Do Children Matter?

Brian Lynch

“Paddling in 2010? "We're too old to get spanked," she told CNN. "This is not the 1940's." Erica DeRamous

I am going to comment on a few aspects of not “child care” but children’s status. Children are people.

A friend of mine pointed out an amazingly thought several years ago that clarified so much about child-rearing. We were talking about the use of corporal punishment and child abuse in general, we were also always in a discussion about the overall uselessness of punishing anyone. Yes, I believe that punishment does not serve a purpose we need to rehabilitate people. We need to understand why people do what they do.

So is it “good” that parents that abuse their children are arrested and prosecuted? For now, it seems the answer is yes. Why? Is that not punishment? It is good because we are just not very evolved. It is because we are evolving. This is so because only a short time ago you could do anything to your child you wanted, even kill them and probably nothing would happen. Children were your property. Still, in much of the world, this is the case so for society to take any action to protect children is a great advance. Holding parents criminally responsible is an advance.

It is a simple thought if I thought you were acting “badly” and verbally threatened you or maybe even struck you I would be guilty in the first instance of assault and in the second of what is called “battery.” Why on earth are we not guilty of the same when we threaten and hit children?

Now there is just one problem when we arrest and even jail the parents of children, and what is that? Well, the children are left without their parents! We know that as strange as it may seem that the situation has to be quite bad at home before the children are better off not at home so enlightened prosecutors and social service agencies do not necessarily press for convictions and sentences but for intense intervention, rehabilitation and supervision. It does take a village to raise a child.

 We Are All Emperors Without Cloths : “Mirroring II”

“Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't the fine line between sanity and madness gotten finer?”

  - George Price

I am writing this with restraint. I am not going to use the usual terms that psychiatry and psychology use to “label” people. I don’t because I think the only way to get beyond these terms and labels is simply to stop using them.

I want, as do a growing number of us, to replace almost all “labels” with a new way of looking at human behavior. That is that the line between normal and “abnormal” is vague if and when it exists at all. 

There are, of course, clearly defined “genetic” disorders but more and more, there are fewer and fewer “pure” disorders. As we see even a condition such as Downs Syndrome over the last fifty years has made great progress. They now lead much more normal lives.

I believe that almost all human activity can be summarized as 1) A focused interest in a goal where effort can be sustained whether the goal is achieved or not. Or in contrast, 2) due to confusion, hurt, or shame; short or long term, the person will a) withdraw from their goal, b) blame themselves for not achieving their goal, c) avoid the problem using sex, drugs, or any number of methods of distracting ourselves and lastly, when all else fails we will attack. Then, if all else fails we will start the cycle all over again. Why, one way over another? It is because we have learned from an early age to move forward using one method over another.

Often lovers will get caught in the above circle. All kinds of terrible labels will be thrown at everyone in the situation. It has been my experience, as a therapist, that all this is pretty much hooey. That is the part about “terrible labels.” No doubt, no doubt, all the research and writing, and work that has led to all this classification has helped, and has been useful, as we as humans have to articulate. We have to describe situations. To name is to know. To describe is to know. Yet it is also to control too much and to humiliate.

Humans are not lab rats. Yet, am I not reducing everything to five actions? But I think reducing our behavior to five generic actions is liberating. It says we all are emperors without clothes”

So when any of us are feeling pain we “only” have five “choices” and if we are not doing too well and cannot focus on what is bothering us and can not solve the problem we might do this: we might engage in a type of “false interest”, say “fall in love.” 

Now this is tricky as people are people. The “Interest” can no doubt be “real”. On the other hand, our pain may be so great that we search out anyone to be with, and in the meantime, darn it, there we go, we “fall in love” ( A common theme in, say, spy movies, such as “Bond” movies but here it is an “almost always an “obvious” manipulation at first Bond falls in love and then gets hurt.). So “love” and this “bastardized” interest (love). Why “bastardized” because much of the energy is coming from avoiding something rather than true attention to the person. That is we are confused and think we are “just” in a relationship not realizing the true cost. None of this may be conscious. 

So much of what we do is because we have “learned” that we cannot directly ask for anything, this I have covered before. This is from a history of abuse. 

I “have” to be deceptive otherwise I will be denied. Of course, if it is not conscious then we do think we are “falling in love” only later to be shocked into reality by our subconscious when the “truth” leaks through and we find out the “real” “subconscious” truth.

But everything here is much more interesting and unfortunately tragic. But what if I find that this “interest” is not working? What happens? I find fault with myself. What else can I do? 

 

I did this. I engaged. Did I not? I alone know the lie. But I continue the lie. I continue the interest. But what is the lie? The lie is human. The relationship is human. Interest is real. This is real. This lie is real. This person is real. This love is real!

But the original “I am here due to a lie” hunts me. I am here due to a scar, a tear in my heart that I cannot face. So I persist. I protest that you must understand, “I am only trying to avoid the pain of my past of facing the past. Please don’t make me do that. I have to do something. That is the only reason I am ‘using’ you.” 

I move now to “avoid.” “Let’s talk” “what are you interested in.” I become you. I become you. “I am you.” I “lose” myself in you. If you do drugs I do drugs.

If you drink I drink. If you smoke I smoke. If you rob banks, I rob banks. If you study astrophysics well, darn it I’ll try or I’ll sure make your eggs. Or, of course, we will have great sex. Yes, sex, sex, sex.

But then what if it all ends? What if the other “catches on?” What if they want a “real” relationship? Well, that would mean that they would be questioning you. What audacity. I still have not even thought about my original problem, have I? Why I am here with you? I am here with you because I am running from my pain. But you are not cooperating! You have discovered my lie so what can I do? I have to attack you. I have to attack you. I must destroy you. How? Well, humiliation might be a good way. 

Now what if this does not work? Well, well we can start all over; we can try and run away, withdraw, then blame ourselves and avoid and attack. Or we can start a slow process and heal. The good news is the “interest” was partially real. Grab on to that real interest, the “now” interest. Some “avoidances” are not all “bad.” We can do well without attacking ourselves or others almost all the time.

h

"Is It Worth It"

Brian Lynch

In almost any relationship, there is some imbalance. One person tends to be more dependent on the other. Of course, there is mutual dependence to some extent. For instance, a leader depends on their subjects for support. However, in one-on-one relationships like parent-child, marriage, mentor-mentee, or working relationships, the balance can be uneven and prone to abuse.

In such one-on-one relationships, when we find ourselves in the dependent position, we often have to make a judgment call. We often dislike how we are being treated. It may not always be clear who holds the power, as in a marriage, making it difficult for us to determine what we can and cannot accept.

My main point is that we should make decisions on our own terms, without expecting the other person to change. Yes, people can change, but the odds are against it. They might change in the long run, but if they do, it's more likely to happen after we leave the relationship, rather than by staying in an overtly abusive one.

The important questions to ask ourselves are: "Where are you going?" and "How are you going to get there?" There are many complexities and challenges involved in answering these questions. I am not advocating selfishness or denying the need for help and support from others. What I'm saying is that we can be as much of a problem as the abuser if we don't know what we want. I'm not letting the abusers off the hook; I'm putting the responsibility on us. We often stay in bad situations for various reasons, many of which are not good. Fear of the unknown and not knowing what else to do is a significant reason we remain in relationships, leading us to try to force a relationship or change the other person.

Since originally writing this, I have become more radical in my assessment in the sense that I do not want to suggest that anything is easy. In fact, I suggest that maybe most of the time we are stuck with the people around us, and the task is to manage the best we can because there is nowhere else to go. There is much Pollyannaishness about that, which gives the impression that we have so many choices. That is a fantasy.

Often, the issue is most visible to people who possess stature and power, such as bosses, teachers, and leaders that we come across and are often dependent on. However, it's a fact of life that many, if not most of them, have had to make significant compromises in their lives, which sometimes involve treating people in not-so-nice ways. If you watch twenty video biographies of famous people, you may find only an occasional one who comes across as a "normal" person treat.

Therefore, if you associate with someone like this, whether it's a relative, boss, or mentor, it can be like making a pact with the devil. Is enduring the abuse worth it? Again, so often, people have no choice but to stay. That said, the boss is going where they want to go, and they won't change for you or me. We won't be the "exception" or the "special" friend. The most important thing to understand is that people may make you feel "special," that you are different. They may say, "I won't treat you like I treat others." Or did you just think you heard them say that? But the truth is, if you witness them treating others in ways you wouldn't want to be treated, I guarantee you will be treated the same way.

If you are free to move on, it is good to do so, but always be prepared for a similar person to be around the corner. If you are not free, then the admonition to accept the things you cannot change is a guiding principle, and you achieve that efficiently if you come to know and learn to regulate your internal emotional environment. 0 COMMENTS  

 ing others well.

Interest

Brian Lynch

You have your interest, and I have mine. Have you ever considered that "interest" is an emotional force? Why do you like your favorite color? Did you choose it? Of course, you didn't. You just like it. You have "interest" in it. Why do you like vanilla over chocolate? Did you choose that? So we can go down a very long list. We can talk about your job. I hope you "like" and "enjoy" it. Well, did you choose to do what you are doing?

It appears that our likes and dislikes, and what we are not interested in, start very early on in our life, and we have accumulated experiences that then guide us into new experiences and new interests. Of course, as we get older, that part that "reason" plays is much stronger.

But having said this, I am now very interested in what happens when you have your interest and I have mine, and they are different. What can happen? Well, there can be problems. The problems are made much worse because we have an unconscious belief that everything starts with "reason," and that reason is "logical" and, therefore, we are "right." If I am right, you must be "wrong."

Understanding that every desire, thought, plan, project, and moral dictum that has ever been devised by man has been based, in the end, on someone's or some group's emotional "interest" first, and remember this includes our own, just might help us.

We might start to realize that our desires, thoughts, yes, and beliefs are based on "logic" that is only constructed and applied to our interests after we have the interests. And again, interests are emotional formulations of our experiences, not logical formulations.

So is everything just "my opinion?" How can we solve disagreements if my "interest" is just as good as your "interest?"

In day-to-day life, this can be difficult, as we all know. Slowly we are starting to understand our emotions and to understand the power of teaching our children from an early age, for example, to be empathetic to others' feelings, i.e., interests. This is a basis to form not so many skills for argumentation and "winning" a point, but skills for discourse and conversation that lead to resolutions, contracts, and synthesis.

The other area where humans have made progress over the last several hundred years is that area called "science." Here scientists start with an "interest." For example, I am interested in finding a cure for cancer. Then they try to make rules to limit "emotional" input as much as possible once that first step is made. They do this mainly by having many people look at the procedures and agreeing on them and then having many people analyze the results so no one person or group" s "interests" dominates.

The point of all the words put in quotation marks is to suggest that particular interest and reason are never quite what they seem to be. They are never purely one or the other. Even without conscious thought emotion has its reason, its logic. And reason is motivated first by attention and interest. To paraphrase Silvan Tomkins emotion without reason is wild and reason without emotion is sterile.

When you want something you want it.

Brian Lynch

Come on admit it. When you want something you want it. We tend to want what we want when we want it and that is pretty much it and we want it now. We will pretty much lie, cheat and steal to get it. Are you offended?

What is my point? Well, just what I have said. I have become, of late, more and more impressed at how we avoid the truth of how we are. In my private and professional life, it continually amazes me how we avoid each other so much of the time. No matter how high we rise and often the higher we rise the more problems we have in “being straight” with each other.

I have the habit of, I guess, continually being “shocked” by people’s behavior in this regard and retell my experiences with others about my “shocking” experiences as how people have simply avoided the obvious problem or truth of a situation and much of the time people seem not surprised at all and are more surprised that I am “shocked.” That is they think I am naive. Thinking “Dr. Lynch, what do you expect of people, to be honest and forthright?” “Do you expect people to be anything other than backstabbers and competitive?”

The truth is I do. I do because it is possible. It is possible because such people exist. Part of “this” project, the total of what I write and other than share this information, is the idea that “human nature” is not fixed. Human nature is constantly changing and all the “negative” that we attribute to human action is counterbalanced by positive attributes that can be taught and augmented and have been throughout history.

But to be concrete and helpful I want to point out that we all make fools of ourselves in the heat of battle if we engage mouth before thinking. Much harm is done and often irreparable harm is done because we want what we want and we want it now and then we justify what we just did or said based on what we just wanted. The logic rarely works because we started at the wrong place, We started with an isolated desire.

None of us has been schooled in the complexity of competing interests. If you want to go to your mother's for Christmas and I want to go to mine, it does not mean at all that I do not like your mother. It means I want to go to see my mother more. That is all it means. But that makes all the difference in the world does it not? It also does not mean that I love you less. It also means that there is nothing I can do about this. What I want is not a reasoned decision! It means I want to see my mother. I believe almost no one understands conflict of interests and that when someone wants something they want it and there is not much one can do about it. There is a lot we can start to do about this if we start from an early age to understand the dynamic of this conflict and how inevitable it is; how to compromise with others and ourselves. We are still going to want what we want!

We come to realize these are primarily emotional issues. Interest is emotional and so we will then not make logical fools of ourselves when we try to reason our way out of the massive confusion, our multiple desires have created in our head because when we do someone ends up getting hurt because there is no way to make sense of them. We often end up attacking and humiliating others. This leads to guilt and shame and more attacking. Hey, a mess! It rarely gets us where we want to go. What we wanted! That is, we can’t make it all come out right. All our interests can’t come true. Knowing this from the beginning is the key. But I think we think because they are our interests they are therefore “reasonable” and therefore logical and therefore everything should work. Wrong.

In an earlier post, I quoted the director of the movie “The House of Fog and Sand” as saying, ”The film exposes the unsettling truth that sometimes it is our hopes[read “interests”], rather than our hatreds, that divide us.”

Door # 1, Door # 2 or Door #3

Brian Lynch

In this piece, I will be discussing three options: Door #1, Door #2, or Door #3. It's important to note that much of what I will say might resonate with those who already agree with me. The focus here is on psychology, which has taught us that changing someone's perspective is a difficult task. So, why write this column? It is that we can all improve our understanding of these dynamics.

A prime example of of being set in our ways is looking at our political affiliations. In the United States, people tend to identify as either Democrats or Republicans throughout their lives. Of course, there are instances of crossover, as indicated by the times when we have a President from one party and a different party controlling Congress. However, a significant portion of the population remains steadfastly aligned with one side.

This phenomenon extends to various topics, such as abortion, free markets, and unions. Everyone seems to have an opinion on these matters, which they often consider "common sense" or conventional wisdom. We grow up believing that our grandmother's common sense is the ultimate wisdom. However, it's important to recognize that this isn't always the case.

To challenge the notion of "common sense," let's consider the famous tree door problem. Imagine a game show where contestants must choose between Door #1, Door #2, or Door #3. Behind one door, there might be a brand new Cadillac, while the other two doors hold disappointing prizes like a goat. Once you make your choice, one of the remaining doors is opened, revealing a goat. At this point, you are given the opportunity to change your initial selection. Now, the question is: Does changing your choice affect your chances of winning the Cadillac?

Common sense might suggest that it makes no difference, but in reality, changing your choice significantly improves your odds of winning (for a detailed explanation, refer to [web address]).

Therefore, whenever we have the time to read, hear, or see something that challenges our thoughts or beliefs, it's crucial to take a moment and critically examine how we arrived at our current convictions. Did we merely accept them without question? Are they based on facts, scientific studies, or just something our grandmother said, or perhaps something we stumbled upon on the first webpage we found? Instead, we should invest the time to read at least two other sources, or even better, consult a variety of sources. We must also be mindful of confirmation bias—seeking information that confirms what we already believe. Research suggests that this confirmation bias often influences our reasoning.

In the fields of medicine and psychology, it is vital to seek multiple opinions. Common sense may be common, but the truth is not always easy to find.

Education

Brian Lynch

It has taken us a very long time to understand that to teach someone something, anything, is a  difficult task. It is now known through great work by the best of the best in learning theory and education that most education does not do what it sets out to do and that is transfer knowledge. 

A great majority of what we think is going on is fantasy. A lot of this can be seen on the Annenberg website if you are interested. There you can find a somewhat now famous video of interviews with some Harvard students and professors on graduation day. They are being asked some “simple” astronomy questions of a grade school level. Almost no one, if I remember, gets any of them right including an astrophysics student.

There is another video that seems to show, at least to my satisfaction, that even the “best” high school students were learning by “rote” for the most part. They were learning for the test or for the teacher. When pressed no one had an in-depth understanding of the material. No one could sustain his or her own thinking on a given subject, and when pressed on real core understanding they reverted to primitive private understanding. In fact, the title of the video is, beautifully, “Our Own Private Universe.”  NOTE: This essay was written some 14 years ago I have not been able to find the specific videos today but here is the Annebergs present website addressing learning issues: Our Own Private Universe

Why is this? It is because of our old friend “interest.” It has taken all this time for even the best educators to understand that, from the earliest times, children are figuring out the world on their own. Cognition, learning, and thinking do not start just when we adults decide to pour knowledge into a child’s head. 

We are beginning to realize that children, infants, and even fetuses learn and feel. How could it be otherwise? All of this learning starts with a feeling. Thinking comes much later but all kinds of people real and imagined are explaining the world to the child and the child to his or herself. 

At some level, we should be careful telling children that the moon is made of blue cheese and what does the child think of seeing figures falling from ten stories and getting up and walking away? They believe and think sometimes long before they are “taught” anything. These “images” and “scripted” thoughts are primary and because they are primary they will become very solidified and thus very, very difficult to change.

I am fond of pointing out that we, in no way, chose our favorite color. Our favorite color “happened” to us. So too many, many things “happened” to us, including many of the ways we conceptualize the world and thus the basis for the way we are able to learn. That is the way our “interest” will be directed from here on out without some radical change.

The educational system has never appreciated this and what has evolved is a ne'er-do-well system that has developed a system of reading, writing and testing to just get us through the day. Those that succeed may or may not be the brightest or the best, but they are the ones that just happen to be able to manipulate the system consciously or not.

With any thought and examination, we know the “the system” is geared to “practical results” jobs, income, and the like. This is despite the fact that we pay lip service to “real” education and “higher education.”

Mirroring People

Brian Lynch

We have all been with people who are affable and agreeable. They make us feel at ease.

We will now and then get a feeling, however, that something is wrong. You can’t put your finger on it.

Sooner or later and the older we get, the sooner it should be that we understand that the uneasy feeling comes from the person “mirroring” us. They agree with almost anything we say and will often feedback to us exactly what we said, sometimes right away the next day. We are stunned and feel good about it.

But we notice, as time goes on, very little is shared by this person about their own beliefs and desires, and plans. The reason is that they take on the personality and traits of those around them. As we say there is little sense of self.

Some of this is conscious, but most must be unconscious or semiconscious as it is done so consistently and smoothly.

It is whatever the case built on shame. It can be simply annoying or dangerous.

Annoying if the person “simply” needs to be affiliated with you to have some esteem. They never had a chance to develop their talents as probably someone was always blunting them so they learned to avoid the hurt and damage by giving adulation to their caregivers, “humoring them.”

This becomes dangerous when the actions are more conscious and the end of getting something from you.

In this case, it is akin to compulsive lying. “I” am driven to play out a program or script that will get me some emotional satisfaction. Unfortunately the “mark” is only the vehicle to that end. That end is often the excitement of “getting over on someone” or “simply” an avoidance of shame. My shame is so great, my esteem so low that I am driven to not expose anything, or the minimum, about myself. Why? Because I feel I am worthless. Each lie helps accumulate more shame and guilt so I “lie” again, that is I hide my true feelings and I mimic yours. If indeed I have ever had a chance to develop any of my feelings!

Of course, not everyone that does this is such a black-and-white figure. It can be as I said just an irritating trait for the most part. Whatever its degree of intensity it is ultimately from a sense of shame or degradation of self. “I know nothing” is the voice inside. “I am essentially bad.” Even if they say it is the “excitement” they are after, I say they are after the feeling of excitement to block the pain of shame.

“Not lying is lying”

Brian Lynch

“You Tell The Strongest People,

 

The Weakest Lies.”  Sugar Blue

Few of us get to adulthood without realizing that “thou shalt not lie” is a “black and white” simplistic approach to human relations. 

But that does not mean that we often slip into the idea that “we don’t lie.” But since it is impossible to not lie, all we can do is try the best we can.

Now there are various types of lies. Some pump up our ego. It is easily proven that everyone lies when meeting new people. Within ten minutes we are oft to tell, on average, three lies. On the other end, there are “lies” that protect confidences be it a business deal or a clergy parishioner relation, or a doctor-patient relationship.

But from time to time we want to believe in George Washington’s truism of “I never tell a lie.” If we do, we have a problem because then we will deny the need to lie! What happens? Shame and confusion ensue for not lying. But the truth is we will lie in some way just not in the rigid terms we have set for ourselves “I never lie!”

How do we lie? Well, I always end up back to what I have come to feel are our only options when we are suppressing feeling and they are: I can try and run away from the feeling, I can blame myself for the feeling, I can blame you for the feeling or I can do something to avoid the feeling. Each of these can be a type of lying as they all can be and are a type of “avoiding” the issue. Avoiding the issue is a “lie.”

Of course, here we can pick on the “politician.” Watch any politician in a heated interview and there is almost always something they do not want to answer. When they are asked they answer masterfully from years of practice of lying without lying.

They change the subject. They avoid the question altogether and often will, in the process start attaching the opposition. They may “hang up the phone”, or end the interview (withdraw, run away). Rarely, will they attack themselves or blame themselves, but even this might be a lie. That is, they might indeed take the fall for someone.

Then there is “politeness.” I am not interested in you, but I can not say it. Or I “need” you for something. Well, in these cases the relationship itself is a “lie.” It is certainly difficult to avoid some relationships like this. And to be compassionate our feelings are not always clear. We are ambivalent. But in the process we will, often due to shame “show our hand.” We will “Tell the strongest people the weakest lies.” “I didn’t have time to call you.” (translation: I had no interest in talking to you.) “I didn’t get to your emails, you know I don’t like to use the computer.” (translation: ditto). These answers are a combination of “attack” and “avoid”.

Of course in any human encounter if we are on the receiving end of such comments how can we be sure? Well, can you be sure it is a lie? And often, maybe it isn’t. If the speaker is not telling you a lie they certainly will be thrown off guard by being called a liar. Of course, being so blunt statements reveal a lack of empathy and a frankness that is inappropriate. What else could it impart to the listener than “I am not interested in you?” The point is, it is simply difficult. I would say we mostly have to judge people by their actions over a long period. 

As a bit of an aside, I use to work with an ethnic population doing initial hospital admissions. I would ask them if they spoke English. If they said “no” then they usually said they did not “like” English. I hope, in some non-shaming way, I said it had nothing to do with “like”, it had to do with necessity as one could easily die in a foreign country due to not speaking the language. In short, they were lying due to shame. Lying to themselves. It was an easy answer.

So the point is “lying” is not the issue at all. The issue is why I am lying. Am I lying out of some, yes, “moral” duty to a higher ideal, that is lying is often the most “moral” thing to do, or am I lying out of shame?