My YouTube Channel - Discussion
Just added Freud's On Narcissism. Lots of insights here into how self-love can go awry, yet Echo is an example of when self-love is too low. Being in the atheist camp Freud and other Neo-Freudians look at religion as an attempt to bring back the fetal experience when all our needs are met. I'm probably going to have to go back to Nietzsche to see how psychoanalysis and analytical psychology was influenced by him.
https://youtu.be/p5bkxLpQ0Qo
Freud - On Narcissism
My subtitles are in English but I can tell I'll have to start translating into other languages since YouTube is so international. That's a whole pile of work.
https://youtu.be/p5bkxLpQ0Qo
Freud - On Narcissism
My subtitles are in English but I can tell I'll have to start translating into other languages since YouTube is so international. That's a whole pile of work.
If you are still taking recommendations for books to review. How about mine? 
The Awakened Ape. It's been on the best seller's list in Buddhism and Theravada for quite some time now.
The Awakened Ape. It's been on the best seller's list in Buddhism and Theravada for quite some time now.
Hi Richard good videos, good work, good resources and information. keep going with this high quality content in youtube
Jordi:
Hi Richard good videos, good work, good resources and information. keep going with this high quality content in youtube
Thanks for the support!
Here's a refurbishment of a prior video on Freud's The Interpretation of Dreams to account for the fact that this series is going to be longer than I thought since Freud ideas developed in a scattered way across many books and papers. 
Blog: http://psychreviews.org/dreams-sigmund-freud/
YouTube: http://youtu.be/dIxp32W5ris
Blog: http://psychreviews.org/dreams-sigmund-freud/
YouTube: http://youtu.be/dIxp32W5ris
New video on the internal commentator. It's mostly in the Advaita Vedanta style, but that's a good place to start and end for most people. Happy insights!
The Commentator:
Blog:
http://psychreviews.org/the-commentator/
YouTube:
https://youtu.be/auejzRGMa9s
Happy insights! The Commentator:
Blog:
http://psychreviews.org/the-commentator/
YouTube:
https://youtu.be/auejzRGMa9s
Richard Zen:
Stay safe from the stupid virus!
There is nothing safe within the 31 realms
(jusy kidding)Will try find time to check that vid, thanks!
Papa Che Dusko:
Richard Zen:
Stay safe from the stupid virus!
There is nothing safe within the 31 realms
(jusy kidding)Will try find time to check that vid, thanks!
I'm more worried about the economy now. So much Samsara!
This video is part of a Freudian exploration of WWI. It will move into Shell Shock/PTSD and then what was learned about the mind after the war.
During WWI, Sigmund Freud was able to stew over his theories, some early criticisms, but he also took stock of the Great War that interrupted everyone's lives. The life that people once new, in what was called the British Peace, the long peace that lasted 100 years, was over. Lives were uprooted, but there was also a lot of optimism on each side. There was a sense of adventure, until one faced reality and saw what adventure really was like.
Blog: http://psychreviews.org/war-sigmund-freud/
YouTube: https://youtu.be/eDgSz9LtjRk
Richard, I found this core idea really significant: "When one has had a frightening, negligent, or abusive background, the need to recreate those circumstances in order to try to master them psychologically can be both visible and tragic." in Part 4
Of course, this plays out quite visible during dark night stages of meditation, but wow, yes it plays out visible and tragically when the dynamic isn't consciously. When meditators really buy into the need to somehow "conquer" the dark night thier is a tendency to keep recreating the triggers they are trying to conquer and for really obstinate people (like myself) it takes hitting bottom before being willing to consider another approach.
I think that a big part of what gets learned through progressive stages of awakening is an alternative approach to this-versus-that style of mastery. There is an appreciation of a sort of "this AND that" approach which doesn't perpetuate the pattern. It's like we learn to extract the lessons we need to learn from both sides of a fightening situation, both the truth of the fear and the truth of the appropriateness of safety...
One related idea from Ken McLeod's writing... https://unfetteredmind.org/the-warriors-solution-passivity-and-freedom-4/
All reactive patterns have two poles which can be called the expressive and the receptive. The example of abuse, physical abuse makes this quite clear. When a parent abuses a child, strikes a child, that experience is usually so strong and so contradictory to what is meant to be happening in the parent-child relationship that the child cannot experience that event in attention. So something freezes. And the child splits into two. And these become the two poles of the pattern.
The one pole, the receptive, is an identity that forms around the experience of being hit and this becomes the victim. And the victim pattern, as it matures through life, is one of passive, of always trying to please, give away, always protective, defensive, hyper-vigilant, etc, etc. Familiar territory, Arlene? Yeah. Anybody who’s worked in psychotherapy knows this very well.
But the other pole also is planted in the child, and that is the expressive, which is the abuser. Because if you have been on the receiving end of abuse there is one thing that you know how to do, you know how to abuse. You know exactly how to do it. And that becomes a sadistic, dominating, belligerent, so forth. And in life a person will typically flip from one to the other. They will form a primary identity about one, but if they encounter circumstances in which that identity can’t function they will just flip to that other pole, because it’s the same pattern.
Student:
Ken: Circumstances. If you think of the bully/coward, if you challenge a bully they flip into a coward. But if you corner a coward they become a bully. And every pattern has those two poles and they flip. This is why we say, “the opposite of a reactive behavior is still the reaction.”
In the opponent’s world with child we meet what we could not face, dissolve that into energy, unite it with the other pole of the pattern, and dissolve that into the energy which it is and in this way come to experience both in attention. In this exercise we meet and experience what we could not face before, and in doing so that dissolves into energy, which is its nature. That energy is united with the other side of the pattern and we meet that and experience it. And that too dissolves into energy. So in this way we experience both sides of the pattern in attention leading to it’s dissolution.
Richard, does any of the ideas that I'm attributing to KMcL sound familiar to you? I think he didn't make it up, but got it from somewhere else. I've been interested in trying to track the source documents/references for this idea of trauma splitting into multiple views/identities/orientations.
p.s. lots of great links, including songs, in Part 5!
Of course, this plays out quite visible during dark night stages of meditation, but wow, yes it plays out visible and tragically when the dynamic isn't consciously. When meditators really buy into the need to somehow "conquer" the dark night thier is a tendency to keep recreating the triggers they are trying to conquer and for really obstinate people (like myself) it takes hitting bottom before being willing to consider another approach.
I think that a big part of what gets learned through progressive stages of awakening is an alternative approach to this-versus-that style of mastery. There is an appreciation of a sort of "this AND that" approach which doesn't perpetuate the pattern. It's like we learn to extract the lessons we need to learn from both sides of a fightening situation, both the truth of the fear and the truth of the appropriateness of safety...
One related idea from Ken McLeod's writing... https://unfetteredmind.org/the-warriors-solution-passivity-and-freedom-4/
All reactive patterns have two poles which can be called the expressive and the receptive. The example of abuse, physical abuse makes this quite clear. When a parent abuses a child, strikes a child, that experience is usually so strong and so contradictory to what is meant to be happening in the parent-child relationship that the child cannot experience that event in attention. So something freezes. And the child splits into two. And these become the two poles of the pattern.
The one pole, the receptive, is an identity that forms around the experience of being hit and this becomes the victim. And the victim pattern, as it matures through life, is one of passive, of always trying to please, give away, always protective, defensive, hyper-vigilant, etc, etc. Familiar territory, Arlene? Yeah. Anybody who’s worked in psychotherapy knows this very well.
But the other pole also is planted in the child, and that is the expressive, which is the abuser. Because if you have been on the receiving end of abuse there is one thing that you know how to do, you know how to abuse. You know exactly how to do it. And that becomes a sadistic, dominating, belligerent, so forth. And in life a person will typically flip from one to the other. They will form a primary identity about one, but if they encounter circumstances in which that identity can’t function they will just flip to that other pole, because it’s the same pattern.
Student:
Ken: Circumstances. If you think of the bully/coward, if you challenge a bully they flip into a coward. But if you corner a coward they become a bully. And every pattern has those two poles and they flip. This is why we say, “the opposite of a reactive behavior is still the reaction.”
In the opponent’s world with child we meet what we could not face, dissolve that into energy, unite it with the other pole of the pattern, and dissolve that into the energy which it is and in this way come to experience both in attention. In this exercise we meet and experience what we could not face before, and in doing so that dissolves into energy, which is its nature. That energy is united with the other side of the pattern and we meet that and experience it. And that too dissolves into energy. So in this way we experience both sides of the pattern in attention leading to it’s dissolution.
Richard, does any of the ideas that I'm attributing to KMcL sound familiar to you? I think he didn't make it up, but got it from somewhere else. I've been interested in trying to track the source documents/references for this idea of trauma splitting into multiple views/identities/orientations.
p.s. lots of great links, including songs, in Part 5!
The paralysis side of things is really interesting... Like how some tasks --- or even how thinking in a particular conceptual domain --- sometimes takes waaay too much activation energy to get started. Even if we ultimately get things done or accomplish the goal, it can feel needlessly exhausting or draining and yet, from the outside looking iin, it would seem to be no big deal to have done it. And so we kinda know something is going on, but because it isn't wildly painful or wildly fearful, its kinda hard to figure out where the actual psychological resistance is, yet there has to be something going on. It can be fun to just dig and uncover these subtle resistances in meditation. Sometimes there's suprising pay dirt -- a pocket of memories or unconscious "strategies" that are kinda shocking when they are seen in consciousness.
And it's interesting because at this level of subtilty, there are also other dimensions that come into play. Like I've noticed that all responsible people have to periodically go through adjustments where they realize "I don't have to get all of this done right now". While many people wait until a deadline, effective people often have the opposite problem of sometimes working too fast to check off their responsibilities. A lot of effective workers/professsionals will get odd resistances to working that are actually the body/mind saying "it's okay, you don't have to pursue work so hard" and this can be a good kind of adjustment, but it can feel so wrong. I've notice that most people need a friend or authority figure to say "I know you always meet the critical deadlines. It's okay to let stuff simmer on the backburner for a while, I know that YOU know when it will be appropriate to do the work and even if you wait until close to the deadline, I know you'll get it done." I had a friend do that for me, and I noticed that there was some aspect of my subconscious that did have a good understanding of when things really needed to be done and indeed I could "slack off" more without being irresponsible. But honestly, it took 5 years of trial and error (but most intensely the first year) before I could trust it.
And then there's the dimension of love, creativity, adventure... sometimes the paralysis is due to the heart yearning for something and all we know is "more getting things done" isn't the answer. This can be an odd kind of paralysis where the super-ego might allow us to slack off, but any attempt to explore new things (or the thing we know we want to do, but can't admit it) will instantly be labelled as frivolous. I've recently had a phase of this myself... and turning 50 years old kinda blew the dust off this dynamic and revealed it more clearly. In other words, the reminder of aging and mortality left me with the counter-thought: when on earth do you think you will have time to try these new things out? It's not like you have endless time left. I've made a pact with myself that I'll use the expression "sure, I'll try it!" more this year...
I kinda think that this dynamic ---- the paralysis-adventure spectrum ---- is one of nearly endless refinement. The body/mind needs to conserve energy to better survive, yet life is unfullfilling if we stay in our ruts, and yet nothing masterful is accomplished without putting ourself in a self-selected rut, yet nothing adds creativity than getting out of out of ruts, etc. It's not about choosing only one option, but kind of an artful dance we have to figure out.
(Well, that was a diatribe Anyway, thanks for evoking all these thoughts!)
And it's interesting because at this level of subtilty, there are also other dimensions that come into play. Like I've noticed that all responsible people have to periodically go through adjustments where they realize "I don't have to get all of this done right now". While many people wait until a deadline, effective people often have the opposite problem of sometimes working too fast to check off their responsibilities. A lot of effective workers/professsionals will get odd resistances to working that are actually the body/mind saying "it's okay, you don't have to pursue work so hard" and this can be a good kind of adjustment, but it can feel so wrong. I've notice that most people need a friend or authority figure to say "I know you always meet the critical deadlines. It's okay to let stuff simmer on the backburner for a while, I know that YOU know when it will be appropriate to do the work and even if you wait until close to the deadline, I know you'll get it done." I had a friend do that for me, and I noticed that there was some aspect of my subconscious that did have a good understanding of when things really needed to be done and indeed I could "slack off" more without being irresponsible. But honestly, it took 5 years of trial and error (but most intensely the first year) before I could trust it.
And then there's the dimension of love, creativity, adventure... sometimes the paralysis is due to the heart yearning for something and all we know is "more getting things done" isn't the answer. This can be an odd kind of paralysis where the super-ego might allow us to slack off, but any attempt to explore new things (or the thing we know we want to do, but can't admit it) will instantly be labelled as frivolous. I've recently had a phase of this myself... and turning 50 years old kinda blew the dust off this dynamic and revealed it more clearly. In other words, the reminder of aging and mortality left me with the counter-thought: when on earth do you think you will have time to try these new things out? It's not like you have endless time left.
I've made a pact with myself that I'll use the expression "sure, I'll try it!" more this year...I kinda think that this dynamic ---- the paralysis-adventure spectrum ---- is one of nearly endless refinement. The body/mind needs to conserve energy to better survive, yet life is unfullfilling if we stay in our ruts, and yet nothing masterful is accomplished without putting ourself in a self-selected rut, yet nothing adds creativity than getting out of out of ruts, etc. It's not about choosing only one option, but kind of an artful dance we have to figure out.
(Well, that was a diatribe
Anyway, thanks for evoking all these thoughts!)
shargrol:
Interesting -- I never quite put together how obsessional = superego, but that makes a lot of sense. Obsession has a high degree of pseudo-awareness but is strangely unobservant; having perceptions filtered through the superego helps explain the all-or-nothing lack of nuance and "obligation" feeling of obsession.
p.s. this is a very content rich summary -- thank you! -- i can already tell i'll want to read it a few times to reaaly get freud's thinking/model.
p.s. this is a very content rich summary -- thank you! -- i can already tell i'll want to read it a few times to reaaly get freud's thinking/model.
It's an early personality typology, but Obsessional involves that feeling when we imagine Objects/Entities in our mind and we get the feeling of Others and being watched. He connects this with religious attitudes of feeling an entity is watching you and judging you. Then he connects superstitious rituals with the placating of the internal object to avoid punishment. It's a way to control people without being there. We also can then do weird rituals and connect coincidences to them which reinforce the magical belief. In the modern day would be cults, tarot cards, and the such, where we project that they work and tend to focus on when it seems like they are working and ignore when it doesn't work. The feeling of helplessness keeps people wanting to believe. Heidegger also talks about this in a different way. We avoid being authentic because we have to face our past and our future death when we take responsibility. A lot of diversions, distractions and addictions are there to numb the effect, but if you're meditative enough you can detect that pang of morality before watching crappy TV, playing a video game or just coasting on the internet. It's very powerful and quite unconscious!
I would add some caveats. Freud squishes psychopaths and narcissists together in the narcissistic self-preservation side, but it's possible to follow an abuser in the mind and think you are doing the right thing. A perfect example is Moral disengagement where the Super-ego excuses let you do bad things with justification and condoning. Watch An Act of Killing and you'll see one gangster dry-heaving while talking about his executions of Chinese communists, while the other guy can talk about it without any bother. Empathy can be involved in the Erotic-Obsessional side, but if the excuses are motivating enough, one can do evil things with empathy.
Carl Jung of course aimed to find a lot more in that Super-ego than Freud did.
Is it possible that I'm not understanding because you are using narcissist in the modern sense and not the freudian sense?
This is somewhat hard for me to truly "get" because I've lived so much of my life as someone with a turbo-charged superego... actually, I'd say I was somewhere in the erotic-obssessional if I had to pick my patholgy.... and so it's hard for me to understand at a visceral level, but intellectually I can see that freudian narcissists really don't have much superego nor a need for being loved and that's the key diagnostic quality. It seems like the freudian narcissist has an overdeveloped ego that is largely uninfluenced by the "superior other" superego and "need to belong and be loved" of the id. As a result, very cold and singular.
It seems like a modern sense of narcisist is closes to Freud's Erotic-Narcissist. They are still defining themeselves in a kind of pseudo-relationship. Because they idendify so strongly with something as transient as a sense of self, which we know from meditation is created by conditions rather than being an inherently solid thing,so their sense of egoic self needs constant activity otherwise it goes away --- in the same way that air is there, but we don't feel it without motion --- and so there is a constant using of others to create a sense of self.
I think pure freudian narcissism is the same as psychopathy. A user and lacking any sense of mutuality of the erotic or inferiority of the superego.... rather the erotic aspect becomes the ongoing activity of pleasure-pain manipulation and obsessional/hierarchical aspect becomes ongoing activity of estabishing dominance.
It seems like schizophrenia is more on the narssistic-obsessional side, or perhaps a case of fairly pure obsessional. It seems like in this model that obsessional types are prone to psychosis.
Does that make sense? --- again, I'm still learning Freud's model, so I'm probably missing a lot.
"narcissistic type, is mainly to be described in negative terms. There is no tension between ego and super-ego (indeed, on the strength of this type one would scarcely have arrived at the hypothesis of a super-ego), and there is no preponderance of erotic needs. The subject’s main interest is directed to self-preservation; he is independent and not open to intimidation. His ego has a large amount of aggressiveness at its disposal, which also manifests itself in readiness for activity. In his erotic life loving is preferred above being loved. People belonging to this type impress others as being ‘personalities’; they are especially suited to act as a support for others, to take on the role of leaders and to give a fresh stimulus to cultural development or to damage the established state of affairs.”
This is somewhat hard for me to truly "get" because I've lived so much of my life as someone with a turbo-charged superego
... actually, I'd say I was somewhere in the erotic-obssessional if I had to pick my patholgy.... and so it's hard for me to understand at a visceral level, but intellectually I can see that freudian narcissists really don't have much superego nor a need for being loved and that's the key diagnostic quality. It seems like the freudian narcissist has an overdeveloped ego that is largely uninfluenced by the "superior other" superego and "need to belong and be loved" of the id. As a result, very cold and singular. It seems like a modern sense of narcisist is closes to Freud's Erotic-Narcissist. They are still defining themeselves in a kind of pseudo-relationship. Because they idendify so strongly with something as transient as a sense of self, which we know from meditation is created by conditions rather than being an inherently solid thing,so their sense of egoic self needs constant activity otherwise it goes away --- in the same way that air is there, but we don't feel it without motion --- and so there is a constant using of others to create a sense of self.
I think pure freudian narcissism is the same as psychopathy. A user and lacking any sense of mutuality of the erotic or inferiority of the superego.... rather the erotic aspect becomes the ongoing activity of pleasure-pain manipulation and obsessional/hierarchical aspect becomes ongoing activity of estabishing dominance.
It seems like schizophrenia is more on the narssistic-obsessional side, or perhaps a case of fairly pure obsessional. It seems like in this model that obsessional types are prone to psychosis.
Does that make sense? --- again, I'm still learning Freud's model, so I'm probably missing a lot.
"narcissistic type, is mainly to be described in negative terms. There is no tension between ego and super-ego (indeed, on the strength of this type one would scarcely have arrived at the hypothesis of a super-ego), and there is no preponderance of erotic needs. The subject’s main interest is directed to self-preservation; he is independent and not open to intimidation. His ego has a large amount of aggressiveness at its disposal, which also manifests itself in readiness for activity. In his erotic life loving is preferred above being loved. People belonging to this type impress others as being ‘personalities’; they are especially suited to act as a support for others, to take on the role of leaders and to give a fresh stimulus to cultural development or to damage the established state of affairs.”
shargrol:
Is it possible that I'm not understanding because you are using narcissist in the modern sense and not the freudian sense?
This is somewhat hard for me to truly "get" because I've lived so much of my life as someone with a turbo-charged superego... actually, I'd say I was somewhere in the erotic-obssessional if I had to pick my patholgy.... and so it's hard for me to understand at a visceral level, but intellectually I can see that freudian narcissists really don't have much superego nor a need for being loved and that's the key diagnostic quality. It seems like the freudian narcissist has an overdeveloped ego that is largely uninfluenced by the "superior other" superego and "need to belong and be loved" of the id. As a result, very cold and singular.
It seems like a modern sense of narcisist is closes to Freud's Erotic-Narcissist. They are still defining themeselves in a kind of pseudo-relationship. Because they idendify so strongly with something as transient as a sense of self, which we know from meditation is created by conditions rather than being an inherently solid thing,so their sense of egoic self needs constant activity otherwise it goes away --- in the same way that air is there, but we don't feel it without motion --- and so there is a constant using of others to create a sense of self.
I think pure freudian narcissism is the same as psychopathy. A user and lacking any sense of mutuality of the erotic or inferiority of the superego.... rather the erotic aspect becomes the ongoing activity of pleasure-pain manipulation and obsessional/hierarchical aspect becomes ongoing activity of estabishing dominance.
It seems like schizophrenia is more on the narssistic-obsessional side, or perhaps a case of fairly pure obsessional. It seems like in this model that obsessional types are prone to psychosis.
Does that make sense? --- again, I'm still learning Freud's model, so I'm probably missing a lot.
"narcissistic type, is mainly to be described in negative terms. There is no tension between ego and super-ego (indeed, on the strength of this type one would scarcely have arrived at the hypothesis of a super-ego), and there is no preponderance of erotic needs. The subject’s main interest is directed to self-preservation; he is independent and not open to intimidation. His ego has a large amount of aggressiveness at its disposal, which also manifests itself in readiness for activity. In his erotic life loving is preferred above being loved. People belonging to this type impress others as being ‘personalities’; they are especially suited to act as a support for others, to take on the role of leaders and to give a fresh stimulus to cultural development or to damage the established state of affairs.”
This is somewhat hard for me to truly "get" because I've lived so much of my life as someone with a turbo-charged superego
... actually, I'd say I was somewhere in the erotic-obssessional if I had to pick my patholgy.... and so it's hard for me to understand at a visceral level, but intellectually I can see that freudian narcissists really don't have much superego nor a need for being loved and that's the key diagnostic quality. It seems like the freudian narcissist has an overdeveloped ego that is largely uninfluenced by the "superior other" superego and "need to belong and be loved" of the id. As a result, very cold and singular. It seems like a modern sense of narcisist is closes to Freud's Erotic-Narcissist. They are still defining themeselves in a kind of pseudo-relationship. Because they idendify so strongly with something as transient as a sense of self, which we know from meditation is created by conditions rather than being an inherently solid thing,so their sense of egoic self needs constant activity otherwise it goes away --- in the same way that air is there, but we don't feel it without motion --- and so there is a constant using of others to create a sense of self.
I think pure freudian narcissism is the same as psychopathy. A user and lacking any sense of mutuality of the erotic or inferiority of the superego.... rather the erotic aspect becomes the ongoing activity of pleasure-pain manipulation and obsessional/hierarchical aspect becomes ongoing activity of estabishing dominance.
It seems like schizophrenia is more on the narssistic-obsessional side, or perhaps a case of fairly pure obsessional. It seems like in this model that obsessional types are prone to psychosis.
Does that make sense? --- again, I'm still learning Freud's model, so I'm probably missing a lot.
"narcissistic type, is mainly to be described in negative terms. There is no tension between ego and super-ego (indeed, on the strength of this type one would scarcely have arrived at the hypothesis of a super-ego), and there is no preponderance of erotic needs. The subject’s main interest is directed to self-preservation; he is independent and not open to intimidation. His ego has a large amount of aggressiveness at its disposal, which also manifests itself in readiness for activity. In his erotic life loving is preferred above being loved. People belonging to this type impress others as being ‘personalities’; they are especially suited to act as a support for others, to take on the role of leaders and to give a fresh stimulus to cultural development or to damage the established state of affairs.”
Of course we are all missing a lot (DSM has more than what Freud would have had experience with). It's a good starting point, but there are degrees of pathology. Schizophrenia is definitely on his obsessional side, but also when he talks about narcissistic-psychoneuroses. There are differences of degrees. A modern day narcissist is often described as someone with a preferred reality that steam-rolls over reality, and people, to find only the parts of reality that confirm the fantasy (Narcissist-Obsessional?). Anything that doesn't is attacked, by the Ego?, or ignored. Narcissists are still in a grip of reality much more so than someone with schizophrenia. Then you probably would have to add paranoia somewhere, probably Super-ego, and all the modern day personality disorder details have to be added.
Freud also compares the healthy behaviours vs. unhealthy ones (Life Drive vs. Death Drive). Outwardly destructive, and self-destructive behaviours have a dark pleasure to them and would have to be added to all the different types. Drives are another controversial subject, but the dark-side keeps coming back because it doesn't fit well with modern Positive Psychology notions. There are people who love self-development and all the steps on the way, but many people find it daunting, exhausting, neurotic, and want to lash out against it because they are looking for control.
The brain is the most complex thing we know of so it's only going to get more complicated as I move along.
Interesting!
I think the challenge most people have with Jung is they want to create intrinsically real "thing" out of what get's encountered as these raw forces like superego and id become deconstructed into something much more creative, primal, and liminal. All the semi-lucid urges and semi-fantastic images have to be honored as just that, rather than trying to make experience into some pantheon of independent entities.
This can also happen with the woowoo stuff that seems inevitable in medtation, the periods of almost channeled inteligence, encountering other beings within our mind, strange psychic intuitions, and magical synchonicities. These are easy to deal with if they are seen as momentary events consistent with those lables, which have already come and gone so no big deal. But human nature is to cling and reify and so people will always make more of a big deal than is appropriate and will always try to control/own/command these strange "powers". It's a fool's errand but we all need to take the fool's journey.
Jung's stuff has the potention to break worldviews out of their materialistic/elemental simplicity into something much more organic and creative... or people can freak out when they realize there is no controlling creativity and no guarantees and then they'll come up with a new system that basically shoves all the creativity back into box.
Cool, I think I'll check out Opponent process theory in the near future! Thanks again for this chat!
I think the challenge most people have with Jung is they want to create intrinsically real "thing" out of what get's encountered as these raw forces like superego and id become deconstructed into something much more creative, primal, and liminal. All the semi-lucid urges and semi-fantastic images have to be honored as just that, rather than trying to make experience into some pantheon of independent entities.
This can also happen with the woowoo stuff that seems inevitable in medtation, the periods of almost channeled inteligence, encountering other beings within our mind, strange psychic intuitions, and magical synchonicities. These are easy to deal with if they are seen as momentary events consistent with those lables, which have already come and gone so no big deal. But human nature is to cling and reify and so people will always make more of a big deal than is appropriate and will always try to control/own/command these strange "powers". It's a fool's errand but we all need to take the fool's journey.
Jung's stuff has the potention to break worldviews out of their materialistic/elemental simplicity into something much more organic and creative... or people can freak out when they realize there is no controlling creativity and no guarantees and then they'll come up with a new system that basically shoves all the creativity back into box.
Cool, I think I'll check out Opponent process theory in the near future! Thanks again for this chat!
This is more a thread to see what I've done recently. The YouTube channel is more organized, if people want to dig into old videos. This website has changed a lot too in its format, so I would keep it to just what is new.
I was already interested in psychology before and posted lots of Positive Psychology on this website before. It's not a "hardcore turn." I'm going mostly in order. I'll probably have to go back to the French school and William James, because of how influential it was to later psychologists.
I'll be taking a break from the meditation side of things because I'm going in order and Jung is next, and probably Adler. I also have Philosophical episodes I'm behind on. There will be some meditation from the Jungian perspective, and he's influenced many including Adyashanti, and it connects with Mahayana more easily. There are those on this website who are interested and some who don't care. That's fine. It's available for those following along. Freud took 3 years, so I'm hoping to do this more efficiently.
The typical meditators who do this are the types who meditate and then they study the brain because Nirvana is not anywhere near their interest. They want Jhanas and then to develop psychological skills and develop more personal character. This is especially true for a lot of Westerners, but I suspect some Easterners are curious.
These trends are in all Sanghas and most meditators have read other psychologists because they often need therapy BEFORE they attempt Buddhism, because what they ignore will interrupt their practice. [Eg. Daniel talks about The Shadow. It would be nice learn from the coiner of the term.] Again this is for those interested. Those not interested can ignore
The Jungian video here is just a warning about overstriving for those interested in Individuation. The Jung series in proper will be chronological so it will be all explained. Jung fans, from talking to some instructors years ago, have a tendency to overstrive and have trouble getting any pleasure in their developments so they give up, or their Heroic function is overused and tries to pretend it's other functions.
Posting knowledge about Analytical Psychology is okay, but at some point people have to try this stuff and incorporate it in their habits to get any benefits, as the above video gives instructions on how to do that. There's so much in there that I can easily use it as a reference for scores of other videos.
I was already interested in psychology before and posted lots of Positive Psychology on this website before. It's not a "hardcore turn." I'm going mostly in order. I'll probably have to go back to the French school and William James, because of how influential it was to later psychologists.
I'll be taking a break from the meditation side of things because I'm going in order and Jung is next, and probably Adler. I also have Philosophical episodes I'm behind on. There will be some meditation from the Jungian perspective, and he's influenced many including Adyashanti, and it connects with Mahayana more easily. There are those on this website who are interested and some who don't care. That's fine. It's available for those following along. Freud took 3 years, so I'm hoping to do this more efficiently.
The typical meditators who do this are the types who meditate and then they study the brain because Nirvana is not anywhere near their interest. They want Jhanas and then to develop psychological skills and develop more personal character. This is especially true for a lot of Westerners, but I suspect some Easterners are curious.
These trends are in all Sanghas and most meditators have read other psychologists because they often need therapy BEFORE they attempt Buddhism, because what they ignore will interrupt their practice. [Eg. Daniel talks about The Shadow. It would be nice learn from the coiner of the term.] Again this is for those interested. Those not interested can ignore
The Jungian video here is just a warning about overstriving for those interested in Individuation. The Jung series in proper will be chronological so it will be all explained. Jung fans, from talking to some instructors years ago, have a tendency to overstrive and have trouble getting any pleasure in their developments so they give up, or their Heroic function is overused and tries to pretend it's other functions.
Posting knowledge about Analytical Psychology is okay, but at some point people have to try this stuff and incorporate it in their habits to get any benefits, as the above video gives instructions on how to do that. There's so much in there that I can easily use it as a reference for scores of other videos.
I come at it from a slightly different but similar angle. Many people's strategy for using meditation practice to improve their life is "I hope this meditation practice fixes my life." This is not a real strategy. A real strategy would be "I will find and use a meditation practice that is designed to fix this specific problem in my life. I will assess whether it is successful by looking for noticible improvements over time. I will work on this until this weak link in my psyche is strengthened. And then I'll work on the next weak link."
Ulimately, I think the effectiveness of various meditations are up there with other modalities. That's my bold statement. But not in a naive "oh, I'll count my breath from 1 to 10 for 15 minutes a day, well most days, well except when I'm on vacation or traveling for work... and that will fix everything" way.
EDIT: adding on...
Now that I think about it, all of the meditation supported work that I found valuable also had a "practice this in real life" component, so this is very much in alignment with your idea of the importance of becoming.
Ulimately, I think the effectiveness of various meditations are up there with other modalities. That's my bold statement. But not in a naive "oh, I'll count my breath from 1 to 10 for 15 minutes a day, well most days, well except when I'm on vacation or traveling for work... and that will fix everything" way.
EDIT: adding on...
Now that I think about it, all of the meditation supported work that I found valuable also had a "practice this in real life" component, so this is very much in alignment with your idea of the importance of becoming.
shargrol
I come at it from a slightly different but similar angle. Many people's strategy for using meditation practice to improve their life is "I hope this meditation practice fixes my life." This is not a real strategy. A real strategy would be "I will find and use a meditation practice that is designed to fix this specific problem in my life. I will assess whether it is successful by looking for noticible improvements over time. I will work on this until this weak link in my psyche is strengthened. And then I'll work on the next weak link."
Ulimately, I think the effectiveness of various meditations are up there with other modalities. That's my bold statement. But not in a naive "oh, I'll count my breath from 1 to 10 for 15 minutes a day, well most days, well except when I'm on vacation or traveling for work... and that will fix everything" way.
EDIT: adding on...
Now that I think about it, all of the meditation supported work that I found valuable also had a "practice this in real life" component, so this is very much in alignment with your idea of the importance of becoming.
I come at it from a slightly different but similar angle. Many people's strategy for using meditation practice to improve their life is "I hope this meditation practice fixes my life." This is not a real strategy. A real strategy would be "I will find and use a meditation practice that is designed to fix this specific problem in my life. I will assess whether it is successful by looking for noticible improvements over time. I will work on this until this weak link in my psyche is strengthened. And then I'll work on the next weak link."
Ulimately, I think the effectiveness of various meditations are up there with other modalities. That's my bold statement. But not in a naive "oh, I'll count my breath from 1 to 10 for 15 minutes a day, well most days, well except when I'm on vacation or traveling for work... and that will fix everything" way.
EDIT: adding on...
Now that I think about it, all of the meditation supported work that I found valuable also had a "practice this in real life" component, so this is very much in alignment with your idea of the importance of becoming.
Richard Zen
Sorry, late reply. Yes Thanatos can be reviewed in multiple ways. The way Freud did it was to look at it as a need for rest, like in the Nirvana Principle and ultimately death. The Life Principle, which is bascially the Flow state, is great when you're in a Flow state, but it's frustration when skills and challenges don't match. For many people, that mismatch is normal life and they want rest from it. Without Enlightenment, or even to the level of Equanimity, it's sabotage of endeavour, and removing any negative comparisons with others, is a crude way of gaining blips of rest.
Sorry, late reply. Yes Thanatos can be reviewed in multiple ways. The way Freud did it was to look at it as a need for rest, like in the Nirvana Principle and ultimately death. The Life Principle, which is bascially the Flow state, is great when you're in a Flow state, but it's frustration when skills and challenges don't match. For many people, that mismatch is normal life and they want rest from it. Without Enlightenment, or even to the level of Equanimity, it's sabotage of endeavour, and removing any negative comparisons with others, is a crude way of gaining blips of rest.
)
shargrol
Wow, that crystalizes it for me. The death/sabotage instinct is the way the subconscious "just wants to make the whole thing stop". Makes total sense and explains why the person would be blind to the consequences of their choices, even though it would be obvious for anyone on the outside looking in... For example, I'm imagining the way Hitler thought it would be a great idea to fight a war with Russia in the winter -- it's a perfectly ideal and heroic and glorious way... to self-sabotage. (Sorry to jumping to using Hitler as an example, what a cliche! )
Richard Zen
Sorry, late reply. Yes Thanatos can be reviewed in multiple ways. The way Freud did it was to look at it as a need for rest, like in the Nirvana Principle and ultimately death. The Life Principle, which is bascially the Flow state, is great when you're in a Flow state, but it's frustration when skills and challenges don't match. For many people, that mismatch is normal life and they want rest from it. Without Enlightenment, or even to the level of Equanimity, it's sabotage of endeavour, and removing any negative comparisons with others, is a crude way of gaining blips of rest.
Sorry, late reply. Yes Thanatos can be reviewed in multiple ways. The way Freud did it was to look at it as a need for rest, like in the Nirvana Principle and ultimately death. The Life Principle, which is bascially the Flow state, is great when you're in a Flow state, but it's frustration when skills and challenges don't match. For many people, that mismatch is normal life and they want rest from it. Without Enlightenment, or even to the level of Equanimity, it's sabotage of endeavour, and removing any negative comparisons with others, is a crude way of gaining blips of rest.
)A better example if you want is drug addiction. The boredom, which happens outside of drug addiction as well, is so intense, and the withdrawal symptoms/resistance of letting go of the drugs, is so intense, there's a feeling of no way out (only more drugs and withdrawal symptoms), so a person prefers to end it all to stop the striving. The Subject > Object striving needs success all the time and confirmations of success to be seen everywhere, and drugs can be the crutch to bridge the gap. As drugs ruin your success with side effects, then all you have left is the drugs and no perceivable way out of stigma to look forward to for a redemption of more success. Even before the self-sabotage of suicide, there are self-sabotage situations because the brain projects a prediction that they will be rejected, so might as well sabotage and get the rejection over with.
shargrol
Just finished the second essay, The language is a little difficult for me, but inherent in what Rank seems to be talking about is the pain of birth/becoming and the intuition that it ends in death/unbecoming, and so -- in the midst of things -- there is this constrained worldview that needs to exist. In order to create, we need to feel that it is worth it, which requires a kind of suspension of disbelief.
He seems to touch on both the experiential (energetic) aspect of this as well as the social identity aspect of it. There is the somatic pre-tension which seems to proceed creating, as if we know both the value and futility. And in the midst of creating, we have to take the "partial" view that this thing has inherent meaning and needs to exist. But once the act is done, it is done. I also hear in this echos of his professional life, needing to be generative in terms of theory, but then also being exhausted by the creative act/role...
It was very interesting to hear how Bowie had a kind of dual vision about the value of creation. Obviously one of the most generative artist/performers around... but he could also see the ridiculousness of the need.
Just finished the second essay, The language is a little difficult for me, but inherent in what Rank seems to be talking about is the pain of birth/becoming and the intuition that it ends in death/unbecoming, and so -- in the midst of things -- there is this constrained worldview that needs to exist. In order to create, we need to feel that it is worth it, which requires a kind of suspension of disbelief.
He seems to touch on both the experiential (energetic) aspect of this as well as the social identity aspect of it. There is the somatic pre-tension which seems to proceed creating, as if we know both the value and futility. And in the midst of creating, we have to take the "partial" view that this thing has inherent meaning and needs to exist. But once the act is done, it is done. I also hear in this echos of his professional life, needing to be generative in terms of theory, but then also being exhausted by the creative act/role...
It was very interesting to hear how Bowie had a kind of dual vision about the value of creation. Obviously one of the most generative artist/performers around... but he could also see the ridiculousness of the need.
I've been secretly venting and seeing what that's like. It does feel like a discharge and a relief cathartically, but it's a little scary. You actually feel closer to a psychopath Id -> Ego with no Super-ego conscience filter, so I think a lot of skill has to be applied to this. You don't want to vent down the street like a homeless person talking to themselves. "Don't go mama! Papa come home!"
I think the insight practice, that Otto calls "don't make pleasure last longer or pain shorten," is still helpful and insight practice is a form of healthy suppression, whereas concentration can be a dull repression, or replacement "ecstacy" as he says. I wouldn't go too much in either direction.
I didn't get censored yet, but it's political season and Google is going on a "Disinformation" binge. Some conservative commentators were booted off for opinions on 2020 election voter fraud which I'm going to broach on the next episode. I did want to move two years ago but I didn't when I couldn't get subtitles to work, but Rumble allows me to add them now. I might as well move now instead of going through the unplesant experience of getting booted. Like Twitter, the algorithms are not trustworthy because they are manipulated so a lot of the stats related to subscribers, likes, dislikes, etc., are smoke and mirrors. It's like living in Dark City. Probably lots of bots on there like Twitter. I'm very happy my brain can write about whatever I want to now. The only warning I got on my videos was bashing BLM and ANTIFA on my Sadism video. They called it sensationalism, but YouTube is full of sensationalism, hucksterism, and Bigfoot videos, so they can kiss my ass. <br /><br />Thanks for the links on Parmenides. That will be interesting, but like most situations, like my review containing a lot of Heidegger, people put a lot of their own takes on what are only fragments. What I do like that is in the fragments is the ability to see other dimensions like different choices giving you a different angle on things, but in the end we don't know what we don't know. Interdependence includes what is mysterious. Contemplating that mystery snaps you out of boredom and ruts and returns a sense of wonder. You can be in Heidegger's The Open and equanimously let thoughts and events come from the concealed to the unconcealed. Some of those things are horrifying of course so it won't be Sean Penn on a beach in Tree Of Life, but I think it's less stressful to have an almost ready stance and expectation that unexpected things can arise instead of being stuck in future narratives and cling to expectations. That relief allows you to use memories and future thinking, but in a less paranoid, or rose-colored way. It might be a fancy way of gaining common sense <br /><br />When it comes to Transpersonal Psychology I'm bumping into similar areas, but mainly Near-death experiences (NDEs), DMT, and the effect religion has on the survival mind that keeps moving around looking for a safe place, like Heaven. Certainly when you hear well described NDEs, that mention conversations that were witnessed out of body and confirmed by doctors in another room that couldn't have realistically been witnessed, the surivival mind releases a survival stress that was unconscious before, but now released by momentary belief, like it now has something to look forward to in death. Of course, those types have trouble explaining absurdity in life and death, or explaining why people see what they want to see in different religions, or an amorphous spirituality, and DMT can be studied like a meaningless drug that stops operating with the final death of the brain, like a point of no return. Categorized, common, dull, and a terrifying practical joke.<br /><br />For the intrauterine experiences I'm still at the level of Otto Rank where one realizes one is looking for endless womb satisfaction in extrauterine experiences, and one could say that wanting a heaven is wanting to return to an intrauterine state again. Satisfaction and love on tap. To believe in heaven, hopefully not in a dangerous psychotic way, is more freeing than intellectually picking it apart as pointless chemicals leading to inevitable entropy. A lot of true believers are trying to make that balance between faith and navigating reality safely.
The only warning I got on my videos was bashing BLM and ANTIFA on my Sadism video. They called it sensationalism, but YouTube is full of sensationalism, hucksterism, and Bigfoot videos, so they can kiss my ass. <br /><br />Thanks for the links on Parmenides. That will be interesting, but like most situations, like my review containing a lot of Heidegger, people put a lot of their own takes on what are only fragments. What I do like that is in the fragments is the ability to see other dimensions like different choices giving you a different angle on things, but in the end we don't know what we don't know. Interdependence includes what is mysterious. Contemplating that mystery snaps you out of boredom and ruts and returns a sense of wonder. You can be in Heidegger's The Open and equanimously let thoughts and events come from the concealed to the unconcealed. Some of those things are horrifying of course so it won't be Sean Penn on a beach in Tree Of Life, but I think it's less stressful to have an almost ready stance and expectation that unexpected things can arise instead of being stuck in future narratives and cling to expectations. That relief allows you to use memories and future thinking, but in a less paranoid, or rose-colored way. It might be a fancy way of gaining common sense <br /><br />When it comes to Transpersonal Psychology I'm bumping into similar areas, but mainly Near-death experiences (NDEs), DMT, and the effect religion has on the survival mind that keeps moving around looking for a safe place, like Heaven. Certainly when you hear well described NDEs, that mention conversations that were witnessed out of body and confirmed by doctors in another room that couldn't have realistically been witnessed, the surivival mind releases a survival stress that was unconscious before, but now released by momentary belief, like it now has something to look forward to in death. Of course, those types have trouble explaining absurdity in life and death, or explaining why people see what they want to see in different religions, or an amorphous spirituality, and DMT can be studied like a meaningless drug that stops operating with the final death of the brain, like a point of no return. Categorized, common, dull, and a terrifying practical joke.<br /><br />For the intrauterine experiences I'm still at the level of Otto Rank where one realizes one is looking for endless womb satisfaction in extrauterine experiences, and one could say that wanting a heaven is wanting to return to an intrauterine state again. Satisfaction and love on tap. To believe in heaven, hopefully not in a dangerous psychotic way, is more freeing than intellectually picking it apart as pointless chemicals leading to inevitable entropy. A lot of true believers are trying to make that balance between faith and navigating reality safely.
For what it's worth, lately I've been reading up on Schema Therapy and I've found it an interesting fairly-contemporarry hybrid model. It's a very practical system, more focused on the things that help patients as opposed to figuring out an "a priori" metaphysics for the psyche. Its creation was motivated by the challenge of chronic BPD/PTSD patients, but the framework also works for others...
Schema therapy - Wikipedia
What I like about it is that it is more focused on the maladaptive framing (schema) of the patient and doesn't diagnose according to specific behaviors. It recognizes that people may have the same core belief (e.g. "I'm defective") but it could manifest as surrender and accomodating that as an identity, ignoring/avoiding situations that trigger that belief, or overcompensating and seeking out ways to prove it wrong. All three of these behaviors are wildly different but they are being caused by the same schema... and if the core schema isn't challenged, then even if the behavior changes, the chronic problem will persist. It will become expressed differently, but the core wounded belief is still there.
It's a sequential process of developing the therapist-patient relationship, inventorying the maladaptive schemas, assessing the benefits and downsides of those schemas, developing proficiency at detecting when the schema is at play, and using pre-planned approaches for cultivating better behavior. All of the above is fairly close to Cognative Behavioral Therapy, which it grew out of.
But Schema Therapy adds two other aspects of treatment. The first is a lot of visualization and role playing, which helps the patient "see/feel" what it is like to be in the schema and still stay conscious. In many ways, it's similar to exposure therapy for phobias, but the phobias in this case are the very core/primal beliefs/thinking/framing that the patient does which limits them. I guess Gestalt therapy also has this same kind of role playing approach.
The second is "Schema mode" work, which is the way therapists can practically deal with patients with many maladaptive schema and different manifestations of those schemas. It can be exhausting for the therapist (especially when focused on behavior modification) when the patient keeps switching modes and behaviors. BPD and PTSD is known for this. In Schema Modes, the patient is help to understand how they have different major parts of their psyche, which play different roles. The psychological dynamic is frame in terms of macro modes:
The abandoned/vulnerable/wounded child -- which is the mode/behavior of the patient when triggered by the kinds of experience that originally created the maladaptive schema -- the neglect, abuse, abandonment, etc. Here the mind sees and feels their wounds --- which is very important --- and can realize the maladaptiveness of some their strategies for coping, but it is a very fragile state. The therapist helps show that they aren't broken, but rather they lacked the love, protection, self-expression, etc. that a young child needed. So the maladaptive schema were a way to survive. And the original wounds are not personal flaws, but the logical results of the actions/context of where they grew up.
The angry child -- which is the mode where the patient lashes out against the situation or person that triggers the feeling of being the vulnerable child. Here the mind is clear about justice/self-worth, but it is exaggerated and often not appropriate in real life. But this is the seed of the patient reclaiming their own rights, self-worth, and expression of appropriate needs. Getting to the angry child is often the most critical achievement in the therapeutic progression. It re-empowers the patient. Again, the patient is helped to see that love, protection, self-expression, etc. are appropriate things for a child to want and need... but to find it in non-maladaptive ways.
Then there is the punative parent -- which is the adult voice in the head which shuts down the child's honest expression of needs and says things like "you're being greedy, you don't deserve that, you just need to try harder" etc. This is a created voice that rationalizes the abuses of the parent, by blaming the child. This part of the mind is simply wrong and the therapist helps the patient clearly see it and defy it.
Then there is the detached protector -- which is the intuitive part of the mind that learns how to survive by shutting down and numbing out. This mode can be confused as being a healthy improvement in BPD and PTSD patients because the patient seems logical and self-regulating in this mode. But actually this is a people-pleasing, therapist-pleasing mode where the patient has shut down their needs/wants and is just saying/doing what others want. In this mode, the patient can rarely say what they want, need, or feel. They try to give "the right answer". This mode is usually the first mode that presents itself and can take a year to work through in order to build therapist-patient relationship. Only then can aspects of the angry child and vulnerable child emerge.
And finally there is the healthy adult -- which is the voice of moderation, balance, sanity, etc. Initially the therapist provides this "voice" and describes appropriate ways to think/feel/behavior instead of the maladaptive schema, but over time the patient is able to detect and play this role. It is further developed during role playing/imagery, where the therapist for example, might play the role of the detached protector and then the patient would talk to the protector, as the healthy adult, and explain to it why shutting down or people-pleasing is a dead-end way to behave if they want a full life.
ANYWAY, what I like about this therapy is it provides a good framework for explaining/honoring a range of existing self-belief and behaviors, but then very pratically moves the patient through the redevelopment process. It starts with giving them a safe place, transistions to understanding their challenges, gives them tools to make incremental progress, uses limited therapeutic re-parenting, but focuses on realizing core wounding, legitimate wants/needs, and how to pursue them as an adult.
And that's my psychology review!
Schema Therapy: A Practitioner's Guide by Jeffrey E. Young | Goodreads
Reinventing Your Life: The Breakthrough Program to End Negative Behavior...and Feel Great Again by Jeffrey E. Young | Goodreads
P.S. once you see this framework, notice core maladaptive schemas, and the different schema modes... you see it everywhere!
Schema therapy - Wikipedia
What I like about it is that it is more focused on the maladaptive framing (schema) of the patient and doesn't diagnose according to specific behaviors. It recognizes that people may have the same core belief (e.g. "I'm defective") but it could manifest as surrender and accomodating that as an identity, ignoring/avoiding situations that trigger that belief, or overcompensating and seeking out ways to prove it wrong. All three of these behaviors are wildly different but they are being caused by the same schema... and if the core schema isn't challenged, then even if the behavior changes, the chronic problem will persist. It will become expressed differently, but the core wounded belief is still there.
It's a sequential process of developing the therapist-patient relationship, inventorying the maladaptive schemas, assessing the benefits and downsides of those schemas, developing proficiency at detecting when the schema is at play, and using pre-planned approaches for cultivating better behavior. All of the above is fairly close to Cognative Behavioral Therapy, which it grew out of.
But Schema Therapy adds two other aspects of treatment. The first is a lot of visualization and role playing, which helps the patient "see/feel" what it is like to be in the schema and still stay conscious. In many ways, it's similar to exposure therapy for phobias, but the phobias in this case are the very core/primal beliefs/thinking/framing that the patient does which limits them. I guess Gestalt therapy also has this same kind of role playing approach.
The second is "Schema mode" work, which is the way therapists can practically deal with patients with many maladaptive schema and different manifestations of those schemas. It can be exhausting for the therapist (especially when focused on behavior modification) when the patient keeps switching modes and behaviors. BPD and PTSD is known for this. In Schema Modes, the patient is help to understand how they have different major parts of their psyche, which play different roles. The psychological dynamic is frame in terms of macro modes:
The abandoned/vulnerable/wounded child -- which is the mode/behavior of the patient when triggered by the kinds of experience that originally created the maladaptive schema -- the neglect, abuse, abandonment, etc. Here the mind sees and feels their wounds --- which is very important --- and can realize the maladaptiveness of some their strategies for coping, but it is a very fragile state. The therapist helps show that they aren't broken, but rather they lacked the love, protection, self-expression, etc. that a young child needed. So the maladaptive schema were a way to survive. And the original wounds are not personal flaws, but the logical results of the actions/context of where they grew up.
The angry child -- which is the mode where the patient lashes out against the situation or person that triggers the feeling of being the vulnerable child. Here the mind is clear about justice/self-worth, but it is exaggerated and often not appropriate in real life. But this is the seed of the patient reclaiming their own rights, self-worth, and expression of appropriate needs. Getting to the angry child is often the most critical achievement in the therapeutic progression. It re-empowers the patient. Again, the patient is helped to see that love, protection, self-expression, etc. are appropriate things for a child to want and need... but to find it in non-maladaptive ways.
Then there is the punative parent -- which is the adult voice in the head which shuts down the child's honest expression of needs and says things like "you're being greedy, you don't deserve that, you just need to try harder" etc. This is a created voice that rationalizes the abuses of the parent, by blaming the child. This part of the mind is simply wrong and the therapist helps the patient clearly see it and defy it.
Then there is the detached protector -- which is the intuitive part of the mind that learns how to survive by shutting down and numbing out. This mode can be confused as being a healthy improvement in BPD and PTSD patients because the patient seems logical and self-regulating in this mode. But actually this is a people-pleasing, therapist-pleasing mode where the patient has shut down their needs/wants and is just saying/doing what others want. In this mode, the patient can rarely say what they want, need, or feel. They try to give "the right answer". This mode is usually the first mode that presents itself and can take a year to work through in order to build therapist-patient relationship. Only then can aspects of the angry child and vulnerable child emerge.
And finally there is the healthy adult -- which is the voice of moderation, balance, sanity, etc. Initially the therapist provides this "voice" and describes appropriate ways to think/feel/behavior instead of the maladaptive schema, but over time the patient is able to detect and play this role. It is further developed during role playing/imagery, where the therapist for example, might play the role of the detached protector and then the patient would talk to the protector, as the healthy adult, and explain to it why shutting down or people-pleasing is a dead-end way to behave if they want a full life.
ANYWAY, what I like about this therapy is it provides a good framework for explaining/honoring a range of existing self-belief and behaviors, but then very pratically moves the patient through the redevelopment process. It starts with giving them a safe place, transistions to understanding their challenges, gives them tools to make incremental progress, uses limited therapeutic re-parenting, but focuses on realizing core wounding, legitimate wants/needs, and how to pursue them as an adult.
And that's my psychology review!
Schema Therapy: A Practitioner's Guide by Jeffrey E. Young | Goodreads
Reinventing Your Life: The Breakthrough Program to End Negative Behavior...and Feel Great Again by Jeffrey E. Young | Goodreads
P.S. once you see this framework, notice core maladaptive schemas, and the different schema modes... you see it everywhere!