommend a specific belief system. At the center, however, is the trust in a 'loving, higher power', the attempt to "trust our God's care as we understand it." They teach fundamental spiritual principles such as faith, trust, honesty, openness, willingness and humility. The following are the original twelve steps as published by Alcoholics Anonymous and adopted by the other anonymous groups: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. We admitted we were powerless over alcohol - that our lives had become unmanageable. Came to believe that a Power, greater than ourselves, could restore us to sanity. Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of God as we understood Him. Made a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves. Admitted to God, to ourselves, and to another human being the exact nature of our wrongs. Were entirely ready to have God remove all these defects of character. Humbly asked Him to remove our shortcomings. Made a list of all persons we had harmed, and became willing to make amends to them all. Made direct amends to such people wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them or others. 10. Continued to take personal inventory, and when we were wrong, promptly admitted it. 11. Sought through prayer and meditation to improve our conscious contact with God as we understood Him, praying only for knowledge of His will for us and the power to carry that out. 12. Having had a spiritual awakening as the result of these steps, we tried to carry this message to alcoholics, and to practice these principles in all our affairs. In parallel, there are `12 promises' for a new, better, more relaxed life (without addiction). It also says: “We realize that God is doing for us what we could not do for ourselves.” Discussion: - These "anonymouses" do not care for the ideological border between official psychotherapy and pastoral care but simply take what they need. 552 1. There were over 100,000 AA groups worldwide in 2008. https://www.anonyme-alkoholiker.de/ 2. Meanwhile, the AA program also adopted by groups without reference to the problem of addiction (EA groups). 345 - In contrast to academic psychotherapies, the last instance in these people's life is not man but "a higher, loving power/ God, as everyone understands him", so a serenity can grow that knows "that with us in the world and in the hereafter everything will go well when we turn to him." - The concepts of these self-help groups are very close to me and are very similar to what I mean by 'primary psychotherapy'. - The concept is particularly suitable for people who are psychically 'at the very bottom' and cannot get on with their own strength or with the assistance of others. Therefore, I also believe that it is well suited for people with (not acute) psychoses. Psychology, Psychotherapy and Psychiatry Today (I am referring here to the situation in Germany.) Psychology, psychotherapy and psychiatry should, in my view, be both scientifically and spiritually religiously based. It is a questionable science if it is to replace religion, when it transforms the lively into a thing only to measure and reproduce it. Religion is questionable when it believes in having to replace or even to fight good science, or when it does not serve man. Psychologists and psychiatrists are now almost exclusively regarded as scientists. The published literature must be brand new, knowledge of past years or even centuries seem to be obsolete. The knowledge of philosophers or even theologians (people who are very intensely concerned with our soul life) is hard to find. Hardly any wise man of past ages gets his or her say. The fact that for billions of people religion is of existential importance is largely ignored. The great human issues such as being and non-existence, life and death, good and evil, love and hatred, meaning and meaninglessness, guilt and innocence, trust and distrust, life-worthy or not, self-worth and unworthiness, power and powerlessness and so on are hardly taken into account - issues, which are experienced in all mental crises and particularly intensely in delusion. Technocrats threaten to drive out our free and therefore Holy Spirit from various positions. They come with a large device, measuring instruments, nuclear spin and computer tomographs like to a battle from one side: They measure, register, evaluate, operationalize, verify and amplify single- and double blindly - and so evidently they are particularly clairvoyant or particularly blind? All of them want to subdue the spirit and create a new, perfect and transparent human being: reproducible by cloning, streamlined, functional and usable everywhere. Ultimately, a blood-empty monster emerges but that the more you want to get hold of it the less spirit it will have. Giant computers are at the end of the development of such purely scientifically oriented psychotherapies, which record the patient's thousands of data and then present the most objectively and best solution, where perhaps a simple hug or a loving conversation would have been the better and simpler solution. In particular, behavioral therapists sometimes appear to me as technicians with very sophisticated, by all means, humane and loving programs. They then resemble a lover who has studied everything that science has 346 found out about love and precisely but for this reason does not know what love really is. We are thus in danger of forcing the lively into scientific theories and programs. These attempts have already failed elsewhere. For example with planned economies. And they will continue to fail - whenever one tries to adapt life, so also the human, to certain theories and not vice versa. The moment our souls transformed for psychologists and psychiatrists to subjects of scientific research they lost their innocence, their gloss, their wonder and their depths. We poke around in the self and hope to find a treasure, in doing so we destroy the whole thing, as we destroy a blossom if we believe that we would unriddle its miracle by putting it under a microscope. But some others take equally one-sided opposite positions in trying to fill the spirit with pure speculations (esotericism, in parts also the 'antipsychiatry'). But it, the free, holy spirit, will blow where it wants and not where they will try to compel it. It will remain free and divine not measurable, not to be grasped, not to be taken in - and yet loving and stronger experienceable than anything else, just like real life and love. New approaches? I quote B. Grom exemplarily. 553 “... according to English-language studies, it can be proved that convinced religiosity and positive religious coping can exert a buffering effect, particularly in the case of heavy stress, and can somewhat reduce depression, anxiety and life-dissatisfaction ... According to an Allensbach survey (2006), a remarkable 42 percent of the Germans say that they 'personally derive consolation and strength from their faith' ... more than a dozen relevant investigations ... prove that religious belief... maintain life satisfaction and reduce depression and anxiety ... “. 554 Discussion: There is obviously a current tendency of traditional psychotherapy to open up for spiritual and religious questions and to give them at least a "limited influence". On the other hand, spiritual and religious worldviews differ from each other partly considerably, so that one should assess them more differentiated in terms of their psychotherapeutic potency than it has been done so far. Moreover, the question remains to what extent traditional psychotherapies are prepared to scrutinize their own materialistic views with their possible "side effects". Fears and Resistances against Change On the Part of the Psychotherapists As the previous sections have shown, religiosity has been an integral part of psychotherapy in the original sense until modern times. It was only with the enlightenment and the Bernhard Grom: „Religiosität/Spiritualität - eine Ressource für Menschen mit psychischen Problemen?“ from: http://www.psychotherapeutenjournal.de/ptk/web.nsf/gfx/3153DC0EEE7B388941257A800048F478/$file/ptj_3_2012.pd f. 3/2012 . 554 Summing up: Klein & Lehr, 2011, literature reference by B. Grom. 553 347 successes of the natural sciences that the predominantly materialistic psychologies and psychotherapies emerged, which because of their predominantly materialistic basis, regarded spiritual and religious issues as irrelevant. As mentioned several times, this has led to a one-sidedness and weakening of psychotherapy. It is only in recent decades that a shift towards a paradigm that encompasses both secular and religious views seems to be emerging. This path will be difficult since both sides have entrenched themselves in their spheres about the last 100 years. On the one hand, official pastoral statements warn of psychiatric activity, on the other hand, the psychotherapists have great reservations about spiritual-religious influences and both sides are rightly careful because the knowledge of the other sphere is usually missing. In addition, there are still organizational and human reasons, both in the field of science and in the ecclesiastical sphere, which make a rethinking or even a renouncement of this or that advantage more difficult.555 The fear of becoming unscientific has also meant that in psychology and psychiatry, anything that is unprovable and unimaginable is usually masked out. Thus U. Sachse states for example in his otherwise excellent book "Traumazentrierte Psychotherapie" that on the one hand our inner world of values is important when dealing with psychical trauma:556 "If we have a philosophical, spiritual and/ or religious system in which injustice, fate, bad luck, arbitrariness occur ... then it is much easier for us to integrate a trauma … ." (p. 55) But, on the other hand, this matter hardly plays a role in his book when discussing therapy strategies. After all, in a psychotherapist journal, one reads the cautious words: "Should psychotherapists make their patients' religious beliefs the starting point for interventions? Can a psychotherapist incorporate his/ her own religiosity into therapy? ... We hope our daring (!) to take up this topic will be rewarded."557 Commentary: 1. Established psychotherapy is based on philosophical foundations, which ultimately can only be believed like religions. 2. It is characteristic that "daring" is necessary to ask basic questions to established psychotherapy today. 3. Just as theologians are trained in psychology, psychologists and psychiatrists should also be made aware of the most important religions and spiritual currents during their training. On the Part of the Theologians Keywords: - Pastors/ theologians usually have too little knowledge of psychology and psychiatry. - Then there is a justified fear of acting incompetently and being sued. - Some pastors/ theologians are institutionally and theoretically too firmly established to dare to innovate. - Some pastors/ theologians have difficulties in understanding the role of God in relation to diseases. Some, rather members of free churches, overestimate God's direct intervention, 555 One will probably (still?) have to renounce a university career if one abandons this smal-mindedness See the bibliography (p. 55). 557 Psychotherapeutenjournal 3/2012, p. 191-298. I added the ! 556 348 others, the majority, may still believe in God's helping with diseases in some way but do not act like it. - Church has long presented illnesses as a direct result of the patient's sins.558 Although theology has a more differentiated point of view on that matter nowadays, many people still regard the Gospel primarily as a moral doctrine and therefore refrain from such pastoral teachings.559 Personally My personal experience: I like to hear the good news that I am absolutely lovable, unique and godlike when I am down. But if I did a great job, I don´t like the Gospel, since, without it, I feel more valuable and better than any bum, who evidently only loiters about all day. Then I want to be more lovable than the bum and also feel better. But man's magical hours are those when he gives up his resistance to +A/ God, who gives the bum the same worth like me. These are the situations where we are in tears in real life or in the cinema. I believe that every person has religious or spiritual basic needs. We all have the longing for absoluteness, redemption, eternity and immortality. But we satisfy them in different ways that is human nature. I understand when a football team is assured immortality at a world championship or millions of people find joy and fellowship with those games. But how quickly this "immortality" disappears and yesterday's heroes are forgotten. I am only able to remember a few international footballers from about 20 years ago, although I admired them then. We should preserve ourselves this joy of human success but why should not we extend our longings and anchor them more sustainable and more deeply? We encounter resistance here in us, whose deeper cause will be probably that we get an existential fear when we cannot hold the reins and are to hand them over to someone else, even if this someone is God. (See `Resistance´). Also: The good news often seems ambiguous. Its positive part is that we are always entitled to freedom, dignity and well-being, regardless of whether having done something right or wrong. Its negative part is: no matter how much we do right, our right to freedom, dignity and well-being is not thereby increased. But by trying to increase our Self by means of achievements, we establish an invisible strange Absolute, which we are also fixed to in the event of our failure and which makes us than small. Thus false pride and destructive inferiority complexes appear as two sides of one thing. “For the reward of sin is death“ (Rom 6:23). On the other hand Jesus: The blind's disease was not because of his or because of his father's or mother's sin.“ (Jn 9: 1-41) both quotes from http://www.o-bible.com/bbe.html 559 Warum heute kaum noch Seelsorge? See also H. Thielicke, in Läpple among others p. lit. 126 following. 558 349 PRIMARY PSYCHOTHERAPY "Love grants in one moment what effort hardly achieved in a long time." (Goethe in `Torquato Tasso´) Love is stronger than death! (~ Solomon 8,6)560 Introduction Concerning the Name This psychotherapy, which I present here, is ultimately Christian-oriented 561 but I intentionally did not call it 'Christian psychotherapy'. Why? 1. I believe that the desirable therapeutic optimum, which I define as +A, is best to be called God or Holy Spirit. However, this good spirit of love can be found in other religions and worldviews, too, albeit weaker. As the bible already says the Holy Spirit blows wherever it pleases - not only in the Christian religion and not only in churches or mosques. 2. Many people identify the Christian message with church institutions or have questionable interpretations (as I sketched them in "Christian” one-sidednesses...´). Unfortunately, the concept of "Christian" will then create false ideas. 3. The term "Christian-oriented psychotherapy" could also be misunderstood as if one were to neglect or negate all scientific knowledge. I use similarly the term 'metapsychotherapy' because 'primary psychotherapy' has its main focal point in the metapsychotherapeutic field. Other synonyms for `primary psychotherapy 'could be: metatherapy, redemption oriented psychotherapy, psychotherapy of love, Christian-based psychotherapy and alternative psychotherapy. Content and Goals `Primary psychotherapy´ is supposed to be a therapy without demanding preconditions because it should be usable and implementable by even the simplest and most sick persons. It is undogmatic and free from ideology. The main thing would be that the most important things are to be given by God. Such therapy requires no analysis, no behavioral training, no special knowledge. It first establishes the most important thing: an unassailable, positive Self - the absolute and existential basis of the person, on which then further therapeutic procedures can take place as required. "Primary Psychotherapy" integrates all positive psychotherapies. Belief in God and his love, however, does not guarantee a carefree and healthy life as the love of parents for their child this guarantees. However, the likelihood that the believer, as well as the beloved child, leads a fuller and healthier life seems much greater than that of a life without love. Because the best, most sustainable and yet free therapy (by the way, also power means) is love. This is an old experience that is always rediscovered and formulated. Also: R. Niebuhr: „God, give us grace to accept with serenity the things that cannot be changed, Courage to change the things which should be changed, and the Wisdom to distinguish the one from the other.” Similar, but more exhausting, the modern motto: „Love it, Change it or Leave it“. 561 Eugen Biser rightly speaks of a therapeutic religion. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugen_Biser. 560 350 Psychoanalysts also dealt with this issue albeit using other terms. So they investigated whether and how a child tolerates the withdrawal of a love object which corresponds to a +sA. The dearest mother will have to withdraw the infant of her breast (being referred to by Melanie Klein as the most important object of love) from time to time. There is no disturbance, despite the withdrawal of the mother's breast or similar frustrations, if the child feels the mother's attitude of unconditional love, i.e. that this love works as an Absolute and relativizes the above-mentioned frustrations. This also applies to the +A-effects on all other love or hate objects. The child (or any other person) can cushion the frustrations not only by subordinating them to this love but also by supposing that seen in a broader perspective - it will benefit from these failures, though they are connected with negative feelings at first. Basically, the person starts early not to understand pleasure or displeasure in an absolute meaning and will be much more prepared for later life. Similar Kohut: "There is a lifelong need to be mirrored by so-called empatic self-objects. The failure of this empathic reflection process is due to numerous pathological phenomena."562 In short, we all need love. But where from should the person (P) get love when the environment is unloving and the person doesn't love himself? From God? But even with God not all problems are gone - but they are at least relativized. After all, if the absolute felt problem is solved by choosing +A/God (→`Absolute and relative will'), then all the others are only of relative importance and then they can be solved much more easily or if not solved, better tolerated. Then all the others are only of relative importance and then they can be solved much more easily or if not solved, better tolerated. Primary psychotherapy does not begin with "You should" or even "You must" but with firm promises: "You are loved and unique," "You may be, whatever you are!" And then you can try to set these or other goals or solve problems. Through the assumption of the +A, every strange Absolute becomes a Relative, the strange Self becomes real Self and the unredeemed becomes principally (no total) redeemed - for "God's reconciliation with the world also allows man's reconciliation with himself, so that, as a `Christian, he has no longer to be a man of eternal conflict' (Bonhoeffer), of indissoluble ethical turmoil."563 The religious mediated redemption can be understood, according to Tillich, "as an overcoming of the existential rule of the negative (fear, guilt, meaninglessness), as a 'salvation of the person's center' to its existential being." 564 Alike Hans Küng writes: "He who has not known religion will never know the great spiritual resources that can be decisive for a patient's wellbeing."565 When even Freud stated in a letter to a priest: "… you are in the fortunate position of being able to lead them to God and bringing about what in this one respect was the happy state of earlier times when religious faith stifled the neuroses. For us this way of disposing of the matter does not exist. Thus our patients have to find in humanity what we are unable to promise them from above and are unable to supply them with ourselves. Things are therefore much more difficult for us, and in the resolution of the transference 562 Quoted (and freely translated) from Wolfgang Wöller and Johannes Kruse: Tiefenpsychologisch fundierte Psychotherapie. Schattauer, Stuttgart, 2005, p. 21 following. 563 H. Wahl, p. 252 564 H. Wahl, p. 301 565 Pfeifer, Samuel: Die Schwachen tragen; Brunnen, 2005. There also Hans Küng „Verdrängung der Religion in der Psychiatrie“. 351 some of our successes come to grief.”566 - then the obvious question comes to mind: Why not offer this possibility? It is rather stressful if you have to serve several or even many gods - as in some religions. This also applies to the many ideologies or nameless "gods" we carry within ourselves. It is freedom, having a God who does not demand for anything. If we free ourselves from the wrong musts, the basis is removed from many mental illnesses. You do not always have to solve the earthly problems necessarily and certainly not always in an optimal way. The person has now no longer to revolve around himself alone existentially - he rests in God. I believe that people who are mentally very ill, like psychotics, therefore have the greatest chance of getting well with God. Where from they should have got the fulfillment of the basic need of unconditional love, security and so on from, while having experienced their environment as existentially unreliable or destructive and thus having lost faith in humanity and in themselves? It is primarily a matter of strengthening the personality core, which gives us the image of God (imago Dei) beyond of good and evil (in the usual meaning of the word), beyond of right and wrong, beyond of other people's opinions, one's own deeds and health or illness. Primary psychotherapy does not fight but leaves free choice. It primarily supports living. It can allow and integrate the relative negative and the relative positive, but tries to influence the Relative. It allows to override and stand above all the earthly things. What are the conclusions? If we take the Absolute into account, we will recognize: - Health and disease are not everything, so we can remain calm and not have an existential anxiety if we get sick. -The Absolute (personal: the Self) has priority and is already there and does not have to be acquired or elaborated - that means also that the strongest solution is gratuitous and easy. Relative problems can be solved only relatively well, thus not completely.This would also be a more realistic view and unnecessary disappointments would be avoided. - Sometimes suffering and disease are unavoidable companions of positive developments which should encourage us not to give up. Instead, we tend to look at ourselves as a failure and at disease as an enemy. - From an absolute standpoint "healthy" and "normal" people can be more sick, abnormal, and more insane than those which are labeled so from a medical standpoint.567 - In addition to scientific knowledge, psychotherapy should not only convey a good basis of belief and not only “treat” the psyche but everything psychical Relevant to the person concerned.568 566 The letters of Sigmund Freud and Oskar Pfister https://archive.org/details/psychoanalysisfa00freu This is not about being against unavoidable technical terms, but against its abuse as a label. 568 This also corresponds to my definition of psyche in a broader sense (→ New Definition of the Psyche). 567 352 Differences to Other Psychotherapies I think, a therapy concept developed from what has been said so far, will set different accents than conventional ones. Most of concepts will be similar as regards questions that lie in the relative range. A great difference is, however, the consideration of an absolute area of the person to which all other areas are subordinated. Decisive therapeutic consequences are the results of it. The main point is not the person's periphery, such as his behavior or character, his guilt or innocence, his successes or failures and so on but his center: his Self, his Absolute. Just like - from a negative point of view - a person is most likely to be spiritually destroyed when one destroys his center, so, from a positive point of view, he is most likely to be healed if one heals this center. Once the person's Self is healed (and thus also the aspects of the Self such as the self-esteem, self-determination, identity), the most resolves itself. The point is, however, that this "central healing" is not an elaborate process but ultimately a simple act of faith (better: "act of will"), which gives back the Self its original role, namely that of life and existence without any preconditions. Why coming to terms with the past so painstakingly if I have the right to live freely and without any burden anyway? Why so much effort to become a better human, more mature, wiser, cleverer, calmer, more analyzed, more knowledgeable, more respected, more loved, more successful and so on if I am already good enough for God, and my blessedness does not depend on these attributes? There must be no +sA to be reached, no –sA to be repelled and no lack to be "filled", necessarily - what a relief! Of course, such therapy is not against analyzes, improvements, becoming more mature, revisions, successes etc. but against setting these attributes absolute and against making the person's center independent from having to achieve them. As liberating as it is, on the one hand, not to have to be defined by the above mentioned attributes, it can be difficult to renounce the 'advantages' of the strange Selves because they also give us 'hyper-security', 'hyper-stability', 'hyper-self-confidence' and 'hyper-happiness', even if only temporarily and only for a price, which can also be a disease. I see the following main differences to the usual psychotherapies: 1. In the first place stands with these the 'Ego-strength' and second place the 'Self-strength'. In 'primary psychotherapy' it is the other way round: first comes the 'Self-strength' (religious: the strength of God) and secondly the 'ego-strength' / the human power. 2. Another important difference to many other psychotherapies is the fact that health and disease are of relative importance and that their absolutization leads to undesirable disadvantages and is even disease promoting in the long run. While psychotherapies often have the problem of setting certain therapeutic goals absolute and thereby simultaneously excluding their opposites, primary psychotherapy also integrates opposing therapeutic goals. It integrates and promotes both the Absolute as well as the Relative, both unity and diversity, both the person's protection and his sensitivity, the security and at the same time the openness. It simultaneously promotes life and functioning, the person and the things, the subjects and the objects. It lets man grow wings and roots at 353 the same time. Moreover, it strengthens his ego but also the you and the environment. It does not unilaterally promote a therapeutic goal at the expense of opposing or other goals. It does not promote the first-rate reality at the expense of second-rate realities - or in other words, it does not promote heaven in us at the expense of the world. Some readers have concluded from my explanations that it is absolutely necessary to recognize and remove one's own mis-absolutizations. Whereas in the past illness or parents or one's own guilt or something else was the thing to be eliminated, now mis-absolutizations or the strange Selves are the ones. This is a misunderstanding. I do not mean that the mis-absolutizations are the evil that has to be eradicated. They are only Relatives, even if they are absolutely felt and lived. They are rather unfavorable, but, as I said, not the negative. Yes, as described, they can function as emergency, substitute solutions if the person concerned does not dare to live out of a true Self. They can be the "minor happiness," as B. Hellinger once called it, albeit in a different context. The 'It' becomes a small 'it' all by itself by God - it does not have to be combated and liquidated. As a small 'it' it gets back into the position it belongs to. 3. Psychotherapy should be able to use all psychically relevant aspects (→ Summary table). I.e. The pPT may (!) Include physical closeness (→ Body Psychotherapy) or - where appropriate spiritual or religious practices (see examples below). Just as love does not exclude anything that helps, neither does primary psychotherapy exclude any kind of help. But: 4. Every patient should receive a very individual therapy - regardless of all psychotherapy guidelines. Examples • I would like to mention the treatment of therapist Sergeant Choi with mentally ill soldiers in South Korea. In short: she embraces the soldiers, caresses their faces, washes their feet, and so on. She also says: "I share your pain, take care of yourself, I will not forget you, I will visit you from time to time. If you need me, call me, keep doing good work, etc." • Therapeutic Touch (TT)569 • Similar: Professional "cuddle therapies", which fortunately are increasingly being offered. • Meditations (see German long version, if applicable), blessing, praying for the patient (with or without him).570 • Art therapy, sport and everything else that makes sense - this also includes what is normally / on average nonsensical, because that which makes sense is also a relative category. Case study showing the difference between usual and "primary PT": A 60-year-old patient reports that she has suffered from the death of her little brother all her life. She had to look after her little brother as a ten-year-old girl because her mother had little time. At that time, she and her girlfriend were playing with the little brother "doll". 569 More in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therapeutic_touch, 2019. This also includes the problem of so-called exorcism, which I do not completely reject. This can not be discussed further in this work. 570 354 They bathed him in a cold bath, and her brother got a lung inflammation due to which he died. She knew not only from previous psychotherapies that her brother's death was not to blame on her because it was her mother's responsibility and not hers. On the other hand she was also aware that she made a mistake. That is why she is still tormented by feelings of guilt. I told her that it was not important before God whether someone was guilty of 100% or only 1% and that it was also second-rate, whether it was an actual or a supposed guilt. (Because who is able to judge this?) Only God knows in the end. The size of the guilt being a fact at all or not is not decisive for him but that the person only thinks `I´m sorry´. And thereby all guilt is lifted/ eradicated for him. His grace is always greater than our guilt. His grace is the real greatness, and our guilt is "small and low" in comparison (G. von le Fort). Besides, I believe her brother is now in heaven and there he is doing well. And when he sees his sister from there with her feelings of guilt, I am sure he would advise her to go on living freely and untroubled. Accordances with other Psychotherapies Behavioral therapies Systemic therapies `Primary Psychotherapy´ Humanistic therapies Analytical and Depth therapies In primary psychotherapy, as well as in the message of Jesus, all psychotherapeutic schools can be found (but relativized !). E.g. Behavioral therapy: many things are similar to the commandments in the Bible which desire correct behavior. Systemic therapies: See the corresponding notes in the Bible. Like, for example, Jesus' statements about dealing with the closest relatives, with the enemies and friends, the equality of all men before God, the support of the weak and sick and so on. Analytical Therapies: The psychoanalyst creates a framework of emotional security in the transmission situation, in which the patient can solve his problems fearlessly. This framework is similar to the one we get, even more strongly, by the +A.571 The most important humanistic psychotherapies can be found in the table `Psychotherapeutic Schools'. One could also mention: body therapies, meditations, blessings and similar 'methods' as Jesus has practiced. It's about a '+ A-based' variety of methods that do justice to the diversity of individuals - just as a mother, at best, does not educate her child by a particular method. General: The importance of empathy is generally recognized by all psychotherapies. A good therapist does not necessarily have to believe in God. God forbid! The Spirit of God blows where he wants and is not bound to a particular denomination. It would rather be that a good therapist should have a basic love for the patient and also for himself. I think many therapists have such love. In my opinion, such an attitude is crucial and will be transferred to the patient, even if the therapist is pursuing strategies that do not directly imply such an attitude. On the other hand, it is astonishing, though typical, that the term `love ' seldom 571 Only the usual schools of psychotherapy are shown in this graphic. 355 appears in the current psychotherapeutic literature.572 With most schools of psychotherapy nowadays there is also agreement that not only the person is treated in isolation, but also their entire environment - i.e. everything that is psychically relevant for the person at all. For example, you can not even once find the keyword `love´ in the „Wörterbuch der Psychotherapie“ by Gerhard Stumm! 572 356 Therapeutic Goals Hint: A superior, higher-valuated Relative is only comparatively higher!573 Absolute are +A / God/ (love) and people with their `Absolute attitude'. The value hierarchies listed in the table correspond to primary and second-rate therapy targets. relatively superior human orientations by God love to be loved by God ghost, soul Absolute: +A / God and the personal absolute attitude- subject salvation salvation self-strength child of God (child-I) safety reconciliation; mercy heaven simply being, being yourself substance inner things inner satisfaction elimination of causes causal treatment (therapy) trust, faith Maria heavenly receiving be justified before God earthly life sinner who regrets light freedom better a tent on solid ground statements about Jesus New Testament relatively subordinate commandments, church, achievements, ideals, human attributes, animals, things orientations by humans achievements, mind self-love matter, world, body (better an eye out ... What good will it be for someone to gain the whole world, yet ...) object, thing health, well-being solutions I-strength being grown-up (adult-I) autonomy right, victim earthly things, "reality adjustment" maturation, individuation shape external things, external satisfaction symptom relief, symptomatic therapy reason, ratio, achievements Martha earthly giving or taking Self-correction > correction of others, …, first take the plank out of your own eye.. to function complacent righteous darkness obedience, responsibility than a castle built on sand bible passages with same meaning Jn 4:12 1 Jn 4:19 Mt 5:29 Mt 18:8 Mt 5:24 Mk 12:33 Mt 6:33 Mt 23:26 Mt 6:26 Lk 12:7 Lk 10:42 Acts 20:35 Mt 7:5 Jn 3:19 1 Tm 1:4 prophets, Paul Old Testament 573 Compare: It is more important to follow the traffic rules than to transgress them. Sometimes, however, the opposite is more appropriate. 357 The Top Therapeutic Goal In my opinion, a person has already reached the highest goal of therapy or life if he has a positive basic attitude to the positive Absolute (or whatever he believes it to be). This could also be called "primary virtue" or "positive primary will". → Absolute and relative will or positive Absolute attitude. I have already mentioned it several times. Very simply said: If he is one with principle goodwill, he has already arrived at the most important thing (for me), which I call +A /God /his Self. He does not have to go anywhere else, he has already reached the goal. He does not have to become another person, he does not have to do anything, etc. - he can be however he is. I consider all other goals to be relatively significant (by no means insignificant!). They are normally relatively good ("secondary virtues"). But because of their relativity, the relative good can sometimes be relatively bad. It can be useful to advise the patient in some individual cases (!) that he should keep his dependency or even reinforce it, rather regress than making progress, rather evil than good, rather aggressive than peaceful, etc. for if he has to be peaceful, for example, he will, according to the "law of emergence of the contrary", produce in himself or other people aggressiveness, which, I believe, is even stronger than the normal, "relative" aggression. Practical Implementation • 'Primary psychotherapy' includes everything that is relevant for the patient's psyche - primarily everything that gives him unconditional love, dignity and freedom. But this partly leads also to other therapeutic priorities. First: '+ A-based' variety of methods and the patient's disburdening and supporting by appropriate attitudes such as the unconditional pledges from God/ love. (To meditations, see unabridged German version.) The treatment method should correspond to the respective patient, which means that one does not give priority to one or another method independently of the respective patient. • Further steps: a) Examples of 'primary-based behavioral therapy'. For example, depression: exercises directly against depression (against depressive thoughts, feelings, behaviors) - as they are described in detail in the literature. (That's why I'm not going to elaborate on that here.) However, I consider 'paradoxical' exercises and meditations even more important, which can be described as 'pro-depression' (better: pro-sadness). For example: "Do not only practice to be strong and more groovy but practice even more to allow yourself to be weak and practice to cry more often!" For example stutterer: Do not only practice to speak correctly but even more to stutter (motto: 'I am allowed to.') For example, psychosis: Do not just practice to be less crazy but play sometimes deliberately the madman, etc. b) A "primary-based psychoanalysis" focuses on the recognition of strange Absolutes (sA) - which can be less favorable but sometimes more favorable - but not on their general elimination because they are already relativized when we the positive Absolute brought into play. In addition, the sA should also be available as emergency solutions. (See also the example in 'Psychiatry' section `Obsessive-compulsive disorders'.) 358 On the Role of Therapists and Patients Here only keywords in reference to meditation 'orientation and freedom'.574 Therapist and patient should try - to be authentic but they may also play a role. - to accept and love each other but they may also hate themselves and the others. - not to demand anything of themselves or the others (not a must) but they may also demand. - to understand the other but they may also misunderstand him. - to recognize and respect their limits and of other people, but they can also exceed them. - to be open but they may also close down. - to solve the problems but they may leave them unresolved or even enlarge them. - to have success in therapy but they may also fail. - to tell the truth but they may also lie. - to be strong, clever and wise but they may also be weak, stupid and immature. - to be grown up but they may also be a child, even childlike. - involve God or spirituality but they may also exclude them etc. Note: the first is usually the most favorable but rarely the unfavorable, too. But even if it is the most favorable, it becomes more unfavorable when it becomes a must. Causal Therapies "Everything is allowed but not everything is beneficial" (1Cor 6:12) Hypotheses: Optimal are causal therapies that integrate symptomatic therapies. The causal therapy is mostly better than the symptomatic. For general solutions see → Solutions. The same applies to causal therapies and to first-rate solutions. The causal therapies have the +A / love as foundation. • They have a +absolute core that redeems. It is a gift of God that man can accept (can but not must!) and has no conditions. • Relative to this are causal therapies that depend in the effort of man. They will, I believe, most likely succeed if they have the base of the positive Absolute. Is the actual solution easy or difficult to achieve? If C. G. Jung says, "Every real solution is only reached by intense suffering",575 then that is only true for solutions based on strange Absolutes (sA) because the actual 'absolute solution' (redemption) is already done when the person wants it. (See `The absolute attitude'). Although 574 575 See unabridged German version chapter 'Meditations' if applicable. Carl Jung, Letters Vol. I, Pages 233-235. 359 the absolute solution is simple, it is very difficult for the Ego to forego the advantages of the strange Absolutes and relativize something that has absolute significance for us. (S. chapter Resistance). We can forego the advantages (mostly with withdrawal symptoms)576 - but then best and easiest when we give God the absolute solution. Then the Self becomes absolute and everything else only a relative meaning. Symptomatic Therapy and Emergency Solutions Emergency solutions are usually second rate solutions based on strange Absolutes. They are less favorable and more expensive than actual solutions. Synonyms for emergency solutions: replacement-, compromise-, pretense-, partial solution frequently a solution at your own expense. Any defense-mechanism and any second-rate behavior may serve as an emergency solution. I will cover only a few important ones in the following due to lack of space. Pro Symptomatic Therapy Consider: First, you shall delete the fire and then capture the arsonist. (Which does not preclude the attempt to capture the arsonist before he even sets fire.) This means symptomatic therapy is often the focus of attention as an immediate measure but the causal one is the most important in the long run. (See also Jesus, who first heals and then says, "Sin no more!"). Similar: The relative (matter) comes first. (For example, Jesus also healed with the aid of matter - when he treated a blind person with sand and saliva - and not by prayer.) Can symptomatic therapy also be of first-rate importance? Symptomatic therapy is of firstrate importance if it is integrated into the positive Absolute (+A). Therefore: "Do not despise relative, symptomatic aids. God does not do everything himself. He also helps by fellow human beings." Symptomatic therapy is also important if causal therapy is directly impossible. Contra Symptomatic Therapy The lazy people are slaughtered - the world becomes diligent. The ugly people are slaughtered - the world becomes beautiful. The fools are slaughtered - the world becomes wise. The sick are slaughtered, the world becomes healthy. The old people are slaughtered - the world becomes young. The saddened are slaughtered - the world becomes fun. The enemies are slaughtered - the world becomes friendly. The bad guys are slaughtered - the world becomes good. Erich Fried: Die Maßnahmen 577 576 577 Quote from Bodelschwing: "If you meet a saved addict, you meet a hero." From: Erich Fried: Gesammelte Werke. Bd. 1. Wagenbach. München 1993, p. 565. © Claassen 360 Symptoms are nowadays too quickly suppressed and fought. Psychical symptoms, however, often have a function. If one removes the symptom then its function, too! However, if the person needs the symptom or its function for mental stabilization or the like, another problem arises that would not have to occur. The symptom is gone - everything seems fine but the underlying problem remains unresolved. Its solution will be moved. A superficial treatment, however, has its price: Once taken drugs are then given permanently. A drug normalizes the blood pressure, another eliminates anxiety or restores the mood, etc. - everyone is satisfied: the patient, the doctor, and the pharmaceutical companies. R. D. Laing clearly expressed this danger: "Psychiatry can so easily be a technique of brainwashing, of inducing behavior that is adjusted by (preferably) non-injurious torture. In the best places, where straitjackets are abolished, doors are unlocked, leucotomies largely forgone, these can be replaced by more subtle lobotomies and tranquilizers that place the bars of Bedlam and locked doors inside the patient."578 Similarly, a patient expressed: "The doctor has given his job to the drugs, which earn him the money. And because it's a lot of money, more than you can imagine, it also has the doctor under control. The medical system as an offshoot of a drug industry grows inexorably. Then the doctor just thinks the drugs are doing the work for him. Seen in larger contexts, he then only makes the work for an industry that wants nothing more to do with the sick - on the contrary, the sicker, the more turnover ... 579 Fighting the symptoms has the same basic idea as drug addiction has ... The pills help the patient to get over his sorrow. The patient becomes relaxed, so he can regulate himself. The consumer is not able to realize that the pill is superfluous but it does not strengthen the personal center where this happens, it weakens it!"580 This does not exclude the attempt to mitigate the consequences or "repair" them if necessary. Emergency solutions are however for emergency cases and not for usual ones. They are almost always more expensive than proper solutions. The struggle against the negative is typically symptomatic. It is common practice to fight against illness and suffering. Now, diseases are consequences of causes and you should "fight" against the causes and not against the symptoms. Therefore I advise to try to accept the symptom, to go with it, possibly even to exaggerate or to create it deliberately.581 Keywords and Comparisons: There is little sense complaining about one's sore feet if one does not remove the too tight shoes. There is little sense complaining about one's sexual impotence if one does not solve one's conflicts with one's wife. There is little sense complaining about one's overweight when one is not willing to eat less. There is little sense complaining about one's depression when one keeps submitting. 578 R. D. Laing: `The Divided Self´ p. 12.- S. bibliography. I remember a drug industry sponsored course on "How to keep my patients coming back constantly?" not: "How to cure and let my patients go?”! 580 Maria Erlenberger: 'Der Hunger nach Wahnsinn', Rowohlt, Reinbek/Hamburg, 1977, p. 64 581 Mt 5:41: “And whoever makes you go one mile, go with him two.” 579 361 There is little sense asking God to remove the symptoms if one does not remove the causes.582 One kills the bearer of bad news but not their offenders. You keep a crutch, although you do not need it anymore. You run against the wall but instead of taking a break, we wear helmets and go on, etc. A) Emergency Solution at the Expense of Other People People preferring this emergency solution pass their problems on to others and thus do not become ill. That is why they do not need a psychiatrist. They tend to selfishness and to push through their interests aggressively. They usually also pay a high price for it (f. e. solitude, lack of love, dull or substitute feelings, etc.) - but that does not interest us at the moment. The real, "healthy" Self does not need to take anything away from others. It has enough. Dynamics and behavior essentially correspond to what I wrote in "Personal Dynamic as It". B) Emergency Solution at One´s Own Expense by Disease I play dead to survive. (A patient) This is the most important emergency solution for our questions. It is solving the problem by disease at own expense. Normally, the person (P) in question has already lived from the "substance", for a long time without being aware of it because the affected is stimulated by a hyper-wellness condition produced by +sA and does not notice when living from the substance! If this behavior is not sufficient to remain stable, the concerned becomes manifestly ill. The further mechanism of the emergency solution via illness is the following: First, it should be noted that these processes take place subconsciously. Since the person concerned has no other solution, the unconscious helps itself - it "makes" the man ill. How does this happen? The initial situation was that the person concerned is no longer able to meet the requirements, which in most cases come from the parents, and does not see or dare another way at the same time. He is overburdened and gets sick in his need. Although not removing the requirements, he protects himself from further excessive demands and alienations and creates an unconscious (!) alibi, which saves his ego from the ruin. He "sacrifices" a part of his ego (health) in order to maintain this protection. (See also ´Sacrificial dynamic´). Note the double character of this solution: On the one hand, the above-mentioned fundamental conflict between the dominant strange Absolutes and the Self is partially solved or at least weakened; but on the other hand, the person pays a high price (illness) for it. Thus psychogenic diseases have important functions (!), without which their penetrance and persistence cannot be understood.583 The ill can thereby mitigate the indispensable demands and gain certain stability, security and protection. He thus weakens the tyrannizing ideals* and taboos* but also himself. It is a 582 Is it not good that God does not answer our superficial prayers for the healing of our bumps on our head in order to point to a causal solution? 583 See also: Morbid gain and Resistance. 362 hard and self-destructive solution but it works. The (partial) sacrifice of the Self is the logical consequence of putting a strange above the actual Self. The inner formula is: “I really absolutely would have to meet the requirements but because I'm sick, I can't do it.” The person in question does not dare to say: “I don't want this! I want what I want!” (In my opinion even better and easier: “I want what God wants because God wants the best for me and has a better overall view of my life.") The MUST, the UNCONDITIONED, the strange SELF, the strange ABSOLUTE You absolutely have to … | You cannot … PROTECTION by DISEASE I have to necessarily fulfill The illness protects the ego from further overload. The person (P) now has an unconscious alibi to escape the demands of the strange Absolutes (sA). The disease thus protects P from +sA and ‒sA. But the disease also protects the sA, because it also ensures their continued existence. I have to necessarily ward off The person concerned makes also indirectly via the illness what he does not dare to make directly. It can also be said: The person concerned has faced a life, mostly in his childhood that seemed to be too dangerous, hostile or overstraining. In order to escape this, a kind of instinctual playing-dead-mechanism occurs, which can look differently and ranges from mild to severe mental illnesses, such as autism and psychosis. In order not to die the `big death´, the death of that what one considers to be the Self one dies the `small death´ - one becomes ill. The psychical illness seems thus the lesser of the two evils because the loss of the strange Self, which he regards as his own Self, appears to be the bigger one. From his subjective point of view he is not wrong. He has never known his own Self, how can he then believe that it is indestructible. So he rather dies a bit to survive at all. Since one cannot live (or dares not to), one only survives, vegetates or only functions. “Better ill than ... (useless, unsuccessful, evil, etc.)” is the unconscious, deeply internalized motto. The very thing which one does not want to sacrifice differs from person to person. It can be every absolutized relative (earthly) thing. Thanks to the disease the person remains in mental balance: If the punishment by the strange Absolute is followed by the patient's atonement (here in the form of illness), then everything seems to be well again and the person feels better. However, if the person dares to defy the sA demands, P feels out of balance, guilty and bad or may become even sicker. We are thus faced with the paradoxical situation to feel safe and "well" in the old family processes, even if they make us sick, while the liberating way can 363 initially trigger negative emotions and symptoms (!)584 The patient may think: „Now I have paid the price, now I have peace.“ Error! The problem remains unresolved and this or another price needs to be paid further on (e.g., to continue to take medications which are not really necessary, etc.). Certainly daring our own life and our own identity is a common problem but many people are fortunate enough to face less resistance than others in their lives. Therefore it is neither an award to be healthy nor it is a failure when becoming ill. It is wise to try the actual solution again and again - in my opinion, it provides the best basis for mental health but this is not an absolute guarantee. If one tries to summarize the role of psychical illnesses, one could formulate: Psychical illnesses express compromises between absolute internalized foreign demands and vital personal interests, that is between the strange Self and the Self. They are the result of unconsciously solving conflicts at one's own expense (at the expense of health). They are expensive emergency solutions to protect the ego from its downfall; alibis, so the ego will not loose its self respect. They sacrifice the ego partly and protect it partly, they self-destruct partly and strange-destruct partly others, they bend partly to the "idols" and rebel partly against these, they give partly into these and take revenge partly on these, they adapt partly to these and defy partly these. They are weapons with which man inflicts wounds onto himself as well as defends himself; the expression of a struggle being a little won but still majorly lost - a stalemate, where no one is checkmate but everyone half checkmate, and where no new, decisive moves are seen or dared; They are expression of gilded cages, crutches, of inner conflict situations in which one does not dare to renounce the corresponding advantages despite the huge disadvantages because one is afraid to perish otherwise. They express a lack of self-love and misunderstood or false foreign-love; a, even if usually only unconscious, neglect of one's own ego and of the permanent attempts to give value and meaning to the ego via some achievements. They express a relative life. The disease, as well as the underlying strange absolutenesses, became partly friends but mostly enemies. The patient is partly free but more a prisoner and an enemy of himself. The person is in a kind of permanent crisis in which he is under pressure to seek a new Absolute. Mental illnesses have different forms and courses. These are essentially determined by the underlying complexes. I have discussed elsewhere, why this or that disease arises in certain situations or constellations. However, the disease always has a little bit of a life and laws of its own and fulfills certain functions (defense, balance, balancing out blame, even meaning etc.). Therefore, the disease does not disappear immediately when the underlying conflicts are resolved and therefore it is also problematic to want to get rid of it as soon as possible. Thus there is always something which we can fear more than the loss of our self or the disease. That is why we are always faced with attitudes like: "Better ill and good than healthy and evil." "Better sick than ... (for example, unsuccessful, fat, aggressive, evil, ungrateful, unpopular 584 Prisoners often feel this way when being released after many years. The patient is in a similar situation: He does not “want” to be healthy although really quite wanting to. 364 etc.)" "I'd rather die myself than to let die the foreign Absolute." "I sacrifice my health for … ." "Better to live on the substance and get sick than to disappoint others, better to become sick than to live on welfare, better to become sick than to be a burden to others/ than to endure the emptiness that might arise if I do less/ than to hurt someone" etc. The list goes on and on. Thus, many times potentially easy solutions are omitted and very unfavorable and expensive ones are preferred instead. (See also chapters: Defense , Resistance). The Emergency Solution through Foreclosure This illustration shows a further emergency solution at your own expense. The left icon image shows a protected Self that is sensitive to the outside world, too. The right icon image shows a weak, vulnerable Self that protects itself by having to seal itself off to the outside world, thereby paying a high price (e.g., autism). Self C) Emergency Solution with More Old or New Inversions I'm scared to live my life. I am even more afraid of dying my death. So I live a strange life and die a strange death. • We have assumed that an inhibited, unfree Self can go several ways to save itself from total destruction. A third, besides the two emergency solutions mentioned before, is the possibility to define one's Self now by other persons, things or ideas or by one's own ego instead of by one's parents as in childhood. Again the person identifies himself not with his very own Self/ Absolute. So, usually unconsciously, the old strange Self/ Absolute is replaced by one or more new strange Selves/ Absolutes. • The person concerned can also fall back on old sA or more Relatives - but then he has to increase the 'dose'. But it is only a matter of time before the too much of a good turns into negative. (→ Reversal into the opposite) Which are these inversions? 1. Human as ideals* (Written in small letters because I repeat parts of the section `Personal system and relationship disorders´). The typical course is as follows: A child identifies with his parents and their ideals* or fights against them later. In both cases it remains dependent on them (mentally). If it does not solve this basic problem in one of the above ways, another way is to let other people into their own center and become dependent on them. These other persons are usually partners or idols who are admired and identified with. Affected are often people who leave home as early as possible or stay in the "Hotel Mama" for as long as possible. They hardly can be alone. Their own Self gives them too little support. 365 Therefore, unconsciously a partner is favored, who gives what one does not have and believes to must have or a fellow sufferer who does not question oneself. The dependence on such partners can be one-sided but it is more often two-sided. Logically, there are a number of parallels between the dependencies on the parents and the later partner - you can say that almost the same (or mirror-image-like) basic patterns have to occur unless the person concerned was able to solve the problems. This means that if he allowed his parents to dictate a particular rule of life (against his own inner Self), he will let his partner do the same because he has no position of his own. It is easy to see that such a partnership looks like salvation at first (and often both partners are really into each other) - but the crisis is already predestined. From now on usually the same crisis is repeated, the same disaster as in childhood, only played with other persons - instead of mother now wife or daughter, instead of father now man or boss or son, instead of sister now friend or however the role distribution may be or whatever it is called on which we now depend, just to not have to look at our own still weak Self. Again and again, we are thrown back on ourselves until we understand the solution. In brief: This tragedy ends like the earlier one. What used to be a support now becomes a burden, what used to be a home now becomes a prison, what used to be a tie becomes a chain, which one previously gladly gave to the other because he desperately needed it, now one denies it, turns it into a weapon and blackmails with it. The previously beloved becomes an enemy, what seemed to be love becomes hatred. But now it is easier to break up, to part, to divorce. One believes, just like the title of a book reads, "Everything is going to be completely different with the next man (woman)." Tragically: Many (not all!) of these separations, as well as many of these mental illnesses, would not have been necessary if - yes if…. The persons on whom one makes oneself dependent may vary and one can try to lose oneself in the mass of people. But again and again, our very own Self stands up wounded, humiliated, denied like a neglected relative, of which one is ashamed. But maybe the concerned persons choose to detour over a last variant of self-alienation and selfdenial by now submitting not to people but to things or ideas. 2. Emergency Solution by Absolutizations of Things or Ideas The unredeemed Self continues to wander restlessly. It has not found an inner home, inner peace, sufficient support, affirmation and freedom neither in its parents nor in its partners or other persons - that is it has not found itself. The Self, which interests us above all at this point and which became ill, does not tend to solve its problems egoistically. It may, however, temporarily stabilize in other ways, perhaps the most common of all emergency situations, namely to seek the meaning of life in relative things or ideas. Again, there are many combinations with other solutions. We have all been there: binding our heart to all sorts of things of this world, hoping this time we would finally be happy now and forever. And everyone probably knows the disappointment when the finally achieved neither satisfies nor brings inner peace and happiness. We depend on whether we get or achieve one or another. Then owning or success determines our being. We should not be surprised of lacking self-esteem when humiliating ourselves this way and regarding possessions, success, work or anything higher than our Self. But we were not given any other means and do not see any other way. So we pile our money or something else up instead of living. I have never met a millionaire who kept his word, that as soon as he had a million he would just enjoy his life. No, he got even hungrier for the next million and then the one after that. He and we "expand" and we expand the more the emptier our Selves are. 366 An invention of the devil, as they said - a vicious circle because the more one stuffs things into the Self, the poorer it gets. That is particularly the case when people believe that some ideology could replace their Self. It is just under a different name and in some ways the most sophisticated of all. I admit, dear reader, now I am having some difficulties to prove the dubiousness of different ideologies is more difficult than the millions just mentioned. I do not think that money or certain worldviews are bad in general. But all things and all ideas should serve man, not the other way around. That means that man should not be dependent on them. This violates his true dignity, diminishes his freedom and makes him sick. All worldviews, as well as all psychotherapies, should, before being internalized, be checked to see if they uphold and promote freedom, worth and dignity, uniqueness and selfdetermination of the human beings, which means nothing else than, whether the Self can be itself or not. One key criterion for me would be the answer to the question whether man is accept and feel comfortable without preconditions in these ideologies or whether such preconditions exist, even if hidden (!). The motto underlying these cases is: "Only when you have done or become this or that, you have got worth and dignity." Quasi in parentheses, one may add: "and as you do not fulfill that, then you cannot claim that for you.” Unfortunately, there are some snags incorporated in most of the worldviews and some religions. They are not altogether bad, no - but they often give in the most important, existential question, no, a wrong or only an ambiguous answer: e.g., "First you have to ... then you are." But man wants to be loved just for himself. He wants to be himself first and then do something. But we have been trained by different ideologies. We are unsure: "May we actually feel well and worthwhile without having achieved anything?" "May we be first? Always? In any case? Just like that? Only through our mere existence? But do we not at least have to ...?" Even if we have said yes with hesitation so far, will we not change sides when they say: "Well, well, you may have the right to exist by not having accomplished anything yet but not you have done the bad or even evil.” Just as the great humanist Goethe lets his hero Faust say at one crucial point: "He deserves only his freedom and existence, who has to win it every day anew!" Even the language of humanism, as certainly one of the best worldviews, does not seem to confirm us enough in the depths of our existence. In humanism, I must ultimately be human and useful, in materialism I must believe in the primacy of matter, in idealism in that of ideas, in socialism I must be social, in capitalism effectively, and so on.585 I can identify myself partly everywhere but completely nowhere. All these "ism" lack the most important. It may seem to be little if only this one thing is missing. But as the most important, absolute, central, it affects a person's last corner and her everyday life. As a strange Absolute, it can - like an occupying power - determine all the essential rules of life, and of course fanatical ideologies are a hundred times worse than the examples above. It would also be a misunderstanding to interpret this work as if it were the primary goal to relativize the strange Absolutes (as I understand the 'The Work' method), without at the same time giving something better (+A). Even a dog will bite you if you take a bone away without giving it a piece of meat. 585 367 But where can I rest my Self without immediately encountering signs with big, black letters: AT FIRST, YOU MUST? And do I search in my own person? My conscience? Is this the final instance? Instance yes but for me personally this is not the last liberating and satisfying thing. My conscience always plagued and tormented me more than it lifted me. Sure, it gave me some good advice also and I do not want to live without it, too. But as my god? As my meaning of life? No! As my servant or adviser? Yes! Is there not this special spirit that many of us seek? Is it not exactly that spirit that we try, as already repeatedly emphasized, to give our children or other loved ones with, where we first say: "I love you the way you are. You are already good enough without doing anything. Only your mere existence is cause enough. And even if you did wrong and bad things, you are the most important of all. And if you become a millionaire or federal chancellor or mother Theresa, please enjoy it - but you are not more endearing by doing so. And even if you have stolen, whored and drunk, you are still my beloved son or daughter. And if I advise you to stop whoring and drinking, it is not because you would be more valuable and lovable but because then you would get more of their life." Would not that be a good spirit? Personally, I found him most perfectly in the person of Jesus, who in my opinion spoke to people in this way. But that is a very personal statement. And the so-called Holy Spirit, does not just blow in the Bible but there probably strongest and liveliest. (See also `The I as Strange Self´.) D) Emergency Solution by Anticathexis or Fewer Absolutizations 1. By anticathexis see above `Defense by anticathexis´. 2. By fewer absolutizations: This emergency solution consists of trying to reduce the number of strange Absolutes (sA) (the "I-absolutely-must-do") without questioning the strange Absolutes themselves. This usually means: You reduce the requirements according to the motto: "I organize things differently. I do less, reduce hours of work." This is not wrong but often brings only temporary relief when the "things" get less but the underlying compulsions of the things remain. The person in question generally overlooks the still existing hazard if he does not want to be liberated from his unconditional must in principle. Why? Even a single sA can ruin our lives if we cannot fulfill it but have to fulfill it. And even if we do fulfill it again, soon we will get another "must-do" because something has become the meaning of our lives, the inner drug that we cannot do without. 3. A similar remedy is to adopt a relativistic or nihilistic attitude. E) Emergency Solution with Psychiatric Drugs "A psychotropic drug [is a ] ... drug that affects the psyche of humans symptomatically ... This often leads to the shortening of a phase but not to the cure of chronic mental illnesses."586 586 From https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopharmakon, 10/ 2011. (bold written from me). 368 Guiding principle: “Use them like crutches etc. When your own strength is insufficient, 'take' them, then they will help you, but if you take them although you can walk on your own, they will harm you.” Pro The psychotropic drugs have the same advantages as other Symptomatic therapies, as I have already described. They are primarily symptom remover. They play a very important role as emergency solutions. They can promote causal therapies to a certain point. They are very suitable for risk control and the security needs of all involved. Currently, there is a tendency to onesidedly use their advantages: diseases should be eliminated as quickly as possible, without suffering and without costs, and finally with the aim of adaptation to superficial normality and functionality. But on the other hand, there are also exaggerated tendencies to refrain from psychotropic drugs in principle by the 'anti-psychiatry' community. Contra "Some psychiatric theory is often not much more than a collection of justifications for the widespread use of psychotropic drugs." (According to S. Gelmam)587 Consumption, as well as abuse of psychotropic drugs, are huge. At the present time, millions of people take psychotropic drugs for their overworked or broken souls. But: The side effects are underestimated and the positive ones overrated and the treatment may be more disadvantageous than the disease itself. Drug-induced well-being often replaces the cure. The pharmaceutical industry advertises, for example, with the idea that people only become who they really are through psychotropic drugs. However, one problem is that these people only seem ok but they are not. You cannot tell that they suffer. They are in a good mood on the outside and (maybe still) coping with everything but in reality, they are already half broken, overloaded and burnt out. Moreover, fellow humans are irritated. They see, for example, on the one hand, that the person concerned is overwhelmed or leads an unfavorable life and on the other hand, he seems to be fine. The pharmaceutical industry spends almost twice as much on advertising as it does on research! For example, in 2004 American medicine companies spent $ 57.5 billion on advertising, while spending a total of $ 31.5 billion on research and development.588 I suspect that the budget available for psychotherapy research is only a fraction of that. In addition, it lacks the lobby. It´s about profits or losses of billions of dollars for the pharmaceutical industry when it comes to the forming of theories as to whether mental illness is rather psychogenic or somatic. Therefore, it influences the researcher in favor of the theory of primarily somatically caused mental illnesses in order to justify a psychopharmacological treatment. Taking psychotropic drugs is similar to taking painkillers. Both do not heal, they 587 588 From: Stefan Weinmann: Erfolgsmythos Psychopharmaka, Psychiatrie Verlag, Bonn, 2. edition, 2010. From: www.faz.net › on 14.3.2014. 369 only have a symptomatic effect. The problem of using painkillers over a long period of time is well known and is rightly regarded only as a stopgap solution. The pharmaceutical industry suggests it to be different from psychopharmacon therapy. I believe this to be wrong because it disturbs the actual solution, the self-healing powers, the natural defense and finally the healing at a certain point. Are psychotropic drugs not for the soul what cortisone is for the body? Do they not have the tendency: Once medical drugs, always medical drugs? Are we not often like those slaves who were content to occasionally be given a treat (such as medicines) by their master but to be denied freedom? Are we not important players in this game by joining the health-madness of the zeitgeist?589 Many benefit from this: pharmaceutical companies, doctors, insurance companies and so on. It is a billion dollar business. Under the heading "Unheilige Allianzen" (unholy alliances), P. Sawicki, head of the Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care, points out that “the professional societies and the scientists involved are financially dependent on the pharmaceutical industry. Pharmaceutical manufacturers bear the costs of congresses, research or pay excessive fees to doctors and scientific opinion leaders.” “Several thousand Euros for a half-hour lecture” are not uncommon according to Sawicki. Where to draw the line between bribery and reasonable fee is then difficult to access. Stefan Weinmann has dealt extensively with this topic under the title "Erfolgsmythos Psychopharmaka" (“The myth of the success of psychotropic drugs”) recently.590 He questions the general prescription of antipsychotic drugs and its excessive increase. "A variety of studies shows the unexplained large increase or at least the lack of decrease of psychical diseases despite the availability of effective therapeutic methods." (p. 12). Moreover, he also points to outdated dogmas in psychiatry and criticizes the current psychiatric establishment. He calls for an alternative approach to psychoses, a holistic and systemic view that looks at the subject psychoses not only one-dimensionally biologically (for the benefit of the pharmaceutical industry) but also psychosocially, and the involvement of psychiatric-experienced patients in the professional system. Stop Taking Psychotropic Drugs? Due to lack of space, I can only give rough guidance in this work because a decision about whether and when to stop taking psychotropic drugs must be made individually. In general, it can be said that there is a tendency to make being-free-of-any-symptom the most important criterion currently and that therefore psychotropic drugs are often prescribed for too long or too high dosed. Generally one can recommend - as mentioned at the beginning: "Deal with psychotropic drugs like a crutch! Do not be too proud to use them, do not fight them wrongly, for example, 'Chemistry just harms' or something like that, take them, especially in case of an emergency, before you collapse - but keep in mind that they will not heal you, that these crutches can weaken you from a certain point onward and that there 589 As early as 1932, A. Huxley designed a bleak future in 'Brave New World' where all people are made 'happy' by psychotropic drugs. 590 Stefan Weinmann: ibid. 370 are other, very strong, healing powers inside and outside of you that I try to illustrate in this work.” Recommended, more recent literature: Stefan Weinmann (s.a.); Peter Lehmann: "Psychopharmaka absetzen"; John Virapen and Leo Koehof; P.R. Breggin, F. Frese, L. Mosher et al. (See bibliography). © by T. Oettinger, 2003/2016 “Paradoxical" Therapy Paradoxical is what is contrary to the mind.591 Paradoxical, crazy situations belong to our world. They play particularly a leading role in mental illnesses. They are difficult to understand and to treat. I started from the hypothesis that paradoxes result from inversions. I explained this in the section 'On the Emergence of Paradoxes' in 'Metapsychiatry'. Paradoxical situations (apparently!) require "paradoxical" solutions/ therapies.592 Why? If, for example, something that is only relatively negative is taken absolutely negative, or something that is only relatively positive, is taken absolutely positively, then we face the seemingly paradoxical task to correct the too negative in a positive direction and the too positive to correct in a negative direction. Exaggerated said: We are to learn to hate, what we love too much, we should love, what we hate too much. This seems paradoxical, of course. But thus the inversions can be corrected. If we see, as therapists, illness, disturbance or misconduct too one-sidedly negative, paradoxical situations will arise which cannot be solved if we do not conceive them as Relatives. If one considers this attitude, it has farreaching and surprising consequences. If we take, for example, the bulimic's binge eating, the depressive's complaining or the psychotic patient's insanity, then our chief goal is to remove the unwanted behavior. This goal is certainly not bad. However, the goal that the patient accepts himself in spite of these disorders is more important. His person has priority. The question of health or illness should be dealt secondarily. According to the terminology of this work, a problem in the selfdomain (absolute range) is more important than that in the ego-sphere (relative range). But we take questions such as being healthy or ill, disturbed or undisturbed, right or wrong behavior or the like very personally - as if it were our own failure, degradation, etc. That is the symptoms, the abnormal behavior etc. become something unacceptable and hostile for the person concerned. Their occurrence leads to (further) disturbance of the patient´s Self, especially his self-esteem. Normally the patient tries to suppress or fight the symptoms. However, the more he does this, the more his Self is disturbed and the symptoms intensify. Thus, a much bigger (absolute) problem occurs in addition to the actual relative problem, namely the violation of the person's integrity. This is important for the therapy because therapeutic interventions are completely different, depending on whether the problem is relative or absolute. In this situation, it is wrong to see improvement of the symptoms or of the behavior to be the most important goal instead of a subordinate therapeutic one. 591 That is why they are hard to be treated with logic. I deliberately put the term "paradoxical" in quotation marks, since it is not really a paradoxical therapy, but one that the person concerned experiences as paradoxical but which in reality is only a seemingly paradoxical one. Therefore, I also avoid the term "counter-paradox" as used by the school of Mara Selvini Palazzoli. 592 371 Otherwise, the therapist tragically adopts the same basic attitude as this patient does - to reduce it to a formula for example: "Change yourself, then you are good!". If, however, I regard restoring his Self to be primary and eliminating of the symptom to be second-rate, then a `paradoxical 'strategy can be helpful, which could be formulated like this:" Dear patient if you do not accept yourself because of your symptoms but thereby you limit your freedom, dignity and integrity - then you should practice doing that, what you really do not like about yourself, intentionally and repeatedly." I advise, for example, bulimia patients if they are ashamed of their binge eating, to gorge themselves deliberately sometimes. Or, as already mentioned, I advise psychotic patients to be deliberately crazy or depressives, to deliberately lament and be a burden to others if this is what they forbid themselves, or people that stutter to do it on purpose, etc. One of the most difficult problems arises from absolutizing the moral evil resp. the good. The real Self should also be beyond the (relative) good or evil. If it is not, then it can be an important exercise to do the relative evil from time to time and to let go of the relative good from time to time. It is better to lose the relative positive than the absolute positive. It is often more important to do the unacceptable (relative) negatives intentionally than to practice positive behavior. It is more important to be able to be weak, incompetent, helpless, immoral ... than to torment yourself, to be everywhere and always only positive and to get everything under control. Then we live against our nature. Such and similar "paradoxical" intentions or interventions have long been known. Some Examples: • Jesus - Against the absolutization of people: "Love your enemies!"/ "Hate your relatives!" - Against the absolutization of earthly life: "If you cling to your life, you will lose it, and if you let your life go, you will save it." "When the wheat grain dies, it produces many seeds." "Let the dead bury their dead." - Against hubris: "Whoever wants to be the greatest, be the servant of all." "The first will be the last, and the last the first." "Whoever exalts himself will be humbled." - Against work-ideologies and rationalism: "Blessed are the spiritually simple (poor) people." "Those who must (only) be grown up (and cannot be like children) are locked out of the kingdom of heaven." - Against coercion: “And whosoever shall compel thee to go one mile, go with him twain .”593 - Jesus' crucifixion itself seems paradoxical from the perspective of the intellect. • Paul - Against absolutizing property: "~Own as if you do not possess!" - Against idealizing the partner: "Those who have wives should live as though they had none." - Against overadaption: "Do not lose yourself to this world, even if you live in it." - Against absolutization power: "When I am weak, I am strong." - Against rationalism: "For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God." - Against absolutizing earthly life: "To live is Christ, and to die is gain." 593 Partly analogous translations (in this order) from: Lk 23:34; Lk 14:26; Mt 5:44; Jn 12:20 ff; Jn 12:24; Mt 8:22; Mt 23:11; Mt 19:30; Mt 7:21. To Paulus: 1.Kor 7:30 ff, 2 Kor 12:9, 1 Kor 1:27, Phil. 1:21. 372 - Against dogmatism: “~The letter of the (in principle good) law kills.” • Old Testament: Against achievement-ideologies: "The Lord provides for those he loves while they sleep." (Psalm 127:2) 594 • Luther: Against moralism: "Sin bravely and believe all the more bravely in God's forgiveness!" • H. Hesse: Against holding on: "Well, my heart, say goodbye and get healthy!" • Goethe: Against clinging onto the earthly: "This die and be!" Paradoxical intentions or interventions were rediscovered for psychotherapy especially by Viktor Frankl and Selvini Palazzoli. Selvini Palazzoli formulated the treatment of paradoxes by counterparadoxia. In systemic therapy, paradoxical interventions have been used mostly by P. Watzlawick, J.H. Beavin and D. Jackson as a means to treat paradoxical communications. Their methods: symptom-prescription, the positive reinterpretation of the symptom (reframing), relapse prediction, the indication of the usefulness of a symptom. One can also consider the first step of Alcoholics Anonymous, which involves a capitulation of one's own will to the power of alcohol, as a paradoxical step that opens up a new, stronger perspective. But even the most correct paradoxical interventions should only be suggestions of relative importance because at a certain point it does not matter if and what you do: In front of God you are always free. In other words: From a certain point, paradoxes, incompatible opposites and dilemmas can only be solved from a + meta-level (+ spirituality, + A, God). This is important for the healing of schizophrenia, since these sufferers are particularly involved in contradictions, paradoxes and dilemmas. Further more in the unabridged German version. 594 He does not give us everything - but the most important things during sleep. 373 Concerning the Psychotherapy of Schizophrenia "A man who no longer loves and no longer errs should have himself buried straight away." (Goethe) I also refer to the chapter "Psychoses" in the part `Psychiatry'. Knowing this chapter is useful in order to understand the following sections. Current State of Therapy of Psychoses My assessment - a brief outline: 1. The symptomatic treatment of psychosis has made tremendous progress in recent decades. However, it has developed unilaterally: the therapies are too symptom-oriented, too little causal. 2. The somatically oriented research and therapy dominates largely. The psychotherapy of psychoses plays a subordinate role if looking at the rapid success by psychotropic drugs. Psychotherapy is usually seen to be only complementary to drug therapy. However, conversely, drug therapy should be seen as complementary to psychotherapy.595 3. The disadvantages of this situation are reflected too little. a) In particular, the disadvantages and side effects of long-term therapies with antipsychotics. b) The fact that the antipsychotics do not cure but only cause symptom elimination or improvement. 4. The theory of a primary metabolic disorder causing psychoses, which is favored mainly by the pharmaceutical industry, is widely accepted. 5. The pharmaceutical industry plays a too large role in this sphere. 6. Like somatic therapy, the psychotherapy of psychoses is essentially based on a materialistic, positivistic ideology and is therefore limited in its therapeutic power. (See Criticism of Materialism and secular PT). More Details on Some Points Problem Antipsychotics I had also presented pros and cons in “Emergency solution with psychiatric drugs”. Here are just some additional keywords regarding the antipsychotics, which are the psychotropic drugs used for schizophrenia treatment. Especially their short-term use is beneficial, considering the torments which people suffered in acute or severe phases without medication in the past. In the long term, however, there is the question of how much a preventive long-term therapy precludes a cure from a certain point on. It is the same as having a crutch, which promotes healing to a certain point when 595 With regard to literature on the psychotherapy of psychoses, I recommend the work of S. Arieti, G. Benedetti, C. Scharfetter, M. Siirala, W. Daim, Peter Breggin, Ann-Louise Silver, Bertram Karon, Daniel Dorman, Robert Whitaker, or as a documentary movie; Daniel Mackler: „Take These Broken Wings -- Recovery from Schizophrenia without Medication.“ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPfKc-TknWU 374 sensibly used but then prevents it.596 After having worked as a psychiatrist for 20 years, I have the impression that some taking antipsychotics (as well as psychotropic drugs in general) over many years or decades inhibited people's personality development and thus made real healings impossible. On the other hand, overestimating one's own powers is also disadvantageous. Again: “It is not weakness but wisdom if you take antipsychotics, like a crutch, before you collapse completely." I suspect that the positive effects of antipsychotics - as well as of Ritalin - have no lasting effect. G. Hüther says that the positive experiences with Ritalin cannot obviously be anchored in the brain. "If you paralyze the dopamine system in the midst of this ripening process with drugs (Ritalin), you deprive the children of the possibility to ... develop complex abilities."597 Assessment of a Former Patient D. Buck, herself a psychosis patient in the Third Reich, criticizes one-sided psychiatry in the past and now, like for example the "psychiatry's claim of omnipotence with its definition ... that the psychoses are primarily caused by a cerebral metabolism disorder, according to the then psychiatric teaching of 'hereditary and physically induced and therefore incurable endogenous psychoses' that we had to pay for with our forced sterilizations and the 'euthanasia' victims with their lives. Today's psychoses experienced people must pay for this 'medical disease model' by taking psychotropic drugs possibly all their life and by experiencing their side effects ... The psychiatrists know as well as we do that this drug repression of symptoms cannot cure. So what could be more natural than asking those who healed themselves, what helped them ... Psychiatrists should actually also be interested in this activation of self-help resourcefulness. But then the 'disturbed brain metabolism' as the primary cause of psychoses would no longer be correct. These psychiatrists do not realize which burden a brain defect only regulable by medication can be for people affected." One should "take the missing psychiatric research of the mental causes of our psychoses and depressions into one's own hands. Because so far 98% of the research funds go into the somatic psychiatry research."598 Criterion 'Relapse'? The so-called relapse-prophylaxis plays a prominent role in the therapeutic recommendations of schizophrenia. The term 'relapse' must be questioned critically. Obviously, it means that a patient has schizophrenic symptoms again. From the point of view of a therapy focused primarily on the freedom from symptoms, a relapse is a negative finding from the outset and is believed to have to be avoided by higher or longer 596 See also section: Criterion relapse. 1. Gerald Hüther, neurobiologist from Göttingen, in Geo 11/2009, p. 154 about Ritalin. 2. Even with anxiety therapies, the fearlessness produced by anxiolytics scarcely takes advantage of my experience in coping with new anxiety. Own experience: In order to fight my height fears, I jumped three times with the parachute from 600m height - however with plenty of anxiolytics. My height fears became worse afterward. 598 Dorothea Buck in: http://www.irren-offensive.de/rede_buck.htm1999/ 3/2014. 597 375 antipsychotic medications. Of course, this complies with the primary wishes of all persons involved. However, you would see it a little differently from a perspective that seeks healing. Why? I have already reflected repeatedly on the relativity of illness or disease symptoms. The hypotheses made there state that all disease symptoms, including 'relapses', should also be viewed positively in some cases and must be treated non-medically. For example, this will be the case, when an otherwise adequately stabilized patient has been subjected to a temporary mental strain or exposed himself to it - for example, when he tried to avoid expensive defense mechanisms! The occurrence of symptoms in such situations would be comparable to the recurrence of fears, for example in the context of anxiety therapy. Just as it would be downright wrong to advise a patient to avoid any anxiety-provoking situations or to take anxiolytic medication before them, so an attitude that seeks to avoid the recurrence of schizophrenic symptoms at all costs would seem wrong to me, too. This would not only be too cautious and would not only burden the patient with avoidable drug side effects but above all, this would suppress healing tendencies or prevent his healing completely. For the question of the discontinuation of antipsychotics see also the section 'Psychotropic drugs' and `Antipsychotics´. It should be added here: " Stop taking antipsychotics very slowly and flexible, usually in consultation with your psychiatrist. Keep in mind that eliminating the drug will eliminate also some side effects and may make you feel "too good" and you think now, you have to make up for all that you have missed, instead of slowly building your life up as you would without a crutch.” Criterion: Incomprehensibility of the Symptoms? If symptoms are not understood or cannot be explained, one will tend to interpret them as biologically conditioned and treat them with medicine. This does not only reflect past psychiatric views. For many psychiatrists, however, schizophrenic symptoms were or are in principle understandable, explainable, psychotherapeutically treatable and curable. I think above all of S. Arieti, G. Benedetti, E. Bleuler, W. Daim, J. Foudraine, R.D. Laing, Frieda Fromm-Reichmann, Marguerite A. Sechehaye, C. Scharfetter, M. Siirala, A. Finzen and others. When attempting to explain "schizophrenia", I take these authors' insights into account, too. I consider the schizophrenic symptoms to be principally explainable and curable. I see the difficulty in achieving a comprehensive theory of "schizophrenia" less in the lack of appropriate explanations but more in the fact that schizophrenogenic factors are so ubiquitous that a common denominator, which I tried to describe with "inversion", is difficult to delineate. I would like to note the following concerning the questionability of incomprehensibility and inexplicability of behavior as a decisive criterion for their pathology: • Separating healthy from sick as well as understandable from incomprehensible is seen too absolute. I believe that there are smooth transitions or a relativity of these concepts. Without wanting to caricature: How often do I not understand my wife even after more than 376 40 years of marriage and how often do I not understand myself? Or: Are not schizophrenic symptoms just as difficult to explain as an adult's fear of a spider, a stutterer's fear of speaking or an anorexia's fear of gaining weight? Is the love of the almost 72-year-old Goethe for the 17-year-old Ulrike von Levetzow not as crazy as "schizophrenic" behavior? And why do we see one thing as understandable and the other as not? And why do we smile indulgently about the one (or even find their behavior admirable because against the norm) and give the other pills according to a norm? Or is it the suffering that we want to prevent? But for many, as with Goethe, it was also foreseeable that their behavior would rather bring suffering. • The incomprehensibility and inexplicability scare us and we will tend to react fearfully and overlook that fear is a questionable counselor. Therefore as long as we declare schizophrenic behavior to be incomprehensible and inexplicable, we will consequently deal with it questionable. Certainly, some schizophrenic symptoms seem weird. But if we explain them, they will lose their uncanny and terrifying effect. Healing from Schizophrenia without Antipsychotic Drugs? In principle, yes! See reports of cured patients599 and of the psychiatrists mentioned above and in the footnote.600 See `Emergency solution with psychiatric drugs´, `Problem antipsychotics´ and `Primary psychotherapy of schizophrenia´ below. However, the path to healing can be very tough. This stems in particular from the described identification of the person concerned with the strange Absolutes (sA). These have become strange-Selves and the attempt to live with the actual Self is normally coupled with an existential crisis. This withdrawal from what had established itself as a strange Self is quite comparable to the arduous and severe withdrawal of hard drugs. Primary Psychotherapy of Schizophrenia Guiding Principles and Hypotheses 1. Primary psychotherapy is also for patients with chronic course as well as for severe psychotic symptoms. 2. After years of experience, I think, that schizophrenia and other non-organic psychoses are explainable and curable. 3. I believe that healing schizophrenia is theoretically relatively simple but in practice often difficult and exhausting (→ Resistance). 599 Reports of persons concerned: Renate Klöppel, Arnild Lauveng, Hannah Green, 'Stories - Successful Schizophrenia' at: http://www.successfulschizophrenia.org/stories.html, 2009. 600 Psychiatrists: Marguerite Sechehaye, Silvano Arieti, P.R. Breggin, M. Eigen, Margaret Little, John G. Gunderson, Loren R. Mosher, Harold F. Searles, Murray Jackson, Bertram P. Karon, Daniel Mackler, Edward M. Podvoll, Robert Whitaker (→ reference list). Good overview of the most important points: F. Frese et. al. at: http://schizophreniaabulletin.oxfordjournals.org/ content/35/2/370.full, 2009. 377 4. I think to participate in a self-help group is very useful. I would prefer a group that has a concept similar to Alcoholics Anonymous. 5. Parallel consultation / treatment of the most important reference persons significantly increases the chance of recovery. [To the emergence of schizophrenic symptoms see the corresponding statements in the section 'Psychiatry'. An overview of what is meant can also be found in the `Summary table´.] Primary Psychotherapy is +A (love/ God) based. That is, the strongest +meta-level is the positive Absolute (+A) corresponding to unconditional love or, religiously, the unconditionally loving God. This love is simple, free and unconditional. I can be in it no matter how I am. This spirit integrates all positive forces and relativizes all negative influences - of both the patients and the therapists with their different psychotherapeutic approaches. The primary psychotherapy assumes that every person, even the sickest, owns an indestructible, unassailable, quasi-divine Self in their core - in addition to also existing strange personality parts. This Self is the strongest force against pathogenic influences. By contrast, secular-based psychotherapies are based on a relative or secondary image of humanity that I call the second-rate personal (p²). Its essential characteristics can be found in the `Summary table´ in column L. The strange Self of P² is not experienced as unbreakable, unassailable, etc. And if both the sufferer and the therapist have this second-rate image of man, then it is likely that such therapy will only be able to achieve partial success. If love/ God is the strongest and simplest therapeutic power against schizophrenia, then why is healing normally so difficult and takes so long? As mentioned above, I assume that certain strange Absolutes are transmitted unconsciously mostly during childhood (or prenatal).601 These strange Absolutes are materialized / somatized sooner or later and gain an existential meaning for those concerned. Even if they have certain disadvantages and future risks are thereby pre-programmed, they represent decisive living foundations for the child. In primary psychotherapy, these basics are now questioned in their absoluteness. This is accompanied by a deep shock that is difficult to bear. Since the old attitudes mean life and being for the person concerned, their questioning is experienced as a questioning of his existence and life altogether that feels like dying. This harsh way of healing is made even more difficult by the fact that the person concerned usually has to walk alone because the surrounding persons or groups have similar philosophies of life and are not able or willing to give them up, too. For they too, like all of us, are dependent on them to a greater or lesser extent.602 (Therapeutic notes also in the section `Past'.) 601 I think the corresponding effects on the embryo are very likely. For example, recent research suggests that predispositions for autism are created before birth. (FOCUS online 30.3.2014). It may be the same for schizophrenia or other psychoses. However, I would not interpret these changes generally as genuine changes in the embryonic brain cells, but rather as a result of 'inversions', which have already produced 'second-rate realities' in the embryo, which are characteristic for autism and other psychoses. But even if they were predominantly organic, I think they are reversible. 602 Why only some members become ill and others do not, I discussed in → Emergency solution A. 378 Remarks for Patients [Note: I wrote the following sections of this chapter for patients some time ago, therefore, they contain sometimes repetitions or overlap with what has been said so far.] Basic Attitudes This section is about certain basic attitudes towards life, which can be rather favorable or unfavorable for us. But the question whether we behave favorably or unfavorably has only a relative meaning because the fact that God loves us is far more relevant, even if we behave unfavorably - and that will always be the case every now and then. Note: The unfavorable attitude can even be more sensible temporarily than the favorable one! Relatively UNFAVORABLE BASIC ATTITUDES Relatively FAVORABLE BASIC ATTITUDES It is unfavorable if you are eaten up by problems. The affected then lives of the substance. It is unfavorable if one has no personal center or this is occupied by something or dependent on something. It is unfavorable to absolutize Relatives. This unfavorable basic constellation could be symbolized as follows: It is favorable if you do not get eaten up by problems. If you have a center that is independent and unassailable that is strong and free. If you do not subsist on the substance but preserve it. This basic constellation can be symbolized as follows: free, protected Self (the words in the symbol) Free, protected Self Here the personal center, the core, is occupied by various problem spheres. (black: negative, white: positive strange Absolute). These form new centers besides the actual person's core and cover up the original core. Relative things have now become absolute and existential. The person concerned can no longer take them easy. Mis-absolutizations or miscenterings took place. Signs for this are: I-really-have to-settings/ -actions. For example: I need to be perfect, be a good person, have to do this or that, etc. In the beginning, the absoluted often gives pleasure (!) (addiction). It is only later when suffering comes. No-way-I-may- attitude. Either-or-attitudes. Black-and-white-attitude. Everything-or-nothing-attitudes. A core and an exterior sphere can be distinguished: The Absolute is in the core; "Outside" are all other mental important spheres but these are only relatively important. This could be for example, relationships with people, the environment, also performance, success, morality, conscience, security, health, appearance, possessions, etc. The outside sphere thus includes the relative. However, the most important thing, the real, the existential, the Absolute, the core Self with the following characteristics are in the core sphere: Just as I am, I am good enough. I am free. I am allowed to be as I am, whatever it looks like. I am allowed to be ill, imperfect, weak, immoral, selfish, distressing, useless, abnormal or anything, I always remain good enough. There is also written in the core: The existential, the most important runs 379 Either-wrong-or-right-attitudes. Friend-or-enemy-classifications (see below). To be other-directed, for the core is occupied by something foreign. He is externally-driven and also externally-based! Feeling: "I function" or even "I am externally controlled". Being into something without being able to stop or, more frequently, being blocked. False absolutizations, for example frequent and misplaced: "never", "always", "absolutely", "at any price", "impossible", "unforgivable", an imperative “must”! I play a role, instead of being myself. I believe, many mental illnesses can be easily or at least partly explained by this model presented here. For example feeling glum (→ depression), splitting (culminating in schizophrenia), lack of freedom and narrowness (anxiety disorders), must (obsessivecompulsive disorders), sucking in relative content by the starving center (addiction), getting devoured (ranging from burnout to the contributing cause of cancer?) and so on are clearly recognizable by the occupation of the core as shown above. The person concerned can also try to suppress, negate, or demonize the problem altogether, kind of counter-reacting. Often, at first, something is idolized (often unconsciously!) later if one suffers from it, demonized. Motto: The spirits that I've cited my commands ignore. There have been mis-absolutations which determine and alienate man. Man is in the dichotomy of enmity and hubris towards himself. He has often become the "best friend" for others (more rarely also for himself, compare narcissism) - but the worst enemy for himself. best all by itself (!), so you can rely on God and have not to rely on yourself or other people. The person concerned has something like an inner island of freedom, basic well-being, esteem, joy and serenity of heaven. He has inner peace. He has inherent substance, a strong, free Self. He has identity. (Motto: I am who I am.) He has a high degree of free will. The focus is on self-determination and faith in God. This center exists independently of what happens outside. It is indestructible. The attitude in the "outdoor sphere" is: “I want to try to do the right thing voluntarily but I do not have to - I can also relax in the center. But because it is unwise and mostly disadvantageous to only rest, I want to try to do the respective meaningful.” Then this is an additional enrichment of life for me and others but not a compulsion because you can always retire to the base and rest there. This is very useful, especially in emergencies. Keep in mind that you can never give/get completely safe, constantly valid advice in the relative sphere (outside sphere) because everything in the relative sphere has two or more sides to it and this sphere only contains rules that also include exceptions. Favorable: thinking in fluent transitions, 'both this and that'-thinking in the relative sphere. Being-here, being-present feeling: "I am living." not: "I am functioning." It is unfavorable if there is no difference and no distinction between what is most important and what is secondary. There is no or a weak core (base) and secondary matters determine the person concerned. Man becomes thus more or less like a plaything of the secondary sphere. One's own ego or Self is stunted, torn, perhaps also compensatory inflated (false pride). One is no longer (or no longer completely) one's own Self. It is important that the core (the Self) is protected. I do not have to protect the core. God protects it. Therefore, it is indestructible. I do not have to defend this inner being. It is enough if I defend my I. Its right to self-determination, freedom, dignity, integrity, its being loved by God and its being the image of God are inviolable. The resulting attitudes are unfavorable: First achieve, then be. First perform, then live. First function, then live. First performance, then well-being. Favorable is: First be, then achieve. [3] First life, then performance. First live, then work. First well-being, then performance. 380 First change, then self-acceptance. First the earthly, then the heavenly. First self-acceptance, then attempts to change. First the heavenly, then the earthly. Disadvantage is: First I have to be in a certain way, then I am OK. Favorable: I am, regardless of my deeds, good enough. A compulsion, as well as a pleasure-and-mood principle, is unfavorable. The voluntary principle is most favorable. (Pay attention: it is unlike the pleasure-mood principle!) First I have to earn my right to live, then I can feel comfortable. I can already feel good, always. Only then I want to see whether this or that meaningful thing is to be done. I must prove and defend myself. Putting demands on oneself and on the world. Standpoint: I have to! I do not have to prove or justify myself. To wish oneself or the world to do something. Attitude: I am, I may - I want to try. These people are like swimmers who always have to be up there to survive. They carry an inner yardstick with which they beat themselves to death finally (F. PERLS). Or they kill others with it. Their condition is strongly linked to their respective performance. We undermine our Self, the foundation of our personality, using imperative demands. These people stand firmly on a rock. They can stay where and as they are. They can go backward, too. They do not drown whatever they do. The basis is named: "I am good enough", religious: "God always loves me.". It is unfavorable to have the wrong life strategy. This is mainly the case if putting secondary and less important things first. So, if I live according to the scheme: first B, then A, it is as if I took the second step before the first one in order to stumble through life. The compulsory principle B ranks before love principle A. It is advantageous to set priorities in life correctly: "First A, then B" could be the motto. More precisely: "First and always A - then try B". A = freedom, selfdetermination, inner peace and well-being (sunbathing in the love of God.) B = endeavor for meaningful achievement, etc. This means that more important than the question of whether I am right or wrong, is, I can act wrongly and live with it while not making this question the basis of my life. It is unfavorable to focus on the optima in life, which is to live perfectionist. Traveling through life is like traveling by car: you drive badly when following no traffic rules as well as following all of them. It seems bad to see life primarily as a succession of performances of one's duty. Freedom is more important than perfection. Living is like driving. You drive best when being joyful and loose as compared to totally correct. Also: First refuel, then drive. The joy of life should be a priority before discipline. Motto: Everything is allowed but not everything is good. The person concerned lacks the first and most important answer (listed in the right column, under 1.) when confronted with problems. He is directly dependent on the solution of the problems. They determine him, take him captive. He is not above the problems. In the case of faults, he reacts self-accusing People with a favorable basic strategy have two answers when problems occur: 1. and the most important answer: I am free - in God. This makes me stand above the earthly problems. I am and remain good enough whether I solve the problem or not. I do not have to 381 or self-destructive. One can solve problems worse, reach life goals worse when one submits to them. Then one is not master of the situation. It is unfavorable to recognize no fault as one's own but it is perhaps even more unfavorable to bear the blame for a long time. solve the problem. That means. First one should remember this basis, then only, secondarily give oneself the following 2. answer: try to solve the problem from a free position. Fault (guilt) is treated relatively, secondary. It is favorable to give your own guilt to God. It is an unfavorable and also unnecessarily strenuous faith if one believes in earning one's own worth. Work first, then only self-worth and feeling good, is a questionable life maxim. However, work or workability often has the status of an idol in our society. But there could be written on such people's gravestone: "His life was only work and the fulfillment of duties." Such a gravestone can be thrown away. Someone once said it was a tombstone for a horse but not for a human being. From a religious point of view, man can feel like God's image in every situation of life. What would be higher? You can even read about human beings in the psalms: "You are gods." Man can say that he is always good enough before God, without preconditions, that he has an invariable basic value without having to give something in advance. Man is thus entitled to "basic well-being" and deeper, existential joy. Motto: A holy joy and serenity shall not leave me. It is unfavorable for us if our core definition includes only the adult role. In my opinion, the strongest core definition is to be the child of God and to subordinate the adult role with all its responsibilities. (See more details later.) It is unfavorable to believe that oneself or the world is quite good or quite bad. In the first case, one is naive and sooner or later will be confronted with reality. In the second one, you will quickly give up. This also spoils the joy of life. It would be good if man, so you, dear reader, too, would not only think that he himself but also the other people, the world and just the entire life are good enough. Motto: It's good enough. (I deliberately write "good enough" because of course a man or life is not only good.) It is unfavorable to believe that one is ultimately subjected to fate or matter or nothing. Of course, God's existence cannot be proved. However, neither his non-existence. In this case, it is rather stupid, or at least unfavorable not to believe in anything. It would still be beneficial if one had deep down a primal trust, an existential feeling of security and safety. This should extend beyond the current condition, physical well-being and death. Any strange Absolute (sA) comes first and the Self second. Man is dependent and outside himselfdetermined by sA. He is ultimately its slave but believes to be its master. Conscience, morality, earthly responsibilities, achievements, opinions of others, ideals, security, health, success, recognition, guilt, fixed goals, roles, norms, etc. determine the Self. A permanent effort is required in order to achieve the absolute positives, to repel the negatives and to fill the emptiness - an ultimately unnecessary waste of energy. The Self comes first and (almost) everything else second: conscience, morality, earthly responsibilities, achievements, opinions of others, ideals, security, health, success, recognition, guilt, fixed goals, roles, norms, etc. The I-self is free here, self-determined and self-responsible and master in his own home. (Religiously and in my opinion stronger: trusting primarily the loving God with only secondary responsibilities, thereby relieving!). It is unfavorable to regard the Relative as selfevident, just as it is unwise to question the real selfevident – namely the promises to the Self (see above). It is wise to take the Relative only relatively and to place the +Absolute (God and his promises) absolutely. Many of the mentally ill are in an (often unconscious) It would be good to drop the victim's role and if role or attitude of a victim. Thus the (former) possible, not to get involved in an (even if 382 offender has still got power over them! The own role of sacrificing is similar. Here we make ourselves a victim of our own or foreign goals, ideals, successes, of the conscience, etc. understandable) offender's role. Religious: I-want-totrust-in-God-standpoint and as a victim: I am God's child and if I am a victim, maybe He will pay back. ("The vengeance is mine," says God. (Dt 32:35) It is unfavorable to take life height more important than life width. Life width is more important than life height. Because the wider your life, the more secure and the higher you can build your life. It is widespread, unfortunately in Christian circles, too, to believe that one necessarily has to be good and morally. Morality without freedom (grace) is deadly, even the Bible says so. That is it. Always having to be only moral is torture on which the repressed immorality flourishes. Karen Horney, a psychoanalyst, calls such people ~`pressure angels´. It is unfavorable to love one's neighbor more than oneself. More → “Christian” one-sidednesses … The easiest way to be good is with the freedom also to be allowed to be immoral or bad, too. I think you also try intuitively to communicate to your children: "First you are accepted and loved, then only you should try to be moral and good. One oneself benefits the most by living a moral life. It is not to please the dear Lord or someone else." In other words, commandments or the like are made to serve man and not vice versa. Likewise, the church should be there for man and not man for the church. It is therefore wise to try voluntarily to be moral, unwise, to believe one has to be. Disadvantageous mindsets are: • Parents only love us if we are good. • Other people only if we are really great. • Our partner only loves us if we love her, too. • Our conscience only loves if we do not act against it. • Morality loves us only if we are moral. • Success loves us only if we are successful. It is unfavorable to take care only of the body or the new car or the apartment and not to do something for the psyche. Unfortunately, we did not learn this very important lesson at school. In order to land more on the "favorable side", it is useful to regularly practice "soul care". The old forces, which offer only a temporary substitute for real success (happiness) but exploit in the long run, are deeply anchored. But they can be overthrown, at least weakened, by patient practice. Concretely: Just as one takes time to eat, one should also take time to nourish the soul. In short: It is favorable for us: ⦁ First (free) absolute, then relative. ⦁ First take absolute, then give relative. ⦁ First heavenly, then earthly. ⦁ First Self, then I-activities. ⦁ First freedom, then duty. ⦁ First width of life, then way. ⦁ First width of life, then height. ⦁ First basis, then try to jump. ⦁ Set the bar at zero, then jump. ⦁ First freedom, then optimum trials. ⦁ First life, then role. ⦁ No demands but wishes to oneself and the world. 383 I repeat because important: the question of whether we behave favorably or unfavorably has only relative meaning, for the fact that God loves us is even more important, even if we behave unfavorably - and this is going to and is allowed to be happening again and again. Unfavorable and Favorable Attitudes in Relationships Tab. 1 Unfavorable Attitudes Favorable Attitudes Favorable relationships can be symbolized as follows: It is unfavorable if one or both partners have no or only Both have a strong, free core, which they also protect. They also do not depend on the most beloved partner. a weak and strange-occupied core: one makes up the Ultimately, he only plays a relative role, even though core of the other. This can apply to one, or more often, occupying a lot of space in life. Which means that no to both of them. This creates dependencies, but also partner or other person belongs in the very core/selfmutual unconscious manipulations and blackmailing domain. If one relativizes the other's importance, the (jealousy!). Everyone is at the same time the other's master and slave. The relationship is either too symbiotic prospect of getting happiness and security from them seems to diminish. On the other hand, however, the or falls apart quickly. Typical are "love"-hate benefits are much greater and more realistic: I myself do relationships. This is the same as dividing people only into either good or evil – also friend-enemy thinking; Or: not have to be your savior, to bring you happiness and the only responsible for you. If one stays with the other, "Who is not for me is against me". it is because one wants to and not for reasons of dependencies. 1. partner partner SELF+ children parents, siblings The figure shows the position of other people in the selfarea of the person concerned. These occupy more or less his center so that this person lives partly foreign directed. He can, on the one hand, rely on the others but on the other hand, he will be exploited by them. It stimulates mental illnesses tremendously if one thinks one must love the other more than himself. This principle, too, usually not so directly mentioned, seems SELF+ 2. children 3. parents, siblings The figure shows a favorable position of other persons to the Self. The others are not in the center (self-domain) but have a relative meaning for the person concerned. The person is thus not alien- but self-determined. The favorable order of the persons in the outer sphere is: 1. partner 2. children 3. parents and siblings. "Love your neighbor as yourself" - is one of the most central biblical statements. In order to make it clear, one should love oneself and love the other. Self-love = love to 384 to be ecclesiastical common property. Lack of self-love, however, is one of the main sources for mental illnesses and partner conflicts. At the same time, it is unfavorable to expect others to compensate for one's lack of self-love. The more demands/ expectations for oneself, the others and life have to be fulfilled, the more the relationship becomes difficult. All tricks and techniques are of little use when love is lacking (not only love for each other but also self-love). others Important: Bring love into the system! It is favorable if I do not expect of others to compensate for my lack of self-love. The relationship is going even better if people express their desires (of themselves, others and life) clearly, without being focused on their fulfillments. The more love exists (self-love and love to others), the less important the differences become which seemed to be insurmountable previously. Favorable: ⦁ Preserve self-determination also in partnership. ⦁ I give and do what I want (principle of voluntariness) and I will try to make it not a pleasure and mood principle. I only give as much as I can. ⦁ I can take without a guilty conscience, without giving. ⦁ I do not have to be useful, I can only try. ⦁ I can also be a burden to others. I should even be a burden to others when it is necessary. (Accept help!) ⦁ I can say no. ⦁ I want to test others' opinions but my opinion is crucial to my life. ⦁ If the others are better than me, I want to be happy with them. ⦁ I do not necessarily have to make up for mistakes if so, then I do it voluntarily. ⦁ I want to defend myself against wrongdoing but I do not want to engage in a personal fight. ⦁ I do not set preconditions for the others and myself but clearly express my wishes. • It is auspicious to have the freedom to part, when the relationship becomes unbearable. The model propagated here is not a selfish model but one of self-protection and self-preservation (by God). By preserving himself, he is also available to society. It is beneficial to try to accept oneself / others first and then wish for change. Conveniently, we could then clearly differentiate between the behavior and the basic attitude of the person (Self). That condemns negative behavior but not convict the person. [1]: The unfavorable basic attitudes are sometimes favorable and not forbidden (!). This means we may or should also sometimes resort to unfavorable emergency solutions or such defense mechanisms. The favorable basic attitudes are mostly but not always favorable and then unfavorable. They are therefore not a must. [2] The core Self is not an earthly Self to be produced but a more or less heavenly, divine Self, which one simply accepts for himself, and which comprises the relative earthly Self. It is most strongly constituted by a power that the person loves for his own sake, which I personally see in God. [3] What is meant is not: First be, and then do nothing, etc. © by T. Oettinger, 2003/2021. Note: The following examples are similar. Here the more favorable or important is as well relative to the actual Absolute (God). 385 Self-Strength and Ego-Strength "I am weak but my God is strong!" (Anonymous) Hypotheses: Self-strength is more important than I-strength. The stronger the Self, the stronger the I. The I is strongest when it is absolutely loved. I believe that we are most loved by God and from him we get the strongest Self and I. An important characteristic of this Self is that it lives by itself, that it is without conditions and that it also supports our mental and physical spheres. Therefore one could even interpret the self-running body functions as Self-effects since they act independently. However, these body functions do not run completely by themselves, only in principle. This means we can help the body to work well but we must not permanently control the body. This applies even more strongly to mental-spiritual functions. This way the human is freed up. He does not have t This applies even more strongly to mental-spiritual functions. That relieves the human being. He does not have to care primarily but only secondarily for himself and for his existence. A major problem, however, is that because of predominantly atheistic-materialistic psychology we do no longer believe in such a God-given and selfsustaining Self. We instead replace it by the responsible Self. The consequences are farreaching: we have no basic trust, only trust in the Relative. But that will not give us enough support and strength and we will be overtaxed in the long term. To trust in the actual Self is objectively speaking very easy but subjectively partly difficult. It can cause fear of death, since old dear absolutizations, with which we have identified ourselves and which became our very own Self, must be abandoned. Above all, to renounce their benefits is difficult. Even if they provide no benefits anymore, we got accustomed to them and we feel threatened by an unendurable void when we relativize them (withdrawal). Lapsing back to old, foreign thinking patterns is normal, before the new, the simple, the relieving and the redeeming will have become more natural. So, dear patient, be patient and dare to allow yourself to be yourself. This rather means recollecting one's own dignity and freedom than constant effort. It means a letting-go or better a letting-go into God. According to the motto: God does the most important thing and he absolutely loves me - I do not have to prove anything to myself or to others. It is as if you are continuously reminding yourself of the first love. Mind! It does not go against the Istrength. On the contrary, the self-strength is the best foundation for the I-strength. What are the characteristics of our true Self? It speaks the language of love, freedom, selfdetermination and unconditional worth of one's own person (keeping a critical eye on one's owns actions at the same time). This Self feels ultimately secure and unconditionally loved. Is that no selfishness or narcissism? someone might ask. I do not think so. I think the human being has the right to self-determination and he can and should protect himself against 386 heteronomy because it is too expensive in the long run.603 Conscience, morality, earthly responsibilities, achievements, security, other people's opinions, ideals, health, well-being, success, recognition, roles, norms; But also: misfortunes, traumatization, guilt, etc. ↓ Self Self ↓ Conscience, morality, earthly responsibilities, achievements, security, other people's opinions, ideals, health, well-being, success, recognition, roles, norms; But also: misfortunes, traumatization, guilt, etc. The left illustration shows different strange Absolutes dominating a person's Self and cause heteronomy. The right illustration shows a Self relativizing these strange Absolutes. Dear reader, I am aware of the difficulties with this issue. They lead to central questions: What is man's essence? What is man's worth? What is his sense, his happiness? Does he not have to do something before he can claim the Absolute? Is there not the danger of ethical relativism, where the end justifies the means - positions which are taken on by some leaders again and again and which they misuse for their purposes?604 Within the scope of this work I can only briefly discuss these questions. First of all, I would like to point out that psychical illness almost always evolves on the basis of a foreigndirected, little valued, weak or self-destructive (felt) Self and that it is our most urgent task to give back people above all their actual Self, their dignity, their self-determination right, their inner freedom and to restore a fundamental enjoyment in living and in being themselves. We will be able to do this more easily if we start from a corresponding image of man in theory and therapy. Imagine for example a therapist thinking of his patient: "This is a schizophrenic," or similarly bad. And further, quite professional, technocratically and perhaps quite like described in a textbook: "Now it is important to figure out, is this a hebephrenic, catatonic, paranoid-hallucinatory schizophrenia or a simple one or a neurosis and which drug I use against it?" This therapist can be professionally extremely competent but ultimately he turns the sick (as well as himself by the way) into a thing - and the tragic is: mentally sick people mostly see themselves this way. Will not a psychotherapy mobilize the strongest forces that values human beings most highly? However, many see the man too low, too weak and too unfree. I am in favor of a view in which man is created in God's image, in which he is free and can feel valuable and loved even without preconditions: an unsurpassable basis – at least I have not found a stronger and more valuable one.605 I guess you could call it “the moment of birth of the self-confidence”. Bruno Bettelheim called a book "The Empty Fortress – Infantile autism and the Birth of the Self" (The Free Press, New York, 1967) which offers the view that the Self must be born and educated in the course of life. I think this can be said of self-awareness, but not of the Self. I also believe that the Self is already there by birth. When we were given our children, for example, I would say that they were themselves right away, even though they were not aware of it. 604 Morality (the "law") has only a relative meaning compared with love/ God. It is embedded in it and thus “also-absolute”. 605 God is thus also the strongest liberator and intensifier of the Self. How do I get to myself? Or: How do I get the strongest self? The spirit that loves me the most will still best help me! He loves me more than I love myself. 603 387 What lets me be so sure of it? 1. It is exactly the same way in which I see my children: "They are precious, free, loved and valuable without any preconditions and without any achievements just the way they are and they can feel well even before they lift a finger!" Only after this assurance, it is wise to point to the tasks in life. (See `First A then B'). This also not, so that the good God feels comfortable but because you better go through life and others benefit from it, too! Unfortunately, the reverse principle of "first achievements then life" is still widespread and propagated in some places by the church. 2. What is handed-down from Jesus about his life and his statements is, in particular, him appearing primarily as a savior and only secondarily as an admonisher and he primarily proclaiming a liberating and joyful message. This message is also extremely humane and does not expect any prerequisites.606 The language of love is expressed in both cases. This means that man must first be taken serious, given his freedom, self-determination and dignity before he can give anything. First, man must be clothed before he can give half of his coat. Even a dog gets fed before being sent to guard. "Love your neighbor as yourself". But if you believe, you must love your neighbor mostly, even more than yourself, it would be a vain and even unchristian-like attempt. Usually, there is a typical series of unfortunate circumstances just like this: the parents had too little love and could give too little love - and the concerned cannot love himself enough but he tries in vain to get love through certain achievements. But you cannot permanently offset the lack of love, appreciation and freedom by something else. Only temporarily, only as a substitute, only if need be – but then the soul wants what really saturate it: a strong, redeeming Absolute with true unconditional love. How do I recognize a foreign Self? Above all, by its wrong absolutizations and by its permanent imperative “must”. 606 For example, the first miracle of Jesus was not a humane act, but the transformation of water into wine. Jesus has sins forgiven without demanding any amends or the like. To ask for forgiveness was enough. 388 Adult-Ego and Child-I One may symbolize those two lifestyles just mentioned like this: Adult-I Adult-Ego Child of God (Self) On the left, the adult Ego is at the center: striving hard to cope with life and to get a grip on life. It never has any real peace. It can never let go completely. It must always be attentive. It is very serious, mostly over-strained, quickly burnt out. It has to see rivals or even enemies in many fellow men. It is never sufficient unto itself. It is always responsible On the right, the I, that trusts in God like a child, is at the center. It lets itself getting loved, does not need to do anything. It is playful, much lighter and yet more realistic because it does not demand anything (from itself) that it cannot offer anyway. However, the person concerned has not turned off his active adult I! On the contrary, it will be all the more powerful if it can rest and make mistakes at the same time.607 The person concerned has not turned off his active adult-I! It will not turn into its own enemy. But: an I, that idealizes itself, becomes its own enemy. As it is not ideal as a matter of fact, its shadow must become its opponent automatically. It idealizes and fights against itself at the same time - or falls back on other emergency solutions. Do we not all bear the longing in us to be like a child, just to let us fall, to bear no responsibility? Christians have such a thing when defining themselves primarily as God's children. "Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven."(Mt 18:3).608 First A then B Many people live according to an unfavorable strategy, which is: "First B then A." What is meant by this? Most of us are educated in such a way that we have to fulfill certain conditions (B) before acceptance or absolute feeling (A) of the individual person occurs. ('A' could also be named the acceptance by God.) Before the person (P) can feel comfortable in his/ her skin, even before P can have the feeling that P has the right to exist at all, P must have done something from a primary B position. Fulfilling any preconditions is then the first and most important thing - the person him-/ herself is secondary that is less important. This can be represented symbolically as follows: 607 I postulate a so-called 'absolute attitude' at the center of the person Self, which exists beyond the child or adult role and relativizes them. 608 It is problematic or even dangerous if, as sometimes recommended, the child-I is centered on its own without a strong foundation (preferably an omnipotent absolute, God), because then it is too vulnerable and weak. That´s my problem with Janov's Primal Therapy. Moreover, the left picture shows us that this person does not run “smoothly”and does not rest in itself. It wobbles. The reason for this, as described elsewhere, is an absolutizing of something relative, which creates a strange-Self with two or more centers, around which the ego wobbles. 389 A B * B A The left-hand symbol shows how the first and most important step (A) is in a second, less important place, and its very place is taken by the secondary (B). The person in question tries to do the second step before the first. No wonder that he stumbles? He more or less chases for being accepted all the time. We are smart when we live according to the motto "first A, then B", when we always assume that we are valuable, unique, lovable and (in the core) free and that we are allowed to always feel good enough. All this comes first - even before we have lifted a finger. We are wise when we see that these fundamental rights are not extinguished even if we make the most serious mistakes. Symbolized it may look like this: B let `die´ (withdrawal) A B 'AB' can also stand for farewell and liberation. The B * in front of A should not "die" in vain but in order to be really alive as B itself. It can live properly only after A, or on the basis of A. It is not all about being against B (our desires, our achievements, etc.) but it is also for B. We will have the earthly things twice and more if we do not let ourselves be devoured by them. As the saying goes: “Seek the Kingdom of God above all else and he will give you everything you need."609 We will have the heavenly (A) and the earthly (B) if we give priority to heaven.610 But we will be weaker if we gain our inner strength only from ourselves or from other people. It is the old, morbid pattern to be subjected to fulfilling this or that condition. We are then, servants of these things or persons. As long as we meet the requirements, they, in their grace so to speak, allow us to be proud, feel comfortable or grant a thrill, usually only briefly. But if we do not meet their demands, the punishment comes automatically and relentlessly. They are going to bleed us white, as we should work for them and not they for us from their point of view. Could we let them go, better hand them to God, we would be more relaxed. 609 (Lk 12:31, New Living Translation) This does not only apply to essential attitudes towards life, but also to simple daily situations. For example: If I, being a man, must be necessarily potent, I cause impotence. When I am educated to say everything correctly and fluently, stuttering will be provoked. If I try desperately to remember something that is very important to me, I will not remember it, etc.. But it is only when we relax and relativize, which means in our cases to be able to be impotent, to be able to say something wrongly, to be allowed to forget and so on, that we are more likely to achieve the desired goal. 610 390 Similarly: High Jump with or without a Yardstick In the left picture, the man is jumping over a fixed yardstick. He is deciding which height. If he is managing this height, he is having a very strong positive feeling if not he is having a strongly negative feeling (black and white pattern). In the right picture, the jumper is keeping the bar at zero. He is also trying to jump as high as he can but is not fixed to a certain height. He is experiencing neither thrill nor frustration, and therefore he is holding all the cards to achieve the desired achievements in the long run. In other words: Without a yardstick above us, the sky opens up above us and at the same time we are better grounded because our heart does not have to aim high. The Undoing of the Fixation The figure shows a fixpoint*. The person lives and does not judge himself from his/ her actual center, his/ her Self but from a strange Self (B*). It is only by a process of "dying" or loosening (depicted by the arrow) of the foreign Self, which is perceived as an absolute necessity, that will solve the fixation and create a freer, more self-assured position - a kind of resurrection. The person now lives again from their midst, from the Self and from God. We are wise if we rather let our fixations, our false gods, die than us. Our fixations are, for example, to be always perfect and good, our fixed thinking of security and order, our indispensable demands on health and well-being, on external happiness and success, and ultimately the fixed expectations how we and the world should be. Only then we were free to live life without (morbid) fear. It would be the best thing for us if we could die all these sensible 'deaths' of our fixations before we perish because of them. It is about the "die and become" (Goethe), the gain of such a 'dying' (Paul), that 'capitulation', as the anonymous alcoholics call it, which offers us a more real, freer life, the farewell of a dogged life, which Hermann Hesse described as follows: “Go on my heart, say goodbye and get well!” or Jesus:"For whoever wants to save his life will lose it but whoever loses his life for me will find it." But we do not want to let these foreign absolutenesses die because we regard them as our Self. When I identify myself with a strange Absolute, I become it and then I get the feeling that I die when I let it die. From this point of view, it is a logical consequence if some people rather kill themselves in extreme cases than give up their strange absolutenesses. We are in a dilemma: If we continue the life of the substitute, 391 we will die. If we want to live freely, we must also let something "die". We have the choice between two types of death and life. Living substitutionally is usually slowly self- destructive. It resembles a drug life. We may be quite high for a time but in the long run, we live a substitute life and die a substitute death. But the Christian solution goes further and is even easier: Let Jesus die for you (which does not exclude that you also endeavor to relativize the strange Absolutes.) © T. Oettinger 2003/ 2019 Choosing the Self and God - a Plea I believe that man can freely choose between the Absolutes. (→The absolute attitude, Absolute and relative will). Elsewhere a person's freedom to choose is only relative. More precisely, I believe that every human is faced with a free, existential and absolute decision, even if he is not aware of it. It is a kind of principle attitude for or against the good. I know I am stepping into a sphere solely concerning the faith. But as I try to show, it is not a purely theoretical or speculative subject but something that plays a decisive role in our lives. For it is connected with the question: “Am I able to claim the above-mentioned characteristics of the Self for myself and for others due to such a basic attitude or am I not able to?” I found the answer to this question most impressively in my relationship with my children and, parallel to this, in the Christian religion. Since my children's births I would automatically and instinctively give each of them the already mentioned characteristics of the Self: Each child is unique to me, something very special (God's image), absolutely loveable, etc. - So to be, without any doing. And all human beings have an inherent right to such a life. Only by their mere existence. These characteristics of the Self give man not only an invaluable dignity but also absolute freedom of choice. More precisely, while the usual decisions for or against this or that, for or against this or that action and even for or against the usual morally good or evil matter only relatively, there is, in my opinion, a crucially important basic decision or orientation to the positive or to the negative. Concrete example: If one of my children (or me or any other person) glorifies the evil, the destruction and the inhuman in principle and irrevocably, then in my point of view this person has gone too far to be possibly forgiven. Forgiveness would be even nonsensical.611 If, however, he was to discover in his heart a principled orientation toward the good, he could, in my opinion, claim further pledges to himself (see below), even though acting viciously and doing evil in everyday life. For this reason, one can therefore distinguish between a Self deciding to be basically positive or negative.612 Of course, no outsider is capable of attributing one or the other to a person. It is not a question of speculative theory but I want to encourage people to raise their heads, to live their own lives, even if they have made a large number of mistakes. From a Christian point of view, such a person can feel free and saved in principle. The real, existential question as regards life or death, being or non-being is answered in principle with the 611 Perhaps S. Freud meant by "death drive" something similar to the Bible's "mortal sin". In his late years S. Freud postulated the "life- and death-drives" as the two main drives. 612 I call the positive absolute orientation or the corresponding will also the actual primary virtue. 392 answer for the good. All other questions, however important, may be regarded as relative, secondary and calmly. The same applies to corresponding questions on responsibility, guilt and conscience, etc. When I refer to my Self, I ultimately refer to God, too. If the I approve of the Self, I become a unity, I become the I-Self. To me, such a Self seems to be divine in the truest sense. According to my knowledge and experience, all other worldviews fall far behind it. Especially in mentally ill people, unconscious, self-destructive mechanisms start very early on. To forgive and to be generous to other people is not difficult for many mentally ill people. However, to be self-generous to himself and to see one's own Self free from the failures, sins, mistakes and to regard it as inviolable by them, is something which most of the mentally ill are not able to. They are determined by negatives that have attained absolute and existential significance with corresponding devastating effects in their absolute and selfrealm. The Self that I mean is sovereign and inviolable like love and God. It speaks for itself. It cannot be questioned. There is no need to prove it. It is a present. You do not have to get it because you already have it. It also includes foreign Selves because it is stronger than them. If a person rejects the Self and makes a strange Self his absolute, the real Self is still present in the depths. Many people long for a good sense of self-esteem but believe they have to do something for it. If H. Schröder thinks - representative for many others: "Selfesteem is determined by the relation between one's own aspiration level and the successes achieved”, then it is a widespread fallacy because this is a sort of `achievement self-esteem´ but no actual self-esteem. This is precisely one of a person who defines himself only by what P has achieved and not of a person whose value comes from his own Self. This feeling is in the minus range for many people. What impact does this have on the therapy and on the self-esteem of the patients? It seems obvious: Whatever a human's picture of himself will be it will be decisive for his self-esteem. Likewise: What kind of picture of humans the therapist has will be essential for the therapy success. How can a patient develop a strong, good sense of self-esteem, when even his therapist maybe underestimates the Self? If it is true that every one of us wants to be loved for his own sake, then it is good to do that as a therapist as well. In one of the following chapters, I will present a corresponding concept for schizophrenia therapy. The Circle Closes I have the idea that we humans, in the symbolic forms of Adam and Eve, had removed ourselves from God and thereby also lost paradise. Following Janov's choice of words (though not with the same meaning), this experience represents our "primordial pain", and perhaps we were born with a "primordial scream" because this world, just like we, is full of suffering and death and needs redemption. Mental illnesses are one part of the suffering. We try to redeem ourselves by establishing various "saviors" in the form of strange positive Absolutes (+sA) - which are, however, only substitute solutions that have some advantages but even more disadvantages. In the terminology of this work: We mix-up God and the Relative. In my opinion, the human being made the decisive step towards the actual solution (the "revision of inversion") by a basic attitude towards the good. One can also say that God 393 will redeem man if he wants salvation. This closes the circle, beginning with the "primordial sin" and ending with Jesus or the "primordial love" of God.613 Systematization In the following section, I try to give some hints regarding some single aspects in the sense of 'primary psychotherapy'. They are more or less systematized and intended for patients. The division follows the one described in the section 'Metapsychology', whereby individual aspects overlap and repeat and therefore only present accentuations. I treat some therapeutic aspects only in notes, others in more detail and some I want to elaborate on later.I also refer to the above remarks in the part 'Psychiatry', to the meditations I have published (in German), to the explanations in the chapter 'The first-rate solution' as well as to the Self-help groups' principles, which pursue similar intentions. Like them I believe that the best basis for the solution of all life problems is God (love) - because he affirms and liberates people most strongly and corresponds to all other requirements for a positive Absolute. Hint: There are a few sentences in quotes that I would say to a concerned person in a corresponding situation using these or similar words.614 Concerning the Dimensions a1 Absolute and Relative or: Redemption and Solutions (See optionally Disorder of the absolute-area of a person). This aspect is about the positive Absolute, in particular. The result of the positive Absolute is redemption, the positive Relatives make solutions. About both, I have already written in the section `Solutions´. "You are in principle redeemed by God." Redemption comes before solution. Redemption comes also before self-redemption since self-redemption also entails self-destruction and destruction to the outside. Redemption begins with freedom, with "I am allowed to". It would not be redemption if it begins with a must, a duty. Redemption is the basis of all solutions. The second step would be to try to solve the specific problem. Especially as I do not have to solve the problem necessarily, the resulting serenity will additionally increase the likelihood of solving the problem! Even thinking about God/ Jesus brings redemption and relativizes all strange Absolutes. a2 Identity and Otherness (See optionally `Identity, Self (a2)´, Disorder of the person's identity) In terms of identity, I distinguish between an absolute identity and many relative 613 As already mentioned at another place, the "original sin" does not correspond to the so-called "mortal-sin". I am specifically talking to a “psychotic” here. I only mentioned some interesting symptoms here, described impressively f. e. about Marguerite Sechehaye's patient, called 'Renée' (see also bibliography). They are the same symptoms listed in the Summary table below schizophrenic symptoms. 614 394 identities.615 I do not consider the identity that we give ourselves, such as the one of the "good person" or the one of our profession or status, to be the absolute identity. They are attributive or relative identities. But, as said, we need an indestructible identity. This cannot be earthly because everything earthly is destructible. I believe that the absolute or rather strongest identity is the one attributed to us by God, namely God's image, which is never lost. "If you feel alienated from yourself or from your environment, then that is not abnormal because we all live in more or less alienated realities (second-rate realities). You only feel this alienation very clearly. Even if this torments you, do not be afraid: your actual Self, which you possess but perhaps have not yet found, lets you, like love/ God, always be yourself because they love you for your own sake, unlike the foreign forces (strange Absolutes). A beloved child does not lose its identity, too, even if its identity has been changed or hurt or the child is evil. You have an indestructible identity. You are unique and inimitable." a3 Reality and Unreality "Do not be afraid of strange and unknown realities. They are not bad - but the first-rate reality is better and ultimately stronger. All of us, even the so-called normal, live in secondrate realities and suffer from them, though probably less than you. If you experience the world, your environment, your fellow human beings as especially unreal, artificial, shiny or dead, unbounded or narrow and experience the things as if they were alive, as if they speak to you do not be afraid. If you experience fellow human beings or yourself like robots, puppets or if contexts get lost and other things that do not belong together seem welded - if you experience this and other bad things, then do not be afraid but try to trust that the love/ God, from which the primary redeeming reality comes, which also becomes strong in you so that you also get well. The love/ God redeems us in principle but not totally from the disadvantages of the second-rate realities on this earth." (See also `Disorder of the person's reality´). a4 Unity and Diversity (See also `Disorder of the person's unity´). Love/ God and the first-rate reality arising from it are unified and diverse at the same time. In the second-rate realities, one often finds fusions instead of unity and rather splittings than diversity. But love is indivisible and diverse like God. By both, divisions, fusions and even autism can again become a diverse oneness. "If you feel split, dissociated or if you feel as being one with other persons or objects and 615 Compare also the explanations about Identity and Identity changes. 395 feel no boundaries or insurmountable borders, do not be afraid, for your very Self is an unbreakable diverse unit." "God heals the brokenhearted." (Ps 147: 3) a5 Freedom and Safety (See also Disorder of the person's safety and freedom). Safety and freedom complement each other in love/ God. (That is the way to fly and take root simultaneously!). One neither exists at the expense of the other. As I mentioned, I distinguish between an absolute freedom, which includes all earthly unfreedoms, as well as an absolute safety, which compensates all earthly uncertainties. I believe the love/ God give this absolute liberty and safety free of charge. A beloved child will feel safe and free. Absolute freedom and safety are not identical with total freedom and total safety. They are primarily spiritual but also have a strong impact on the psychical and physical areas. Freedom and Responsibility Optimal relief will occur (begins) if you assume only an absolute, individual 'responsibility' (Absolute attitude) and otherwise only relative responsibilities. That means all the normal responsibilities will overburden us if they are seen to be absolute, like Freud's “never-ending search for truth”, C. G. Jung's individuation requests or the dogmatic formulated responsibilities of a misunderstood Christianity or of other religions. (Examples can be found in the German unabridged version in the meditation `Orientation and Freedom'.) a6 Center and Periphery The Christian religion is both theo- and anthropocentric, as already mentioned. That means God has also placed man in his center respectively in the center of the world/ the cosmos. According to religious understanding, man left the center (paradise) by the primeval sin but he returns there through Jesus Christ (if he wants to). Just like loved children, we can always feel to be in the center, even if we were pushed up to the edge. This spiritual center prevents us to feel mental isolated and marginalized. This center is not a point but really wide. This width, which contains all negative spheres as well, is more favorable than the attempt of having to reach and obtain a certain (worldly) center of one's life. (Of course, this does not exclude earthly goals but does not make humans dependent on them.) “God is with you even in the remotest (thought) universe, even if you believe to have already lost yourself and your center.” (See e.g., the book: Elyn R. Saks: “The center cannot hold!” and Disorder of personal bases and levels). a7 Security and Autonomy (See also Disorder of the person's independence). Security comes before autonomy. Even as an adult, like a beloved child, you can feel secure, free and autonomous in love/ in God. But autonomy and security, as well as the other absolute dimensions are so only in principle but not total. However, they also affect all other aspects of human life by their fundamental nature. Therapy goal autonomy? Autonomy is only an absolute when we think about the self-determination with respect to 396 the absolute - not when it comes to self-determination in the earthly realm. (→ Absolute attitude). Motto: The one who is as free as allowing himself to also be dependent owns the greater autonomy. Concerning the Differentiations Main Differentiations I. Being Spiritual being is stronger and more important than material being. Similarly: the inner is more important than the outer. "You may be, however you are. You have an unconditional right to exist. II. Life Mottos: First life, then work. Life is more important than functioning. Heavenly life has more essence than earthly life. "You have an unconditional right to live, even if you are aggressive, crazy, irrational, evil, lazy, paranoid, neurotic, dirty or otherwise. You should try to act well but if you do not, then you do not. I strongly advise you to practice deliberately and playfully what you absolutely do not allow yourself to do, then you are master of it - that is, negative behavior does not have to enslave you." Practice both: functioning and dysfunctioning." III. Qualities "You are more important than all earthly values, more important than all ideals." "No one is worth more (but also no less) than you.” “You are God's image." “Try to rise above the zeitgeist, who wants to persuade you that we have to optimize ourselves." IV. Subject / Object and Relationships Things should serve people and not vice versa. "You are (as a 'subject') more important than all objects." The love/ God connects without welding and solves without splitting. Individual Aspects 1. Everything (All), Individual and Nothing Everything is allowed but not everything is good. Everything will be fine. Therefore: "I have nothing to lose - I'm free!" 397 2. God and the World (Transcendence, Immanence) "Do not become a slave to the earthly." according to Genesis 1:28 Man and the world are in need of redemption. Earthly existence, immanence often is very good - but good transcendence is even better and goes much further. God is omnipotent but man is only partly powerful. Man is wise when relying not only on himself but more on God. I have not come to know any stronger and better "power" in my life than God, and I do not believe that there is anything bigger and more loving. "If you do not know how to carry on, you can turn to God or Jesus. If you do not believe in them, you may try once. In the simplest case, you just say/ think `God´ or 'Jesus' and 'I want to try to believe that I am absolutely loved and safe!' Something like that, depending on how you feel. In my experience, it is best for us to be affirmed by him and not if we believe we have to give him anything or to be a good person - for he has given us birth to be free and not that we are his or other people's slaves. If you want to know more about God/ Jesus, you can read in the New Testament what he is like and what he advises you." 3. People and Things People are more important than things. 4. Me and Others `Love your neighbor as yourself!´ - But do not become the slave of another slave! Just being yourself is more important than individuation or other changes. (Goethe, C.G. Jung et al., in contrast, thought individuation to be the highest goal.) Man's aspiration to become fully himself someday is an illusion and overstrained him. The Self is a gift of love/ God that everyone has. The stronger Self is not that which must be strong or authentic or true but that which is allowed to also be weak or a strange Self which does not lose itself when it becomes improper, unauthentic or untrue but instead can integrate these parts. This way the Self cannot get lost but integrates all foreign parts, which become Self, too. All the people are worth the same. "Love your neighbor as yourself!" is a recognition of mankind formulated at all times and by all great religions and philosophers. As a basic ethical formula, this statement is the last criterion for humanism, - for a Christian, the last criterion is God and his love for us, which does not make this ethical orientation a dogma. Meaning, even if I hate the other or myself, I remain loved by God. "If you feel lost, absolutely lonely, cold, strange, unreal, tormented, dulled or full of fear or anger, meaningless, worthless, and hopeless, unlike the seemingly normal. If you feel responsible and guilty of everything and dictated by commanding voices if you struggle with your last ounce of strength against something that wants to overrun you, imposes its will upon you or seduces you that you want and yet you do not want at the same time, which perhaps tears you up inside - whatever your suffering is, try to endure it because your Self, love, God are ultimately stronger than those forces that do this to you! It will be a matter of 398 time, until you will be free, in principle, even if it is not totally (more is not possible on this earth)." 5. Spirit, Soul and Body Spirit is stronger than matter - both in a positive and in a negative sense. About the Relations between mind, soul and body s. Ibid. The spirit of an unconditional love/ the + A, the spirit of God or the Holy Spirit, whatever you call it, is – in my view, the strongest and best power in our lives - as far as we allow it. Health and well-being do not just depend on God. But free, good, given and not expensively bought health and wellbeing are best reached with God. But they are also not necessarily necessary, they do not have to be maintained all the time and their loss has only relative importance. 6. Love and Sexuality Love / God are the best basis for good sex. 7. Peace of Mind and Well-Being Mottos: `Peace of mind is even more important than well-being.´ `Your pain today is your freedom of tomorrow '. "Do what is good for you!" is a frequently heard motto in therapies. Normally the person concerned understands 'good' to be 'well-being'. But I can also create well-being through a +sA (for example through drugs or alcohol) but then have to pay a price. 616 "You may have all the feelings that exist, especially the 'crazy' and 'evil' ones such as hatred, envy, jealousy, revenge, etc. Do not fight them, try not to suppress them - they are mostly relatively unfavorable and therefore try to put them aside or give them to God. If not, then not. But sometimes they can also have a positive function. If you taboo feelings, that you experience negatively, I advise you to practice them on purpose. Test playing the jealous, vengeful, madman's role, etc." Why are there people who seemingly have no feelings, f. e. autistics? I think many of them carry in themselves the prohibition from the childhood of not being allowed to have bad or irrational feelings and thoughts. Pieces of Advice for Patients Try to accept your illness and try to do something about it but do not make the disease an enemy, which must be defeated. Do not hide, do not be ashamed and get help at the right time. Do not taboo your illness but do not hawk it around either. Believe that life goes on, even if you die on earth. Try to believe that God is stronger than all negative forces. If your present "God" forbids you something imperatively, then find a God who gives you 616 Like Nietzsche's “Rapture peaks" and their consequences “peak and abyss” (Nietzsche). 399 freedom. If your "devils" are strong or even stronger than your present God, then look for a stronger God. If you do not get along with your father or mother, take God as father/ mother who will always love you. If you feel worthless, then look for a God who will lift you up. If you are always guilty, try to find a merciful God who forgives you all that you regret. 8. Absolute and Relative Will Morality is good but the "primary virtue" is more important and easier. I. Kant: "It is impossible to think of anything at all in the world, or indeed even beyond it, that could be considered good without limitation except a good will. Mind, mind, judgment, and the like, whatever such mental powers may be called, or courage, determination, and perseverance in one's plans, as qualities of temperament, are undoubtedly good and desirable for many purposes but they can also be extremely evil and harmful if the will … is not good."617 Like Kant, I see the primary virtue also in goodwill but more precisely in a fundamental will to the good. "Call on your Self /God." "Remember your 'primary will' ('primary virtue'). It is not a mortal sin if you, like every human being, in part want and do evil. (See also `The absolute attitude´). 9. Being and Having To have is good, to be is better. More favorable than greed is modesty. But greed is not a deadly sin. God is the only one who does not demand a price for what he does - contrary to all ideologies and most world views. To take heavenly things is more important than giving earthly things. "You are always more than you own or have achieved." (See also: Erich Fromm: "To Have or to Be"). 10. Strength and Weakness Mottos: 'I-strength is good, the strength of the actual Self even better!'. Or: 'self-strength is more important than Ego-strength.' "Try to be strong - but you can also be weak because the most important goes by itself. Let God (or others) do what you cannot do yourself." (See also section: `Self-strength and Ego-strength'.) 11. Order and Necessity People say that the way to hell is paved with good intentions. Even more: the way to hell is especially paved with many `musts´. 617 https://genius.com/Immanuel-kant-groundwork-of-the-metaphysics-of-morals-chap-i-annotated 400 It is therefore favorable: no must, no compulsion - even the favorable does not have to be better is voluntariness. 12. Primary Virtue and Morality Morality is good but the primary virtue is more important and easier. (See also `Absolute and relative will´,`The absolute attitude´ and `Right and wrong´.) 13. Freedom and Control We were born to be free. Control and discipline are good but freedom is better. You may be, however that is! (See perhaps meditation: 'Orientation and freedom' in the unabridged German version). 14. New and Old Seen from this angle, I discussed Hallucinations - an important symptom of schizophrenia - as new, strange 'creations'. The hypothesis regarding their genesis was: Inversions of all aspects can promote or cause hallucinations, in particular inversions in aspect 14 ("main impact direction"). Conversely, it is hypothesized that all `revisions´ of these inversions that all ultimately strengthen the Self, must help against hallucinations, especially those that can be categorized under aspect 14, such as "You are a unique creature - the so-called normal reality is subordinated." Or, "Everything that comes from you, all your 'creations' are allowed to be, even if they are bad." In addition, other interventions or meditations may be useful because other aspects (mainly asp. 3 and 4) play a major role. In these cases, it has proven useful for me to reflect the content and the possible origin of the acoustic hallucinations together with the patient. For example to investigate the following important questions: Which persons could such voices come from? What significance do these persons have for the person concerned? What functions could the hallucinations have? According to my experience, it is very fruitful if the person concerned does not suppress or even fight the voices he hears but has a conversation with these voices in the therapist's presence. In doing so, I advise to “somewhat” agree with the voices, in order to avoid a struggle with them, and to take into account the fact that these voices have partly positive functions, that there is usually "something true in them". As a result, the person concerned does not come into conflict with himself because the originally mostly external causes for the hallucinations became his own strange-Egos someday, which speak to him. However, in the next step, after the voices were partially proved right, I advise to present the own position corresponding to the actual Self - like, "Voice, you are not entirely wrong here and somehow I can understand where you're coming from - but essentially, I see it differently (now) namely so and so, etc." For example, if the voice insults the person concerned, which is often the case if it says something like, "You're a pig!", the optimal response would not be, "I've never been a pig!" but “Yes, sometimes I am a pig.” or something like that, "because we all are sometimes like pigs." This latter and strongest reply would be based on love/ God, who says, "You may be a 401 pig or whatever. You can be, whatever you are, you always loved and made in my image and everything else is less important!" 15. Let and Do In my experience, most mentally ill people are fixed for functioning - that is, they function according to a strange Absolute, respectively its "system". They miss out on life this way. How many people do realize "I only function!" - but they cannot change it because a change is possible only very slowly (because that is how it has been done since childhood). "Do not fight it, first try to accept it and then if possible, put it aside easily. Practice loving and in particular being loved - especially in those situations when you think you do not deserve it." "First being, then achieving" is not a bad motto. Or: "The Lord provides for those he loves while they sleep."618 - At least he gives the most important things. Or, according to Augustine: "Love - and do what you want!" "Many people believe they must do well. Nice if you can do so and have the needed strength. But it is also normal to do evil or nothing. If you forbid yourself this, you may practice it playfully. You may as well inform your friends and family members that you should practice the negative behavior – it is for their benefit, too because that way, no aggressiveness builds up. Besides, you can apologize afterward, too. Or you simply let God forgive your 'sins'." 16. Trust and Knowledge Knowledge and mind are good, trust in God even better. Rationality without irrationality becomes sterile - so "do not suppress your irrationality and your ignorance. Both God and your ignorance will protect you from being flooded with too much information because all earthly information is of relative importance." (See also: Belief and Knowledge.) 17. Openness and Reticence "Try to be open - but you may also be closed down and hide." "You are the light of the world!" and "Do not put your light under a bowl!", says Jesus. But we are also allowed to remain sitting in the dark, hide and betray ourselves - without losing ourself. 18. Values Under this aspect, I called delusion, an important symptom of schizophrenia, primarily the result of judgment and thinking disorder. These, in turn, according to the hypothesis, may have been due to inversions in every aspect but mainly due to inversions in aspect 18 'Values and meanings' - as I show in the corresponding section of delusion in the part 'Metapsychiatry'. Analogous to this, a revision of this inversion in this aspect 18 should be focused on - but just 618 Ps. 127,1 402 as a 'therapeutic spreading', revisions will also have a therapeutically favorable effect on all other inverted aspects, so in particular the person concerned's self-esteem, which can be strengthened by appropriate meditations. For example: "You have/are already the most important thing (your Self, God's love, made in his image) - everything else is less important." As I said, this also applies to all other aspects. That is to say, any meditation or attitude change that confirms the person's true Self will be therapeutically beneficial. They all find their common denominator in an unconditional love for the person concerned, or the +A or God's promises - whatever you want to call it. In short, I believe that nothing is as effective against delusion and against all other schizophrenic symptoms as this unconditional love. One question often arises in therapy: Should one correct the patient's delusional thoughts directly? In my experience, it is best to acknowledge the subjective truth that the delusional thoughts have for the patient and to try to present their positive function (as a defense mechanism, for example). Then, depending on the stability of the person concerned, one can encourage him to loosen or give up this protective function and to trust his true Self/ God. At the same time, I would like to point out that it can make sense to use the old defense mechanisms (as well as antipsychotics) again, on purpose, in case of greater stress. Of course, this requires an intensive examination of the content and background of the delusions. Regarding the thinking: "You may have all kinds of thoughts, even the evil and crazy - killing ones, thoughts of revenge, sadistic, masochistic, sodomitic thoughts or behavior - You may curse God in your thinking or out loud (he will stand it) or curse your fellow human beings, even if they cannot stand it. Try to accept these or similar thoughts or behavior and thus you in your totality. But do not let them run to seed because they usually have a negative effect but they become even more negative if you taboo them. Yes, sometimes they can be very important and have a positive function, then it would be false if you suppress them." Howsoever, "You may be whatever you are, what you may think and do. Try to be clever (but you do not have to be clever either). Where appropriate, practice actively the evil, crazy thoughts by deliberately thinking them if you tend to taboo them." 19. Past I believe that most people who once had a psychosis have been burdened by certain strange Absolutes by birth or prenatally. They live feeling `I am only allowed to be under preconditions´. If they meet these preconditions, they are relatively stable, albeit always at risk. This applies more or less to all of us but especially to some. In my view, a psychosis occurs then when someone can no longer fulfill certain strange Absolutes or no longer wants to! We then regress and return to a point in childhood where we were overstrained by certain sA. We are then helpless, powerless and at somebody's mercy like an embryo or a child.619 Even 619 Already in the 1920s, Harry Stuck Sullivan discovered that patients who were seriously ill returned to the forms of early childhood communication. Compare: http://suite101.de/article/therapy-der-psychosen-a116571 , 2014. 403 as an adult, we retain childlike parts, even though we are mature and smart in other spheres of life. Now the dark sides of the then established sA become clear. In order not to stop their demands by illness they should be relativized. How should that happen? "Simply" by daring, under the protection of the +A, to take the position that we were not allowed to take in our childhood. So, if we dare to trust like a child of God and feel secure in "Abraham's womb", without being compelled to bring anything, and I mean anything, in order to be entitled to life, then the most important sAs will be disempowered and we will be in principle (but not totally - which is not possible here) safe and free - and will have the best basis to be healed. We will then also have the experience that despite this helpless, stuck situation, nothing happened to us and we will feel like a new human. Quite a few psychiatrists thought similarly and acted fruitfully like S. Freud in a certain way and A. Janov in his particular way ("Urschreitherapie"). Other therapists, such as John Rosen, Marguerite Sechehaye and Jacqui Lee Schiff, also succeeded by responding to their schizophrenic clients' regression and nourishing them like infants and children. While Roses and Ship fed their patients by bottle, Sechaye satisfied their needs on a symbolic level."620 They all agreed not to demand any preconditions and achievements from their patients and to provide security and appreciation in the form of an "auxiliary ego" or something similar. But this way seems easier than it is. As it means for the person concerned a great risk, to entrust himself again like a baby or toddler to someone who perhaps, similar to earlier, does not satisfy the primordial needs and thus repeats the old story. But even for therapists, a common way with the patient is not easy because they are, as each one of us, inhibited by some own sA. I think, it is therefore favorable for all parties involved to bring the +A/ the love/ God into play, as not to overburden the involved persons or to develop a symbiotic relationship because +A is the self-evident and the independent, that lives by itself and prevents that. (See optionally the story `Adult-Ego and child-I´) 20. Present The present is good - eternity better. One advises, "Carpe diem!" (Seize the day!) - but I believe that the day, the present is only an attribute of eternity which itself again is the most important thing. So you can sometimes sleep through the day without feeling guilty. Some say, "The way is the goal." But, "Whoever does not know the destination, cannot have the way." (Chr. Morgenstern). (See also `The journey is the destination´). 21. Future "Try to have no fixed expectations but only wishes from you and from the world." The earthly future can be good - the best future is in heaven. 620 But: I find it problematic as already noted in the confrontation with the psychotherapy of Janov, if the affected person regresses on a child level, but he should feel safe, loved and invulnerable - which is only partly possible in the presence of the therapist - an additional + `meta-area' (God) is best. 404 We are already inscribed and sealed in the book of eternal life in all of our first-rate uniqueness. Therefore we do not need to have any existential fear anymore. "Stand up and lift up your heads because your redemption is drawing near." 22. Right and Wrong `The Lord said, "They now know the difference between right and wrong, just as we do.´ (Genesis 3:22)621 To the guilt question In my experience, permanent feelings of guilt significantly increase the development of mental illnesses, especially psychosis. Above all, responsible and perfectionistic people are affected. "Because I have done this or that wrong, I have to be punished - otherwise my soul will not rest." Not a gracious God but our superego demands this self-punishment. Franz Kafka, for example, painstakingly described these tortures in "Der Prozess" (“The Trial”). Psychotherapy tends to deny guilt or to exclude the question of guilt. One only discusses feelings of guilt (which should be removed), but no guilt.622 Or: "Most patients are convinced that their illness is their own fault. Here it is necessary ... to overcome these false guilt convictions and to learn instead to take responsibility for one's own life. And this is a very big difference because it leads the patient into acting and shaping his present and future, instead of remaining ruminating over guilt."623 One should certainly avoid accusations of guilt. On the other hand, I see neither ignoring guilt nor accepting responsibility as the solution to avoiding guilt questions. Why should I taboo my guilt, my flaws, my shady sides or stress myself with compensating them by responsibilities? Why not just apologize if it is true? In addition, one could be absolved by Jesus. You do not have to but it is easier. But one has largely said goodbye to Jesus. The church is not innocent of that. Consider the abuse of penance in earlier times when it was a must. Scharfenberg to that: "A Christian theology and ecclesiastical practice ... which must first awaken and nurture feelings of guilt and then redeem them with the word of forgiveness perverts to a pure end in itself of an ideology hostile to life." 624 Similar H. Wahl: "The dialectic of the eternal conflict, man's division with himself and God and the rediscovered unity and reconciliation with God and the world in Christ, between the 'penultimate' and the 'last' also assign the phenomenon of the ethical and thus the Ethics its place and value in the whole of reality: as knowledge of good and evil, all ethics belong to the structure of the penultimate ... This freedom, in which, instead of masochistic selftormenting according to the mechanism of 'guilt and atonement', human self-acceptance (Tillich), happiness, imagination and capacity for suffering (Sölle), free self-obedience and a free dealing with the instincts (Mitscherlich) are, belongs to the identity of faith and implies the abolition of the 'guilt principle' but not the denial of real guilt experience that requires a 621 Contemporary English Version, 2006. I read that in the entire work of S. Freud the word 'guilt' is mentioned only once. 623 Aus: Krank- selber schuld? www.ekir.de/bonn/00/stk/Downloads/12_-_Krank_-_selber_schuld.pdf 2007. 624 Scharfenberg quoted at H. Wahl ibid. p. 288. 622 405 differentiated more structured, 'strong' I; this liberation is rather aimed at the enabling and willingness of responsible acceptance of guilt (Bonhoeffer, Ricoeur) ['and of handing over guilt' should be added in my opinion] - instead of an 'illusionary getting over guilt' before a foreign law - or superego God."625 Many people see only moral teaching in the gospel. But one wishes, as the above-cited blogger or as H. Thielicke puts it, " 'beyond good and evil', to be treated in medical 'objectiveness'. One would like to be liberated from guilt and paranoia; one would like to have something like the Christian who knows about 'forgiveness' and 'peace' ... One would like ... being talked out of the feeling of guilt."626 "Various analyzes illuminate the unconscious background of guilt. This itself is presented to the patient as the product (let us say, causally deducible product) of various childhood traumas or similar causes, thus removing the sphere of freedom, in which all genuine guilt and all genuine knowledge about it, is grounded. It is the result of a process to which the patient behaves purely as an object ... But in seeing my deeds, my conscience, my feeling, even my entire subjective existence to be the products of contexts suprapersonal and detached from my responsibility, my freedom is denied and the real guilt 627my depression backgrounds could be based on is disputed."628 In short, you handle the patient as an innocent object and not as a normal person who sometimes becomes guilty. And that will also weaken the therapy. As said, guilt is not the last thing. I think again about Luther's sentence: "Sin bravely and all the more believe bravely in God's forgiveness." Or, "You do not have to justify yourself - you are already justified!"629 (See also `Absolute and relative will´and `The absolute attitude´). 23. Protection and Defense "Try to trust: your Self is indestructible! What is destructible are our strange Selves. But our strange Selves are not only bad, they also protect us but only like heavy tanks. They are good in an emergency but generally too heavy and too expensive. Try not to fight your enemies but to let them be, perhaps even to 'love' them (not what they do!), then it will be easier for you to admit or even love your own inner enemies. This is not a must! You can also hate your enemies, in an emergency that is even favorable but generally, it is too exhausting and makes depended. We often defend our strange Selves because we consider them to be our own Self and fight against our own Self because we consider it strange. But we also do not have to defend our Self. It defends itself. Stronger: God defends it. It is enough if you defend your I. If you have no strength for it, do not be afraid, God still protects 625 H. Wahl ibid. p. 288f. H. Thielicke, In: Läpple, Volker & Joachim Scharfenberg (Hrsg.): „Psychotherapie und Seelsorge“; Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt, 1977, p.126f. 627 One ought to say, "... A perhaps real guilt will then be denied", because of course, other people can be guilty of my depression, too. 628 H. Thielicke ibid. S.128. 629 I used to be just sad about my sins in the past. Now I am still saddened about them, too, but also happy because God takes them away from me - and this joy is greater than my sadness. 626 406 the most important thing, your Self. God will also avenge you. Your perpetrators will be treated fairly by him, that is if they repent, he will forgive them if not, then they judged themselves or “Vengeance is mine”, says God but he is still more the grace. You do not have to burden yourself with this exhausting judgeship - He will do that." Fictitious letter to a Schizophrenic Person "Believe me, nothing can tear up your person's very base, your very Self because it is indestructible as it rests in God (even if you do not believe in God). What can break is a strange Self, the strange center, the strange Absolute in your soul - that which you may think of as your Self but that is not. To attribute no absolute importance to this strange absolute can be like a hard drug withdrawal because we have become addicted to the strange Absolutes. You will need a lot of staying power. But you have time. When the strange Self dies, it will feel terrible because you think it is your own Self. But believe me, there is the actual, indestructible Self, which you cannot see or have not experienced yet. It is under the strange Self. I.e. under your illness rests the actual health - by no means lasting well-being. How do you recognize the strange Self? Above all, it demands something from you before you can be yourself. How do you know the actual Self (God)? That there is something in you that loves you for your own sake - without preconditions, without demands (only with orientations.) Try to believe that you are loved for your own sake, howsoever you are! Believe me, the Spirit of God, which is also called the Holy Spirit, will always love and accompany you. God will take all the blame from you, you will be like new-born and you will always live." Successes of 'Primary Psychotherapy' Regarding the successes of psychotherapies that consider religiosity or spirituality, there is little German-language literature. In addition, the differences between the different religions and spiritualities are sometimes immense, so it will be difficult to make general statements about their successes. In Anglo-American literature, there are many reports of healings based on similar experiences. (See, for example, `Curability´ of Schizophrenia.) I have had the experience that, with the inclusion of what I called the positive Absolute (the love / God), which is at the center of this 'primary psychotherapy', the serious mental disorders, the psychoses, as described above, have good chances of healing. As far as I know, the anonymous self-help groups, whose concepts are very similar to mine, have had very good successes. And if even S. Freud praised the advantages of `religious beliefs' towards psychoanalysis,630 this should encourage every layman concerned to benefit from such beliefs. I hope to have shown that a theory and practice that conveys the most love is also the most effective. When I find this greatest love in God / Jesus, this is my (but also other) 630 Sigmund Freud - Oskar Pfister: Briefwechsel 1909-1939, Frankfurt: Fischer, 1963, p. 12f. For details, see `Content and goals´ of 'Christian psychotherapy'. 407 personal experience, which, however, is less based on religious formulas than on corresponding contents as they are more or less found in all good psychotherapies as well. 408 Some Mini-Stories • Redemption • The umbilical cord • The small child in us • Neurotics • Nobody can help me - I'm doing everything wrong • Sadomasochism • Story of the slipping • How do I get from the seesaw? • The bread-roll story • The story of the big trap • The plus 30 or minus 70 percent • The story of the wrong suitcase • The story of missing thanks • Rail or gravel • The pit • The story of the conflicting interpretation • The story of the lost paradise • The story of the prostitutes • A neurotic story between myself and my wife Redemption A few years ago, I went with my wife to the Community of Taizé in France because I was in a personal crisis. At that time the Prior Frère Roger still lived. During the summer months, thousands of young people from many countries gather in Taizé to celebrate, to sing and to pray together. But I was depressed, anxious and full of self-doubt. In my need, I asked one of the Order Brothers to bless me, although to me this was unusual. The brother asked me only for my name, for nothing else - and I said to him my name. Then something wonderful happened: He pressed a cross like a seal on my forehead and said, "God will always love you!" This struck me like a lightning bolt. I had to cry - it was liberating tears - I felt redeemed. The blessing liberated and raised me - but it did not allow me to heighten myself. I'm sure if the President of the United States or a tramp wanted to have the blessing after me. No matter they got the same blessing. The Umbilical Cord People who are interdependent are connected with each other like with umbilical cords. This often affects several people at the same time. So also different generations. Even if parents or grandparents no longer live, we can be dependent on them. One thinks, as long as one has still, what makes dependent, does not happen much. However, we overlook how much we must sacrifice ourselves for this and ultimately come too short, and that our fears and diseases have to do with this situation. What can you do? First, I recommend two exercises: 409 1. The participants should do "separation exercises": they should work on the points at which they are dependent on other people (alone driving, shopping, visiting, traveling, expressing their own opinion, their own wishes clearly and not pretended wishes the other, etc.) I recommend at least once in the partnership. - to make a fictional separation conversation. What if we are separated by destiny or divorce? (The conversation should be in the details, otherwise, it makes little sense!) - occasionally conduct a conversation with reversed roles. I am you and you are me - and what we say then! 2. Likewise, it is useful for dependent partners to do approaching exercises because interdependent ones cannot separate and not approach each other enough too. In both cases, they must fear the loss of their mental stability. When they are completely separated, they fear the loss of something that seems absolutely important to them (e.g. partner); in the case of a more intense approximation, they must fear that they will be "sucked" of the other. In other words because they fear their own loss in separation and the loss of the other in intense approximation, the partners remain in a fixed middle or stalemate position. The freedom they still have is determined by the degree of their dependencies. A possible deeper solution consists in revising the definition of what love is. (Possibly also what God is.) A big field! The most important misunderstandings here are, in short: lack of self-love, excessive mutual consideration, the opinion of having to prove oneself and the other, dogmatized principles and ideologies, false gods, etc. The Small Child in Us The figure shows a child who was blocked in its development at the age of three years. If this blockage has not been lifted, the blocked child will still be within us, even if we are 25, 35, 40 years or older. 3 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 yaers Therapy: Accept the small child, take it by the hand and try very patiently to move forward with it. We humans appear as one whole person. In our interior, however, we have many, contradictory spheres. In these spheres, we are differently secure, differently congruent, differently mature etc. We can have a lot of experience and competence in some spheres and be there much 'further' than people of the same age. At other levels, however, it can look absolutely different: There we are afraid, unsafe and helpless like small children maybe even like a newborn child. While we give the image of an adult to the outside, there is in truth a different, other picture, which, as I said, can range from the newborn to the wise 410 old man. Thus outer appearance and inner conditions are often in extreme contradiction. Maturity is welcome to us - the helpless-childish or evil parts not. They have mostly arisen in childhood because we have been blocked in certain development stages. The main blockages, as shown in this publication, are fixed ideals, prohibitions, strange absolutizations (sA). In most cases, these are from parents who are blocked or fixed in similar places. Mostly unconsciously, for fear or other reasons the parents or a parent did not dare to develop freely and self-confidently at these points and that´s why they blocked the development of the child. If the child dares new ways, it comes to fear or even rejection of the parents. The normal development in this sphere is blocked and can remain so for decades also unnoticed blocked. But if the person in question comes into a life phase or situation where he faces a problem at this blocked level, he/she will behave accordingly to the "mental age" in which he/she was blocked - thus like a small, helpless child. Now comes a crucial point: We can accept this situation or we cannot accept it. We usually do the latter. We do not accept our unloved childlike behaviors, repress them or, worst of all, we fight them and want to exterminate them but they are parts of us. We want to kill the little child in us. We have often accused our parents that they loved us too little - and do not even notice the tragedy that we are now perhaps even worse with ourselves. What can you do? We should do what we can do with our own children but never have learned with us: We should try to accept and to love the fearful, helpless, evil child within us. We should take it by the hand and accompany it slowly and patiently into the world, which is so frightening. This means that in situations where we "failed", we should try to be with us. In these cases, the 'paradoxical' attempt is quite efficient to play deliberately the role of failure, disgust, pig, or the like. Intentionally and upright (!). Note: One difficulty of eliminating the blockade is that the blockade is not only a hindrance but also a protection of the helpless child from the threat. Try to take the risk! It will help a religious person to feel accepted in these situations completely as a child of God. God does not demand that we react always adult. Neurotics A small selection of our follies: 1. Too much noise in the house by quarrel → Everybody shuts the ears, instead of solving the conflicts. 2. The unemployed are to blame for unemployment. For if they did not exist, then there would be no unemployment. 3. The big child can still not go - that´s why the mother has to wear the child, it falls otherwise 4. If I put my head in the sand, I do not see the danger. 5. Because I'm too fat, I cannot move, that´s why I cannot lose weight 6. You are to blame for my bad behavior. Or: I am to blame for your bad behavior. 7. I take painkillers because my feet are burning instead of buying better shoes. 8. I have left my husband only for your sake! 9. How can I put the weapon away, but then the enemy shoots me. However, he argues as 411 well as me. 10. If the purpose sanctifies the means. 11. She: "I love you!" He: "I thank you." 12. Things are more important than people. Nobody Can Help Me - I'm Doing Everything Wrong Patient: "I'm so desperate because I'm doing everything wrong." Therapist first: "It's not so bad. Accept your mistakes." P. "I cannot accept it, even that's wrong, you cannot help me." Therapist probably more effective with paradoxical intervention: "You can do everything wrong." Or like Luther: “Sin boldly but believe and rejoice in Christ even more boldly.” Sadomasochism Neurotic play of sadomasochism: He submits to the domina and thus becomes dependent on her. At the same time, she is dependent on his payment. Each is thus the dependent ruler and the dependent object of the other at the same time. → Neurotic happiness and satisfaction, neurotic balance and neurotic stability. Also: shorter luck and longer bad luck. Story of the Slipping The strange Self (sS) gives a person a certain base which is differently wide: from the narrow burr up to the bigger width which never reaches, however, the width and stability of the real Self. As long as this person is on the sS base and does not leave this, he stands sure. Yes, he can say himself with pride that he has created it, this higher position compared with other people. If the person leaves, however, this sS base - and this is exact in the point where he does not fulfill the demands of the strange Selves any more - then he will slip off into the negative sphere. It begins a slipping or dropping to which the affected person is delivered more or less and which stands, besides, in no relation to the defectiveness of his behavior. It becomes a self-running. Most mental disorders are found in such autodynamical and mostly self-destructive processes. If somebody stands with both legs on real itself, it can go, figuratively spoken, also down, then, however, it is a descent with which the person concerned loses not the footing but keeps always firm ground under the feet. People who climb the "strange Self-summit" live under durable compulsion: „You must come up higher, you must reach this, you must become better“- everywhere `must'. If the summit is reached under self-abandonment, height drunkenness, however, becomes soon fear - but the descent is forbidden. It seems like the loss of self-esteem. The summit must be hold - in spite of fear, in spite of an immense effort and in spite of increasing cold and loneliness. Besides, it would be much easier for us to trust our real self-(God) but then the kick is absent. 412 „+“ area ‒ area sS sS How Do I Get from the Seesaw? Two or more people sit on a seesaw. They want to stop with seesaws. Problem: The one below could go down easiest but then he endangers the seated one on top because this would then fall down. Solution: The one, which sits top must - with a certain risk - first down. A seemingly paradoxical solution because the initially more risky solution is the better one. That is, not every easy solution is the best. Similar: The story of the family, which holds an expensive balance in the boat. If one of them moved, the boat can capsize, although thereby a solution is blocked. (See also 'Relationship disorders'). The Bread-Roll Story Or: too much consideration and love. At the end of her life, a couple is astonished that both of them, despite the utmost consideration, had been given the part of the bread roll, which they did not want. How did it come? The man always wanted the upper part of the bun. But because he loved his wife very much and thought that she wanted the upper part as well, he preferred the lower one. However, she wanted, actually, always the lower one but because also she wanted to give him the better one, she said, she wants the upper one. Everybody thus gave to the other from a wrong consideration what he wanted, actually, himself - with the result that both got this what they did not want or did not get both what they wanted, actually. But it would have been easier a lot. The Story of the Big Trap In the normal psychical development, we go through the phases of the adaptation, the antiposition and finally of detachment. We all are blocked in this development more or less and shy. On the way to solve these blockings, there are many obstacles, seduction and traps. One of the biggest traps is the following: At last, we believe, we have parted from our parents. At last, we are no longer following their love and recognition. At last, we have looked through them and are shocked at how weak, timid, flawed, and even evil they are. We now know which mistakes we cannot make with our children now. But one day we see like in a mirror and see with horror how similar we have remained to our parents. We are, as in the case of the mirror image, exactly different, mirrored but therefore still dependent. But the actual great trap is not this realization but if we condemn ourselves. I wish my readers that they do not. If they do not, it also means that they stop condemning their parents. 413 The Plus 30 or Minus 70 Percent At the points where we are fixed, where we have absolutized something, the story of the plus 30 and minus 70 percent will come across. You can fix yourself on everything. For example, on sex or success - which is the case with many men. The inner, often unconscious motto is: I must necessarily have sex or success. Only then I am happy. It is not a mistake when men want sex and success, the mistake is when they depend on it. What is happening? If he concerned is fixed to 1oo% achievement but reaches only 30, he loses the 3o% satisfaction too but experiences, unfortunately, 7o% minus. minus 70 % 0 0 100 % + 3o The Story of the False Suitcase A patient had a dream: He went with a heavy suitcase through a strange town and searched lodging. Suddenly he tripped, the suitcase fell down and its contents poured forth on the street. In amazement, he found out that the things which had liked there on the street not his but they of his parents were. He let everything lie, and went free in his ways. He had understood that the suitcase at all had not been his "thing". The Story of Missing Thanks Our grandchildren have certain wishes. Although my woman it sometimes cuts herself from the ribs, she fulfills almost all wishes. Result: The grandchildren look at it as natural and, therefore, thank her seldom. Maybe they think even: The granny needs this because is just her thing - yes then she would even have to thank us for giving us something. I try to keep up sometimes the motto: „Dear a healthy and bad grandpa, than good and dead.“ Result: I am thanked for the most. Rail or Gravel If we are programmed on the positive strange Absolutes and must fulfill whose demands, then we get speed like on a rail. If we do not fulfill the demands because we can no longer fulfill them or no longer want, we come from the rail on the gravel. Rail or grit, everything or nothing, black or knows, properly or wrong and nothing in between, that are then the formulae. Then it will be difficult to find or create normal ways or meadows in this sphere. (See also `Resistence´) The Pit People start to live from very different positions. The first far in the plus, the second far in the minus. 414 The second one often falls into a pit, although he has done more than the first. Why? If he compares with the first one after a few years, he is still behind him. He takes it badly and falls into the "pit" (depression ...). His mistake: he does not consider that he had a much worse start and could be proud of himself. Findings: Compare is crap. The Story of the Conflicting Interpretation My wife has got a new book and instead of going to bed with me, she reads the whole night. Is this the sign of a lack of love or great love? Lacking love perhaps because she prefers the book to me. But it is big love, perhaps because she considers me so generous that she can do it. The Story of the Lost Paradise We have lost paradise through our sins. We try to put ourselves in the place of God and eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. That is, we have tied ourselves to the leg, which is too hard for us. Instead, to relativize the question of good and evil, we have submitted to it and are now condemned to do the good and to let the evil. We should not have done this stress. (See also `Theodicy´) We should live in the center of our lives paradise again - (in the core) beyond good and evil. (It is easiest with Jesus, I believe). The Story of the Prostitutes One prostitute to another: The men are all pigs. They want only one thing: sex. One suitor to another: the prostitutes are all pigs. They want only one thing: money. A Neurotic Story between Myself and My Wife Because my last two patients fell out, I came at home one hour too soon. Instead of joy, I see slight horror on the face of my wife because, as I learned later, she had not yet ready the meal. But I did not expect that at all - on the contrary, it does not matter to me. I am now offended because she has not rejoiced at my coming, and even more because she seems to me to be under the impression that I, like a despot, demand immediate punctual food. 415 She feels hurt because I've told her that she was not happy about my coming and even more about it because it seems that I do not care when the food comes to the table and I do not value their efforts. A neurotic solution that went through with the head would be that I would never come home too soon, so that this conflict does not even arise. And I often take such neurotic solutions because they create greater relief in the short term. © by T. Oettinger, 2003/2021 Meditations (see unabridged German version) 416 BIBLIOGRAPHY OF THE UNABRIDGED GERMAN EDITION Arieti, Silvano: Schizophrenie. Piper, München-Zürich, 9. Edition 2006. Arieti, Silvano: Understanding and Helping the Schizophrenic; Basic Books. Inc., New York 1979. Auster, Paul: Die New-York-Trilogie; Rowohlt, 1998. Auster, Paul: The New York Trilogy; Faber and Faber Ltd. London, 2011. Avenarius, R.: Nervenarzt, 44.Jg. H.5, 1973 p.238. Bandler, Richard und John Grinder: Metasprache und Psychotherapie; Junfermann-Verlag Paderborn, 1981. Bateson, Gregory et al.: Schizophrenie und Familie, Suhrkamp TB, 1978. Bateson, Gregory et al.: http://solutions-centre.org/pdf/TOWARD-A-THEORY-OF-SCHIZOPHRENIA-2.pdf Becker, Vera: Die Primadonnen der Psychotherapie. Junfermann, Paderborn, 1989. Benedetti, G. et al: Psychosentherapie; Hippokrates-Verlag, Stuttgart 1983. Berg-Peer, Janine: Schizophrenie ist scheiße, Mama! Fischer TB, Frankfurt aM, 2013. Binder, Hans: Die menschliche Person; H. Huber-Verlag Bern, 1964, p 204. Biser, Eugen: Theologie als Therapie; Verlag für die Medizin Dr. Ewald Fischer, Heidelberg, 1985, p 47. Bleuler, Eugen: Lehrbuch der Psychiatrie. Springer-Verlag Berlin-Heidelberg-New York, 1983. Böker W., Brenner HD: (Hrsg.): Bewältigung der Schizophrenie. Hans-Huber; Bern, Stuttgart, Toronto (1986). Bollas, Christopher: Der Schatten des Objekts. Klett-Cotta, Stuttgart, 2005. Borsche, Tilman Hrsg.: Klassiker der Sprachphilosophie; C.H. Beck Verlag, München. 1996. Bovet, Theodor: Der Glaube Erstarrung und Erlösung; Paul-Haupt Verlag, Bern 1947. Bowels, Paul: Himmel über der Wüste; Rowohlt TB, 1991, p 197. Bowen, M. in: Schizophrenie und Familie; Suhrkamp Verlag Frankfurt a.M. 1978, p 182. Breggin, P. R. (1997). Brain-Disabling Treatments in Psychiatry: Drugs, Electroshock and the Role of the FDA. New York: Springer Publishing Company.NY, 2008. Breggin, P. R. (2012). Psychiatric Drug Withdrawal: A Guide for Prescribers, Therapists, Patients and their Families. New York: Springer Publishing Company. Breggin, P. R. The Heart of Being Helpful: Empathy and the Creation of a Healing Presence, Paperback published 2006 by Springer Publishing Company. Brinkmann N.: Die deutsche Sprache Gestalt und Leistung; Düsseldorf, 1962. Brockhaus Enzyklopädie in 24 Bd. 19. edition F.A. Brockhaus, Mannheim, 1986. Bucher, Anton: Psychologie der Spiritualität, Handbuch; Beltz PVU. Büchner, Georg: Dantons Tod; z.B. Reclam, Stuttgart, 2001. Büchner, Georg: Leonce und Lena; z.B. Studienausgabe, Reclam, Stuttgart, 2001. Cardenal, Marie: Schattenmund; Rowohlt TB-Verlag, 1988. Caruso, Igor, A.: Psychoanalyse und Synthese der Existenz. Freiburg, 1952. Chomsky, Noam: Sprache und Geist. Suhrkamp Verlag, Frankfurt a.M. 1970. Ciompi, Luc: Affektlogik. Klett-Cotta-Verlag Stuttgart, 1982. Daim, Wilfried: Umwertung der Psychoanalyse. Herold Verlag Wien, 1951. Daim, Wilfried: Tiefenpsychologie und Erlösung Herold Verlag Wien, 1954. Dawkins, Richard: Der Gotteswahn, Ullstein TB, 2008. Dettmering, Peter: „Zwillings- und Doppelgängerphantasie, Königshausen & Neumann-V., Würzburg 2006. Deutsches Fremdwörterbuch (DFWB). Bearbeitung von G. Strauss, E. Donalies, H. Kämper; Jensen Verlag: Walter de Gruyter & Co; Auflage: 2. Edition 1995. Drewermann, Eugen: Psychoanalyse und Moraltheologie. Bd.1, Bd. 2 Matthias Grünewald Verlag, Mainz 1984. Drewermann, Eugen: Tiefenpsychologie und Exegese. Bd.II Walter Verlag Olten und Freiburg i.Br., 1986. Drewermann, Eugen: Sünde und Neurose... in: Münchener Theologische Zeitschrift 31, 1980. Duden, Das große Fremdwörterbuch. Duden-Verlag, 1994. Duden Grammatik : Bibliographisches Institut Mannheim Wien Zürich. Dudenverlag 3. Auflage, 1973. Eigen, Michael: The Psychotic Core , Jason Aronson Inc. Publishers;: New edition (Juni 1993) 417 Evangelischer Erwachsenen Katechismus, Gütersloh, 6. edition 2000. Finzen, Asmus: Schizophrenie; Psychiatrie Verlag, Köln 2. Auflage, 2013. Foudraine, Jan: „Wer ist aus Holz?“ R. Pieper & Co.Verlag, München, 1974. Frank, Gunter: Schlechte Medizin, Knaus; 1. edition 2012. Frankl, Viktor E.: Das Leiden am sinnlosen Leben. Herder Verlag Freiburg-Basel-Wien, 1980, p 98. Frankl, Viktor E.: Der unsichtbare Gott. Kösel Verlag, 1974. Freud, Sigmund: Abriss der Psychoanalyse; Fischer Verlag (Taschenbuch), 1983. Freud, Sigmund: Gesammelte Werke Bd. XIV p 378. Fromm, Erich: Die Kunst des Liebens. Ullstein Taschenbuch Verlag, 1985. Fromm, Erich: To Have or to Be. Harper & Row, 1976. Fuchs, Thomas: Die Psychiatrie, Schattauer, 4/2010, p 236. Glasenapp von, Helmuth et al.: Das Fischer-Lexikon. 1. Die nichtchristlichen Religionen , Fischer-V. Frankfurt a.M. , 1957. Gödel, Kurt: Über formal unentscheidbare Sätze der Principia Mathematica und verwandter Systeme I. Monatshefte für Mathematik und Physik 38, 1931, p 173–198. Goethe, Wolfgang: z.B. Divan, Notizen und Abhandlungen; Faust. Greenberg, Joanne: `I never promised you a rose garden´. St. Martin´s Paperbacks, 2009. Gruen, Arno: Der Verrat am Selbst. DTV, München, 2005. Gruen, Arno: Der Wahnsinn der Normalität. DTV, München, 2004. Guareschi, G., Don Camillo und Peppone; Rowohlt TB, 1995. Gunderson John G.; Loren R. Mosher, Aronson "Psychotherapy Of Schizophrenia, New York City, 1975. Harold F. Searles, Collected Papers on Schizophrenia and Related Subjects, karnac, 1986. Hasler, Felix: Neuromythologie. Transcript Verlag, Bielefeld. 3. edition 2013. Heidegger; M. In: Die Sprache. Hrsg. Bayrische Akademie der schönen Künste. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt, 1959, p 93. Heimann, H.: Psychiatrie der Gegenwart Bd. I/l. Springer Verlag Berlin-Heidelberg-New York, 1979. Heintel, Erich: Einführung in die Sprachphilosophie. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt, 1972. Heisenberg, Werner: Sprache und Wirklichkeit in der modernen Physik. p 194 zit. bei Hoffmann p 139. Hellinger, Bert: „Zweierlei Glück“, Carl-Auer Verlag 2010. Hesse, Hermann: Die Fiebermuse; Das Glasperlenspiel, Stufen. Hölderlin, Friedrich: Der Tod des Empedokles, II,4; Hyperion, Frankfurt a.M. Insel-Verlag. 1983. Hofmannsthal, Hugo von, Die Gedichte und kleinen Dramen, Insel-V., Leipzig, 1923, p 3. Hofmannsthal, Hugo von: Der weiße Fächer. Ebd. p 136. Horney, Karen: Neurose und menschliches Wachstum; Aus Yalom: Was Hemingway von Freud hätte lernen können. p 35. Horney, Karen: Neurosis and human growth.NewYork, W.W. Norton, 1950. Horvath, Ödön von: Der ewige Spießer. Frankfurt, Suhrkamp, 1987. Humboldt, W.v.: zitiert bei Stenzel. International Dictionary of Psychoanalysis, ed. by Alain de Mijolla, Detroit [u.a.] : Thomson/Gale, 2005, (PDF) Jackson, Murray (Author), Paul Williams Unimaginable Storms: Search for Meaning in Psychosis karnac, 1994. Janov, Arthur: The Primal Scream; Abacus London, 1973. Jaspers, Karl: Allgemeine Psychopathologie. Springer Verlag Berlin-Heidelberg-New York, 1973. Jaspers, Karl: Die großen Philosophen, Piper-V. München, 5. edition 1995. Josuran, R., Hoehne, V., Hell, D.: Mittendrin und nicht dabei. Verlag AG Zürich, 1999. Jung C.G. In: Psychotherapie und Seelsorge. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1977, p 182. Jung, W.: Grammatik der deutschen Sprache. Bibliographisches Institut Leipzig, 1973. Kaiser, Peter: Religion in der Psychiatrie. V&R unipress Göttingen 2007 (Net). Karon, Bertram P.: Psychotherapy of Schizophrenia: The Treatment of Choice, Jason Aronson, Inc. 1977. Karon, Bertram P.: Psychotherapy versus medication for schizophrenia. In: Fisher, S. Greenberg, R.P.: the Limits of Biological Treatments of Psychological Distress. Hillsdale, New Jersey, 1989. Kaufmann L., Luc Diskussionsbeitrag. In: Psychotherapie und Sozialtherapie der Schizophrenie. Hrsg. H. Stierlin, 418 L.C. Wynne, M. Wirschnig. Springer Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg-New-York-Tokio, 1985, p 284/285. Keller A. Albert: Sprachphilosophie. Freiburg i.Br.-München Aber-Verlag, 1979. Kellerhals, Emanuel: Der Islam. Brendow-V. Moers, 1993, 3.edition Kielholz, A. In: Psychotherapie und Seelsorge. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1977. Kisker, K.P., H. Freyberger, H.K. Rose, E. Wulff: `Psychiatrie, Psychosomatik, Psychotherapie´, Georg Thieme-V. Stuttgart, 1991. Klemperer, Victor: LTI: Notizbuch eines Philologen. Reclam Universalbibliothek, Leipzig, 2. edition, 1968. English Translation: The Language of the Third Reich, LTI. © The Atione Press 2000. Klessman, Edda & Horst-Alfred: Heiliges Fasten und heilloses Fressen; Hans Huber-V. Bern, Stuttgart, Toronto. 1988. Klöppel, Renate: Die Schattenseite des Mondes; Rowohlt TB, Reinbek, 2004. Klußmann, Rudolf: `Psychotherapie´. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg... 3. edition, 2000. Kondakow, N.I.: Wörterbuch der Logik; deb Verlag, Westberlin, 1978. Koran (Qur´an), Die ungefähre Bedeutung des Koran, Hrsg. Lies Stiftung 11. edition 2013. Küng, Hans: Projekt Weltethos, Piper München, 1990. Läpple, Volker & Joachim Scharfenberg (Hrsg.): „Psychotherapie und Seelsorge“; Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt, 1977. Laing, Ronald, D.: The Divided Self. Penguin Books, London, 1990. Lauveng, Arnild: Morgen bin ich ein Löwe - wie ich die Schizophrenie besiegte; btb München, 2008. Lehmann, Peter (HG.): Psychopharmaka absetzen; Antipsychiatrie Verlag, 2. edition, Berlin, 2002. Lennox, John: Hat die Wissenschaft Gott begraben? R. Brockhaus Verlag; 2. edition Wuppertal 2002. Lessing: Minna von Barnhelm. Liebrucks, Bruno: Sprache und Bewußtsein. Akademische Verlagsgesellschaft Frankfurt a.M. Bd. II, 1965. Little, Margaret: Transference Neurosis & Transference Psychosis Jason Aronson, Inc.; First Softcover Edition edition (7, 1977). Loch, Wolfgang (Hg.): Die Krankheitslehre der Psychoanalyse. S. Hirzel-V. ,Stuttgart, 1977. Lurker, M.: Wörterbuch der Symbolik.-Alfred Kroener Verlag Stuttgart. 1988. Lütz, Manfred: Irre! Wir behandeln die Falschen - unser Problem sind die Normalen. Gütersloher Verl. 2009. Mackler, Daniel: Film: Take These Broken Wings -- Recovery from Schizophrenia without Medication. Mann, Thomas: Joseph und seine Brüder. Aufbau Verlag Berlin, 1974, Bd. 4, p 7. Mentzos, Stavros: Neurotische Konfliktverarbeitung;. Frankfurt a.M., Fischer TB,1992. Mertens, Wolfgang: Psychoanalyse. Kohlhammer, Stuttgart u.a., 1992. Meyers Großes Taschenlexikon. In 24 Bd. 4. edition Bd I. Taschenbuchverlag, Mannheim et al. 1992. Miller, James: Die Leidenschaft des Michel Foucault“ Kiepenheuer & Witsch 1995. Miller, James: Die Leidenschaft des Michel Foucault“ Kiepenheuer & Witsch, 1995. Miller, James: The Passion of Michel Foucault; Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1993. Mosher, Loren R (Chief of the Center for Studies of Schizophrenia in the National Institute of Mental Health (1968–1980), Soteria Project.“ Cit. "Psychiatry is bought by the pharmaceutical industry ...“ keyword: non-drug treatments of schizophrenia. Müller P.: Einige Aspekte zur Neuroleptika-Wirkung auf die psychosoziale Entwicklung schizophrener Patienten, In: W. Böker und H.D. Brenner (1986). Pasternak, Boris: Gedichte, Verlag Volk und Welt, Berlin 1969, p 189. Pasternak, Boris: Doktor Schiwago. (wahrscheinlich Fischer TB) p 20. Peters, Uwe-Hendrik: Lexikon Psychiatrie, Psychotherapie, medizinische Psychologie, 5. edition Urban & Fischer, 1999. Pfeifer, Samuel: Die Schwachen tragen; Brunnen Verlag, Basel und Gießen, 2. edition 1990. Philosophisches Wörterbuch, VEB Bibliographisches Institut, Leipzig, 1970. Philosophisches Wörterbuch, Hrsg. Schischkoff, G., Alfred Kröner Verlag Stuttgart, 1991. Podvoll, Edward M.: Recovering Sanity: A Compassionate Approach to Understanding and Treating Psychosis, Shambhala, 2003. Psychotherapie und Seelsorge: Hrsg. Volker Läpple & Joachim Scharfenberg, Wissenschaftliche 419 Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1977. Ratzinger, Josef: Jesus von Nazareth; Herder, Freiburg im Breisgau, 2007. Resnik, Salomon: The Delusional Person: Bodily Feelings in Psychosis karnac, 2001. Reza ,Yasmina: in „Kunst“ (Theaterstück) Richter, Horst-Eberhard : Eltern, Kind und Neurose. Rowohlt TB Verlag, 1983. Richter, Horst-Eberhard: Der Gotteskomplex. Rowohlt Verlag, Hamburg. 1979. Riemann, Fritz: Grundformen der Angst. Reinhardt Ernst-V. 40.edition 2011. Rolland, R.: Das Leben Tolstois. Rütten und Loening, Berlin 1967, p 54. Roth, Joseph: Juden auf Wanderschaft. Gesammelte Werke Bd 3 Allert de LangeVerlag Amsterdam, 1976 p 293. Ross, Werner: Der ängstliche Adler, Friedrich Nietzsches Leben, TB, München, 1984. Rudolf, Gerd, Peter Henningsen, Hrsg.: Psychotherapeutische Medizin und Psychosomatik. 6. Edition Thieme-V., 2007. Sachse, Ullrich: Traumazentrierte Psychotherapie; Schattauer, Stuttgart, 2004. Safranski, Rüdiger, Goethe und Schiller; Fischer TB frankfurt a.M., 2013. Sartre, Jean-Paul: Geschlossene Gesellschaft. Saint-Exupéry, Antoine de: Aus „Dem Leben einen Sinn geben“ Karl Rauch Verlag, Düsseldorf 1957. Scharfetter, Christian: Schizophrene Menschen. Urban u. Schwarzenberg, München-Weinheim, 1986. Schischkoff, Georgi: Philosophisches Wörterbuch. Alfred Kröner-V. Stuttgart, 22. edition 1991. Schneemann, N.: Sprache und Psychopathologie. Nervenarzt 44, p 359-366, Springer Verlag 1973. Schweitzer, Albert: In: Ausgewählte Werke, Bd. 1, p 161 Union Verlag Berlin. Sechehaye, Marguerite: Tagebuch einer Schizophrenen, Edition Suhrkamp, 1973. Selvini Palazzoli, Mara, l. Boscolo, G. Cecchin, G. Prata: Paradoxon und Gegenparadoxon, Klett-Cotta, Stuttgart, 9. edition 1996. Selvini Palazzoli, Mara, l. Boscolo, G. Cecchin, G. Prata Paradox and counterparadox: a new model in the therapy of the family in schizophrenic transaction, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., New York et al. 2004. Sheldrake, Rupert: The Science Delusions; by Cornet, 2012. Siirala M.: Die Schizophrenie des Einzelnen und der Allgemeinheit. Vandenhoeck u. Ruprecht Göttingen, l96l. Slobin, Dan: Einführung in die Psycholinguistik. Scriptor Verlag Kronberg/Ts., 1974. Spierling, Volker: Kleine Geschichte der Philosophie. Piper-Verlag 5. edition1997 p 244. Stenzel J.: Philosophie der Sprache. Wissenschaftliche BuchgesellschaftDarmstadt, 1964 p 35ff, 108, 111. Stich, Helmut: Kernstrukturen menschlicher Begegnung. Johannes Berchmans Verlag München l977. Störig, Hans Joachim: Kleine Weltgeschichte der Philosophie. Fischer TB Verlag, 1998. Straus E.W.: In: Psychiatrie der Gegenwart, Bd. I/2. Springer Verlag Berlin-Göttingen-Heidelberg 1963, p 927. Strindberg: Aus „Ein Traumspiel". Stumm, Gerhard & Alfred Pritz (Hrsg.): Wörterbuch der Psychotherapie, Springer, Wien, New York, 2000. The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge University Press 1999. Tölle, Rainer: Psychiatrie 7. Edition Springer Verlag Berlin-Heidelberg-New York-Tokio, 1985, p 331. Tolstoi, Alexander: Auferstehung; Wovon die Menschen leben. Tschechow: Erzählung „Ariadna“. Turgenjew: Iwan, in der Erzählung „Mein Nachbar Radilow“. Ullmann, Ingeborg-Marie: Psycholinguistik-Psychosemiotik. Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht Verlag Göttingen, 1975. Vinnai, Gerhard: Die Austreibung der Kritik aus der Wissenschaft... www.vinnai.de/kritik.html ,2013. Virapen, John und Leo Koehof: Nebenwirkung Tod; Das Neue Licht Verlag. 7/ 2012. Volkan, Vamik D.: The Infantil Psychotic self and its Fates, Jason Aronson, Inc. (March 1, 1995) Wahl, Heribert: Christliche Ethik und Psychoanalyse. Kösel-Verlag München, 1980. Wahrig: Deutsches Wörterbuch. Bertelsmann Lexikon Verlag GMBH, 6. edition, Gütersloh 1997. Watzlawick, Paul : Vom Schlechten des Guten. Piper Verlag, München-Zürich, 1986. Watzlawick, P., J.H. Beavin, D.D. Jackson : Menschliche Kommunikation.... 420 Hans Huber, Bern-Stuttgart-Wien, 1972. Watzlawick, P., J.H. Weakland, R. Fisch : Lösungen. Hans Huber Verlag, Bern-Stuttgart -Wien, 1974. Weinmann, Stefan: Erfolgsmythos Psychopharmaka; Psychiatrie-Verlag, 2008. Weitbrecht, Hans Jörg: Psychiatrie im Grundriss. Springer, Berlin, 1963. Whitaker Robert: Anatomy of an Epidemic: Magic Bullets, Psychiatric Drugs, and the Astonishing Rise of Mental disorder in America, Crown; April 13, 2010. Whorf , B. L.: Sprache, Denken, Wirklichkeit. Rowohlt Verlag, Hamburg, 1963, p 39. Wiebicke, Jürgen: Dürfen wir so bleiben, wie wir sind?, Kiepenheuer & Witsch, Köln; 2013. Wiesenhütter, E. Freud und seine Kritiker. Darmstadt, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft (WBG) - 1974. Wolle Stefan: Die heile Welt der Diktatur. Econ TB, 2001, p 35. Wöller, Wolfgang und Johannes Kruse: Tiefenpsychologisch fundierte Psychotherapie. Schattauer, Stuttgart, 2005. Wörterbuch der Logik von Hrsg. N.I. Kondakow, deb Verlag, Westberlin, 1978. Wygotski, L.S: Denken und Sprechen, Conditio humana. Hrsg. J. Helm, Stuttgart, 1969. Wyss, Dieter: Die tiefenpsychologischen Schulen von den Anfängen bis zur Gegenwart. Göttingen, 1970. Youtube movies of: Peter Breggin, Ann-Louise Silver, Bertram Karon, Daniel Dorman, Daniel Mackler, Diana Ross, Jenny Lynn, Sabeetha Nair, Lucy Holmes. Zimbardo, Philip G.: Psychology and Life. Harper Collins Publishers. 12. Ed. 1988. [Further references are also given in corresponding footnotes]. References Open here the PDF Summary table (Read with zoom!) (abridged and unabridged German versions) Other references later. 421 Often used Abbreviations + = positive − = negative ¹ = first-rate or primary ² = second-rate (or secondary) not to be confused with coordinate (nebengeordnet) → = 'see or `result is´. * = Sign for absolutizing and / or dominance. (Often used to point to an absolutizing.) | = a sign that the German original version has been shortened at this point. A = the Absolute (+A = positive Absolute, −A = negative Absolute) All () = here strange everything, which stands in opposition to the nothing(ness). asp. = aspect C = general abbreviation for complexes that dominate personal and other areas of reality. D = Dynamism D¹ = first-rate D., D² = second-rate D. DM = Dimensions DM = Defense-mechanisms e.g. = exempli gratia (for example) etc. = et cetera I = I in general ( I¹ = first-rate I, I² = strange I = ego) i.e. = id est (that is) ibid. = ibid. It = dominating entity/instance, consisting of 2 or 3 cores: 2 parts: all and nothing (/ 0) = `dyad' or 3 parts: pro-sA or + sA, contra-sA or -sA and 0 = `triad' It/sA resp. It/sS: if I want to emphasize the absolute role of an It-part. KW = keyword = headword ns = new-strange/ new-second-rate (new secondary) No. = Number P = Person; P¹ = first-rate personality; P² = second-rate personality (often only P labeled) pr = psychically relevant r = relative R = the Relative (R represents everything that is not A or 0.) R* = Relativistic resp. = respectively s = strange = second-rate (²)631 sA = strange resp. second-rate Absolute pro-sA and contra-sA = opposing sA. asA = absolutistic strange Absolute rsA = relativistic strange Absolute s0 (or 0) = strange, determining nothing(ness) = nihilistic sS = strange Self BLQC = being, life, qualities, connections syn. = synonym W = World, reality WPI = world, person, I. 631 Discussion and definition of this term as in literature - see in` Metapsychiatry': The strange-Self (the strange personal absolute). 422 Index =Opposites 98 Absolute, the 19 7 synonyms 22 areas 22 negative (‒A) 40 overview 23 positive (+A) 39, 276 representatives, occurrences 23 strange emergence 92 positive 92 negative 93 and life and death 94 collective 197 addiction 179 behavioral, non substantial 179 ADHD 264 all and nothing emergence 91 Alzheimer's 265 anticathexis 182, 184 Anti-Psychiatry 266 attitude absolute 73 autism 146, 241, 365 autonomy 36 Beck, A.T. 332 behavior paradoxical 175, 185 being 37 belief and knowledge 42 Bermuda Triangle, psychical 262 Body Psychotherapy 338 body-psyche-spirit connections 45, 66 Buddhism 297 burn-out 263 causes 34 5 hypotheses on 35 of mental disorders 222 from biography 222 child and adult 410 choice absolute 73 Christianity 300 misinterpretations 300 Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) 331 Criticism 331 collusion 197 complexes emergence 169 contradictions 126, see also opposites coping 181 crisis 228 criticism of `Christian´ misinterpretations 300 of academic language 287 of anthropocentric psychotherapies 339 of antipsychotics 374 of behavioral therapies 331 of Buddhism 297 of Christianity 305 of functionalism 286 of humanism 290 of hyperrealism 175 of individuation 75 of Islam 295 of materialism 282 of neuroscience 340 of positive thinking 334 of psychiatric drugs 369 of psychoanalysis 325 of realism 286 of schizophrenia-theories 252 of secular psychotherapies 322 of Self-definitions 57 of self-redemption 309 symptomatic therapies 360 Criticism of religions 303 defense and anticathexis 181 delusion 253 depressive and manic reactions 258 differentiations 13 dimensions 18 division 141, 395 dynamics of complexes 195, 208 of opposites 168 of Opposites 93, 157 of opposites in schizophrenia 240 sacrificial 188 Ego see I, the:strange Embodiment 338 Esoterism 299 expressed-emotion concept 251 fascination of death and the nothing 187 of deindividualization 187 things, objects, machine 187 fear 262 Freud, S. 9, 82, 119, 184, 268, 276, 283, 304, 324, 351 fusions 103 future 404 fuzzy-logic 286 423 God 39, 310 and illness 214 and the world 45, 398 Goethe 283, 289 guilt 405 hallucinations 257 Hinduism 299 Hölderlin 221 homunculus 110 human, the 45 and the Absolute 46 and the world 47 I, the and others 398 and the absolute attitude 73 classification 70 definitions 67 strange, second-rate types 68 identity 31, 394 indestructible 395 ideologies 107, 132 individuation 75 inversion 81 classification 85 Person-It 134 Islam 295 It 87 and ideologies 107 as triad 100 definition 88 effects 123 emergence 90 in general 87 in literature 88 parts 91 emergence 96 valences 101 personal 109 differentiation 118 kinds 119 valences overview 102 Janov, A. 328 Jung, C. G. 56, 147, 169, 341, 359 neurosis 180, 214 Kant 285 Kernberg's Object-relations theory 248 Laing, R. D. 234, 361 language 13 and the psychical relevant 29 derivation of psyche 54 life 38, 397 Luther 312 materialism criticism 282 matter and spirit 37 metapsychiatry 77 metapsychotherapy 267 Metapsychotherapy problems of 270 morbid gain 215 neuroscience 340 Nietzsche 221, 304 nothingness 26 emergence 95 obsessive-compulsive disorder 260 Opposites 92, 93, 95, 102, 103, 116, 121, 126 as parts of the It 91 behavior 185 dynamic 93, 103, 157, 168 dynamics see also collusion emergence 141 Ideologies 168 important Links 106 in schizophrenia 240 in the realities 104 Overview with links 106 personal dynamic 196 Reversal 193 Solution 272 overadaptation 225 pain 263 paradoxes 102, 126, 185, see also Opposites and schizophrenia 242 emergence 139 in the world 164 in therapy 371 past 403 person 49 like It 173 to It 178 personal relationship 197 personal dynamics 171 complex 195 simple 171 with the It 192 philosophies 281 funktionalism, critique 286 materialism, criticism 282 realism, critique 286 positive thinking, criticism 334 post-traumatic stress disorders 263 present 404 primary psychotherapy and other psychotherapies 353 protection and defense 406 psyche 50 analogy to language 54 classification 53 definition 50 dimensions 56 grammar of 54 psychiatric drugs 368 psychoanalysis 324 criticism 325 psychoanalysts 328 424 psychology 49 psychoses in general 230 psychotherapists and patients 399 resistances 347 psychotherapy `Third Viennese School´ 342 and spirituality 341 behavioral 331 causal and symptomatic 359 dialectical behavioral 335 humanistic 336 integrative and gestalt 337 logotherapy (Frankl) 336 mindfulness-based 335 paradoxical 371 pastoral 343 primary 350 of schizophrenia 377 case example 407 successes 407 primary therapy Janov 328 rational-emotive 334 resilience research 338 salutogenese 337 secular 321, 322 self-help groups 345 soteriogenesis 344 spiritual-religious 341 stories 409 systemic 337 transpersonal 342 qualities 38 reality strange emergence 123 in different systems 131 general dynamics 166 redemption 272, 394 Relative, the 24 7 synonyms 25 relativity of health 43 of illness 43 Religion Criticism 303 religionism 303 resistance 312, 316 reversal into the opposite 193 of person and It 134 person and things 147 subject-object 145 reversal of qualities 130 right and wrong 405 sacrifice by desease 362 sacrificial-dynamics 188 safety 33 salvation 272, 274 schizophrenia 233 and paradoxes 242 main causes 234 new theory 234 opposites 241 split and fusion 240 splitting 238 symptoms 243 symptoms and meaning 238 theories 247 criticism 252 vulnerability-stress-theory 247 science materialist 283 Self 56 actual 61 and non-Self 117 and the I 71 definitions 56 in language 63 strange 109, 113 classification 114 emergence 114 positive and negative 116 self-help groups anonymous 345 self-optimization 334 self-redemption 307, 309, 326 self-strength and ego-strength 386 sense 43 solution 31, 271 and redemption 272 emergency by disease 362 with drugs 368 first-rate 272 in literature 275 second-rate 273 spirit soul and body see body-soul-spirit spliiting 251 split 238, see also opposites, Siehe division splitting 141, 238, 240, 250 in psychoses 231 spreading and compression 209 example 210 stutter 248 subject-object-problem 41 Thanatos 187 Theodicy 218 theologians resistances 348 tip over 193 depression 259 truth 32 unity 33 and diversity 395 425 vicious cycles 193 victim 173 victim-offender 203 virtue primary 400 vulnerability-stress-theory 247 will absolute and relative 400 Winnicott 113 withdrawal 215, 377, 390 worldviews 279, 308 anthropocentrc 280 christocentric 281 theocentric 280 Yin-Yang 92, 116 zero point 193 426 Author and Contact I am a psychiatrist/ psychotherapist and have worked for decades above all psychotherapeutically. I have no liabilities or obligations to any individuals or groups. I am glad about feedback to: Dr. Torsten Oettinger Wewelsburger Weg 7 D- 33100 Paderborn Germany Mail: torsten.oettinger@yahoo.de © by T. Oettinger, 1999/2021. Lizenz CC BY SA This publication is partly translated or proofread by dr. Robert Oettinger, Astrid Quick, Pia Burt, Joschua and Barbara Minnich. We try to keep improving the translation. 427