Psychology as storytelling part I

Psychology as storytelling part I Storytelling has been with us since the days of camp and the siege of wild animals. It serves a number of important roles: to increase the fears, communication of vital information (regarding survival tactics and the characteristics of animals, for example), the satisfaction of a sense of order (justice), development capacity of the hypotheses, predict and introduce theories and so on.We have a sense of wonder. The world around us inexplicable, incomprehensible in its diversity and myriad forms. Experience the need to organize, to "explain the wonder away", so that they know what to expect next (predict). These are the essential elements of survival. But if we have succeeded in our mind of the structures of the world outside? were much less effective when trying to cope with our inteal universe.The relationship between the structure and functioning of our (ephemeral) mind, the structure and mode of operation of our (physical) and the structure of the brain and behavior to the outside world have been the subject of heated debate for millennia. In general, they were (and still are) two forms of treatment: Some people, for all practical purposes, the origin (brain) with its product (mind). Some of them postulated the existence of a network of prejudices, bo categorical understanding the universe? ships in which our experience and that mold. Others have regarded the mind as a black box. While it is possible in principle to know its input and output is impossible, again in principle, to understand its inteal functioning and management of information. Pavlov coined the word "conditioning", Watson adopted it and invented "Behaviorism", Skinner came up with "reinforcement". School epiphenomenologists (emergent phenomena) regarded the mind as the product of the brain "hardware" and the "wiring" complexity. But all ignored the psychophysical question: What is the mind and how they are connected to the brain? The other area is more "scientific" and "positivist". It is speculated that the mind (whether a physical entity, an epiphenomenon, a non-physical principle of organization, or the result of introspection)? had a structure and a limited set of functions. They argued that a "manual" could be composed, replete with engineering and maintenance. The best known of these "psychodynamists was, of course, Freud. Despite his disciples (Adler, Hoey, the object-relations lot) diverged wildly from his initial theories? all parties to them his belief in the need to "scientify" and objectify psychology. Freud? a doctor by profession (Neurologist) and Bleuler before him? came with a theory about the structure of the mind and its mechanics: (deleted) energies and (reactive) forces. Flow diagrams were presented together with a method of analysis, a mathematical physics mind.But was a mirage. An essential part is missing: the ability to test the hypothesis that derives from these "theories". All have been very convincing, however, and, surprisingly, had great explanatory power. But - not verifiable and not how they were forged? can not be regarded as having the characteristics of the redemption of a scientist theory.Deciding between the two camps was and is a crucial issue. Consider the clash - however repressed - between psychiatry and psychology. As for the old "mental disorders" as euphemisms - only recognizes the reality of brain dysfunctions (such as biochemical or electric imbalances) and hereditary factors. The latter (psychology) implicitly assumes that there is something (the "mind", the "psyche") which can not be reduced to hardware or wiring diagrams. Talk therapy is aimed at something and supposedly interacts with it.But perhaps the distinction is artificial. Perhaps the mind is simply the way our brains experience. Endowed with the gift (or curse) of introspection, we experience a duality, a division of both observer and observed constantly. Moreover, this is talk therapy - that is the transfer of energy from one brain to another through the air. This is direct, in particular formed energy, intended to cause certain brain circuits in the receiver. No wonder if it was found that talk therapy is clear physiological effects on the brain of the patient (blood volume, electrical activity, discharge and absorption of hormones, etc.). All this is doubly true if the In the mind of the fact, only an emerging phenomenon of the complex brain - two sides of the same coin.Psychological theories of the mind are metaphors of the mind. They are fables and myths, tales, stories, hypotheses, conjunctures. Play (very) important role in the definition of psychotherapy? but not in the laboratory. It is his art form, not rigorous, not testable, less structured than theories in the natural sciences. The language used is polyvalent, rich, effusive, and fuzzy? in short, metaphorical. They are dying of value judgments, preferences, fears, post and ad hoc constructions. None of this has methodological, systematic, analytical and predictive merits.Still, theories of psychology are powerful instruments, admirable constructs of the mind. As such, they are required to meet certain needs. Its very existence proves it.The achieve peace of mind is a necessity, which was neglected by Maslow in his famous delivery. People sacrifice of wealth and material well-being, to renounce the temptation to ignore the opportunities and endanger their lives? just to get all the happiness and integrity. There are, in other words, a preference on the homeostasis of inteal balance. And 'the fulfillment of this need that psychological theories set out to face a. In this sense, no different than other collective narratives (myths, for example). In some respects, however, there are significant differences: Psychology is desperately trying to relate to reality and to scientific discipline with the observation and measurement and the organization and presentation of results using the language of mathematics. This does not atone for its primordial sin: that its purpose is ethereal and inaccessible. However, it lends an air of rigor and credibility to it.The second difference is that while historical narratives are "covered" stories? psychology is "the", "custom". Only one description is invented for every listener (patient, client) and is incorporated in it as the main hero (or anti-hero). This flexible "production line" seems to be the result of an age of growing individualism. It 'true that the "language units" (large chunks of denotates and connotates) are one and the same for each user. "In psychoanalysis, the therapist can always use the tripartite structure (Id, Ego, Superego). But these are the elements of language and should not be confused with the plot. Every customer, every person, and his single irreplicable ground. (More) The Author Sam Vaknin is the author of Malignant Self Love - Narcissism changes and, after the rain - How the West Lost the East. E 'a columnist for Central Europe Review, United Press Inteational (UPI) and eBookWeb and editor of mental health and Central East Europe categories in Open Directory and Suite101 searcheurope.com. Visit the Web site of a Sam