Fight, Flight and … Freeze? Most people have heard of the “fight or flight” response. It is the body’s naturally hard-wired way of dealing with threats to one’s safety. I have written about it before, a few times, so I won’t go into it again but today I’m going to mention the third part of this response: freeze. In nature, animals typically go to flight first, since they are free of ego and have nothing to prove, only to enhance their own chances of survival. If they can’t go to flight and escape danger, they will go to fight, posturing and growling in hopes of scaring off the threat. If this fails, they will actually engage in aggressive behavior, albeit defensive aggression. Once these two options are unsuccessful, or if they are unavailable, most species have a form of reflexive behavior that could be termed “playing dead”. Playing Dead Emotionally Since most of the threats people face in our neck of the woods are social or emotional (although many do face actual physical threats in many forms), the freeze response may look a bit different than it does for a possum or cat. In our case, we tend to play […]
-
Playing Dead Emotionally: How Numbing Your Pain Can Be a Curse (and a Blessing)
Playing Dead Emotionally: How Numbing Your Pain Can Be a Curse (and a Blessing)
-
All Aggression is Defensive
All Aggression is Defensive
Making a Case for a Single Motivation of Aggressive Behavior Lots of research in recent years has distinguished between two types of aggressive behavior: reactive aggression and proactive (or instrumental). So what distinguishes one from the other? Simply stated, reactive aggression is a response to something, whereas proactive aggression is not. It is also referred to as instrumental aggression because it can be seen as a means to a particular end. This distinction seems to make intuitive sense and the research seems to reinforce intuition in this instance. However, despite the surface differences between these forms of aggression, is it possible that something is missing? Is it possible that all aggression is reactive, or defensive, in nature? Consider the neurobiological home of aggression, the fight-or-fight (FoF) response of the nervous system. Aggression does not exist without arousal of the FoF system. Therefore, it stands to reason that even proactive aggression is caused by the brain’s perception of a threat that may warrant activation of the FoF system. After all, it is the FoF response. In order for a response to be elicited, there must be a stimulus that is being responded to. It is by this logic that it may […]
-
How to Change The Past
How to Change The Past
One of the most frequently used lines of false consolation that I hear is “you can’t change the past”. Usually this bit of indispensable wisdom is offered as a word of advice when someone is describing the impact of some negative event from their history, something that they wish had never happened and often something that continues to affect them to this day. Of course, this advice and apparent statement of the obvious is rarely helpful, which is not surprising if we look at the gist of this rejoinder. Let’s say you run breathless to the neighbour’s house, pounding on the door. They open the door and ask what’s going on. You tell them that there’s been a terrible accident and you need them to call an ambulance because you think your brother is dead. I don’t think anyone would feel justified or even attempt to rationalize a response such as, “Well, it’s in the past. You can’t change the past. You just have to let it go and get over it.” We would expect that person to offer help, to repair whatever damage had been done, within reason and their capability. Of course we wouldn’t expect them to take […]
-
Validating Your Brain: The Epic Conclusion
Validating Your Brain: The Epic Conclusion
Click here for part 1 and part 2 Up to this point, my last two posts have tried to demonstrate a few key realizations: The brain is working primarily on an unconscious level. Because of this, we are rarely as aware of what we are doing and why as we would like to believe. The brain is well-intentioned and is trying to accomplish its sole purpose, surviving the moment. Because it is focused on surviving the moment, it will make decisions that favour short-term benefits EVERY SINGLE TIME, unless we override it. Because the brain operates primarily on the level of our unconscious, it usually communicates with our conscious brain indirectly. Often, it is trying to get our attention and we are not listening to it, which leads to the perpetuation of problem behaviors, thoughts, and feelings. If we learn to really listen to our brain, it will tell us everything we need to know. The final piece of this trilogy will attempt to focus on the final point I’ve listed above. Specifically, I’m going to be demonstrating how working together with your brain, instead of fighting against it, is the surest way to mental health and a better experience […]
-
Validating Your Brain (Part 2)
Validating Your Brain (Part 2)
Read Part 1 here Keep in mind that your brain’s task is to survive the moment, not the long-term. Without fail, the automatic behaviors that our brain engages in are accomplishing this task. However, due to its lack of perspective, the brain does not have the ability to coordinate momentary survival with long-term survival. So when your brain is acting, thinking, and feeling on your behalf, what does it think is happening? When we experience automatic behavioral responses, what is the brain trying to tell us? Think of the following example. The next time you feel an itch on your skin (which will be fairly soon, given that I have now invited you to think about it), try to physically look at the area of your skin that is itchy but DO NOT ITCH IT! Just look at the itchy place. If you can’t physically see it, try to visualize it in your mind as vividly as possible. You may even want to visualize yourself itching it. I can almost guarantee that devoid of any foreign substance interference, if the itch is generated by your brain, looking at it alone will be sufficient intervention to remove it. Give it a […]
-
Validating Your Brain (Part 1)
Validating Your Brain (Part 1)
rofessor Julie Baumberger, of Capella University, once told me “You are not your brain”. While to many, this statement may at first appear confusing, to me it made perfect sense. The fact that we are able to notice what we are noticing, to think about what we are thinking about (referred to as meta-thinking by hoity-toity academic types) seems to denote some separation between the physical and automatic processes of our lower brain centres and our higher brain centres. Some may take it further and say that it is evidence of the existence of some non-physical part of ourselves, whether it be a synergistic outcome of the firing of neurons or an intangible soul. That is an entirely different discussion and one that will not be tackled here. However, I would like to talk about Dr. Baumberger’s maxim and how we might apply it in a real way to improving our experience of our existence. First, we need to look at our brain and describe what it is and what its purpose is. If it is separate from me, are we on the same page? Do we want the same things? Do we have the same strategies by which we […]
Recent Comments