Situational inertia

Hello this is Bobby Deep and today I would like to explore some things that could stop us from in implementing change in our lives.

Many of us will want to implement change in our lives because we are not satisfied with the way things are.  Perhaps we want to be free of addiction, or perhaps we want to change the way we structure our days, or want to eat more healthily, or change the way we interact with people.  Inevitably we believe that changes will bring us more happiness or a better quality of life.  Indeed, we may want change because we have realised our worth.  However,  there are things that might hinder progress.

There is a force of nature called inertia.  In physics,this refers to the property of all matter that has mass, In which things that are at rest tend to remain at rest, while things that are in motion, tend to remain in motion.  Simply put, it takes energy to get something to start moving.  Similarly, it takes energy to get something to stop moving. This law seems to apply in the psychological dimensions also.  What I mean is that if you wish to initiate  a new way of being in your life, it may require that you put considerable energy into doing so.  Similarly, if you wish to stop doing something, it may also take considerable energy to stop doing it.

For example, you may have realised your sense of self-worth, or you have developed some self-esteem.  Consequently, you may have decided to mind your own well being.  Perhaps you are trying to engage more with life, or to develop your social environment.  However the people around you may not realise that something has changed  within you. At the sane time, you may no longer respond in ways you use to respond to people.  Take for example someone who has quit alcohol or smoking.  

Skull smoking a cigarette - Vincent Van Gogh  

Previously, the smoker or alcoholic may have responded to social invitations in a particular manner.  After they have withdrawn from a substance, they may no longer respond in the same manner.  Thus, the people around them may read the mew behaviours as strange or unusual.  Unfortunately, (or fortunately) these surprised friends will either withdraw their friendship or discourage the new behaviours.  This then puts the person attempting changes to return to previous unwanted behaviours. Therefore, the loss of friendships and relationships could accompany changes in self-concept or behaviour.  In fact, a changed relationship to one thing could lead to changes in other relationships.  I refer to this as situational inertia.  

All of us exist in psychological and social equilibrium.  In other words, we live in a system of interactions between ourselves and the world.  Therefore, it is not surprising that when we change something inside ourselves, that we may upset the equilibrium outside ourselves.  So do not be surprised when the changes you implement create crises for you.  These crises may occur gradually or they may occur suddenly and simultaneously.  Sometimes the stress they in evoke in us may lead us to return to previous unwanted attitudes, beliefs and behaviours.  

So how can we avoid this problem?  One way to avoid this kind of situational inertia, is too predict and to plan for it.  In other words, we need to have a roadmap for change that includes the possibility that the relationships we have formed, may change as we change our relationships to other things in our lives.  It also involves trusting that we will be open to new and more healthy relationships.  In short, it means that we need to have courage.  But courage does not exclude the possibility of being gentle and tender with ourselves. Each of us has immeasurable value, and each of us has a right to implement changes to make us more whole.  

When everything seems to be going wrong, it's important to ask ourselves the question is this because I have changed my relationship to something?  In fact, what seems catastrophic at one instant in time may, on reflection, later prove to be a blessing in disguise.  I invite you to conduct a thought experiment.  Think back to your past And remember a time when something catastrophic happened.  At the time, you may have thought the event was something awful and terrible.  Now try and imagine your life without that event having occurred.  I suggest that in many cases you will realise that the catastrophic event was in fact a catalyst for an opportunity or for something good.  You are probably aware of the saying that when one door closes another door opens.  I have experienced people saying this to me in the past, and found a little flippant.  However, when I look back, it's  inevitably true.  I am not denying that bad things can happen and do have long-term term negative consequences.  However, it is useful to think back and reflect on how something catastrophic turned out to be positive in the long term.

So I am urging courage on your part, and I am asking you to consider that what You see as catastrophic may in fact not be.  Perhaps this universe In which we find ourselves is actually quite a friendly place!  I wish you warmth and goodness.   

Narcissistic Rage

Hello it's Bobby Deep here again and I have decided to discuss something that I find both  interesting and quite disturbing.  In one of my previous posts I wrote about narcissism and people who are narcissistic.  In this post I would like to write anout the kinds of things that could happen when narcissism dominates the personality of the individual.

I will start with the usual caveat that all people have some level of narcissism in them. Indeed, a certain level of selfishness is necessary for the purposes of self-preservation and survival.  However, we need to also show some selflessness in order to function socially.  Although Immediate selfishness may bring short term pay-offs, its overuse may sabotage any long term benefits.  In a way, selflessness and giving to others helps guarantee our embededness within a particular social context over a longer period.  In other words, those who are kind are more likely to have kindness shown to them.  Of course, this is not guaranteed.  But perhaps kindness has evolved to provide us with credit in our social account and thus promotes longevity.  However, people who have stronger narcissistic traits have great difficulty trusting that short term giving without a corresponding immediate pay back might result in longer term pay offs.  

In order to identify what such individuals might look like,  i am providing som typical traits below.  

(A) A poorly developed or absent sense of empathy;  they have feelings of their own but struggle or don't care to imagine  what another is feeling.  

(B)  A sense of misplaced grandiosity;  a sense of superiority and being better than others;

(C) A sense of entitlement;

(D) Exploitativeness; 

(E)  Self-centredness;  the conversation must focus on them;

(F) Lack of forgiveness;

You will find different ways of characterising this problem, but these seem the most salient to me.  In the past, this kind of individual would have been called a megalomaniac. If these traits are pronounced enough,  the person could be said to have a narcissistic personality disorder (NPD).  However, such a diagnosis is a very serious matter and should only be conducted  by qualified individuals.  Usually, five out of nine traits need to be firmly present for such a diagnosis.

Narcissists can be very charming and often very pleasant on the eye.  Also, they have every appearance of being a typical nice guy or gal, without any obvious negative characteristics.  But they are excellent mimics and know exactly how to act in a social situation, by presenting an amalgam of personality characteristics that are replicated from other people. Ironically, although they see themselves as unique, the personality they portray is a hodge-podge of others' personalities. Nevertheless, this amalgam is extremely hard to detect and only those with finely honed phoniness detectors will sense they are speaking to a synthetic persona. 

Sadly, the real person behind the mask exists only in a stunted or vestigial form.

  

Smeagol in The Lord of the Rings, reminds me of the Narcissistic vestigial self. 

This ossified genuine self is unable to present itself to the world but has its needs obtained by controlling its simulacrum.    It is hungry for one thing and one thing only:  a constant supply of unconditional positive attention from whomever the narcissist believes has the credibility to issue such regard and praise.  They therefore suck up to their betters and vilify their apparent inferiors. 

Narcissists could move the people in their lives around like objects without regard for their needs.  In fact, the needs of others play no part in the calculations narcissists make with regard to the best yields of positive attention.  One thing is certain: they do it for themselves and for no one else.  Therefore,  they are extremely selfish and stingy and are likely to be in complete control of finances..  Often, the gifts narcissists give are given to keep the target "sweet" or hooked; and these gifts will often be a little  off-target with regard to the likes and preferences of the rare recipient.  The narcissist is often a poor gift giver because it is too effortful to imagine what someone else might like or want.  Even when given precise instructions, they might get it wrong, some believe because they deliberately want to torture the recipient.  But I think this is more likely due to a reluctance to prioritise the other's needs; as torture requires imagining what might frustrate the gift recipient.  In contrast, they are very aware of their own frustrations.

Narcissists cannot and do not tolerate even the smallest amount of criticism without becoming enraged. Rage is not anger.  Rage is the experience of suddenly and unexpectedly loss of power.  Being accustomed to controlling their supply of positive attention and regard, and obsequious placating behaviours from others, any departure from established patterns can severely unhinge the narcissist.  This is very exhausting for the people who live with or  who relate to them. It is impossible to be genuine with them and to give them honest  feedback about your feelings about them or their specific behaviours, because you will elicit a rage response.  This rage is likely to be absolute, hateful and deeply unsettling for the recipient,whether  the rage is cold or more outspoken.  Such toxic displays of rage can have consequences to the well-being of others.  Thus the narcissist who is unable to express who they really are, force others to do the same. 

Here are a few more behaviours that you might see with someone who has a narcissistic personality disorder or tendencies towards it. They choose to have relationships with people who have some form of vulnerability.  However it is very important for them to choose people who also have some claim to fame or some set of skills or social recognition. Narcissist always do their homework before engaging in any form of relationship with anyone.  So for example, they might use search engines or social networking websites to find a target's CV, This enables them to check out a target's social value.  They could become obsessed with an individual in this process.  It's a type of infatuation which precedes the actual meeting with individual.  When they eventually do meet up with the person or manipulate the target  into some form of interaction, they are completely infatuated with that individual, and may very quickly learn what the other person needs from a psychological perspective.  Then, they will proceed to act in a manner that meets the needs of the target. Thus the narcissist presents the target with a very potent set of social behaviours that addict the target. For example, the  target may feel completely understood and that they have found somebody who really meets their needs. Accordingly, their  defences will fall and this is precisely what upsets  the narcissist. 

As the target's defences come down, the narcissist starts despising the target. Being unable themselves to enter a vulnerable state in which the true self can  be shown, the narcissist is disturbed by the target's vulnerability.  The annoyance caused  by this loss of an idealised object leads the narcissist to start undermining the target and to withdraw any form of affection.  Unfortunately the target is now addicted to the narcissist and is likely to experience withdrawal symptoms.  Most likely these individuals will then engage in placatory or begging behaviour to try and coax the original behaviours out of the narcissist. But this only serves to enrage them further as a sign of phoniness: their idealised target is now a whimpering, begging fool; someone who deserves only contempt.  Ironically, the phoney barcissist, unable to present a true self to the   world cannot integrate the strengths and weaknesses of their idealised target.  In other words, they cannot see them as a blend of strength and vulnerability because for the narcissist there is only either good or bad, black or white, with no intermediate gradations.  Nor is there an understanding of process and how time regulates process.

If the target has the audacity to criticise him, the narcissist will punish the target by either withdrawing completely or engaging in utter vilification and enraged vituperative language, the force of which stands in stark contrast to the original obsessed infatuation. However, this rage does not only damage the target but also the narcissist.  As they engage in splitting the personality of the target from idealised to vilified, they themselves become split from the position of infatuated joy to a primal sense of frustration and rage which takes a toll on them.  

Although very toxic, these individuals cannot be said to be evil. They can however cause a lot of unnecessary suffering.  Unfortunately, their personality development has been stunted at quite an early age, either by neglect, over exposure to parental conflict or exposure to parents who were unable to teach the child to regulate their feelings and emotions, mostly because they neglected the child's needs. 

If you believe you have been exposed to a narcissist I suggestion you get some psychotherapeutic assistance to help you deal with your feelings and to work out strategies that support you.  Similarly, if you recognise traits of narcissism in yourself, realise that awareness is not enough.  Seek help and be one of the few who do something to try and free themselves from the painful cycles of infatuation, devaluing, rage and disappointment.  Become healthier, balanced and more functional as you seek to heal and love your true hidden self. 

All or Nothing Thinking

Although I have criticised Cognitive BehaviouralTherapy (CBT), it has some fantastic tools that allow one to challenge your thinking.  Briefly, CBT is based on the idea that much of our suffering is due to distorted thinking and faulty logic.  As you know, I believe that it is not enough to address faulty logic without also addressing relationships.  However, let's assume that you are taking care of that side of things, and look at one distorted thought process, namely "All or Nothing" thinking, which is also called "Black and White" thinking.

All  or nothing thinking happens when an individual characterises an object, the self or others as either totally wonderful or completely evil, without recognising that all things and people exist on continua that vary according to:

 (a) context;

(b)  stages of a process/development

(c) energy/resource availability;

(d) short term and long term needs;

(e) insight and knowledge.

In general,  nothing is perfect or imperfect because, as the Buddhists say, everything is in a constant state of flux; everything is changing; and everything that exists is in process. The notion of perfection or imperfection is a human construct which assumes that there is some pre-existing and overarching standard or pattern, separate from the human collective consciousness, against which things and people can be tested.  

This assumption is probably rooted in our primitive instincts.  As a newborn, we are only able to experience the absolute joy of having our needs met (nursing); or being utterly overwhelmed by our immediate needs being unmet (crying for the breast).  These ideas were first put forward by Melanie Klein, an English psychoanalytic theorist in the early 20th Century, who is credited as being the first children's psychotherapist and who wrote on the topic of "object relations". She wrote about how the reflexive infant splits experiences into a good breast or a bad breast.  This splitting results in the infant existing in binary states and in which they are either experiencing either total joy or total suffering.  Thus both the part representation of the mother (breast) and the self are split into two.  

Crying in response to hunger holds survival value because it signals need.  However, as time passes,  the infant who has his needs met learns that the breast sometimes provides and sometimes withholds;  and the developing personality learns to trust the process of life.  Freud said that depending on the quality of care, people carry with them into adulthood either a hostile or idealised infantile prototype.  In other words he noticed that individuals exist on a continuum that ranges from a tendency to project an ideal onto other people, or they project hostility (evil) onto others.  

Some people switch suddenly between these extremes, without integrating people or situations into their grey in-betweens which depend, I believe, on the factors I mentioned in the list above.  

Therefore, awareness of all or nothing thinking challenges us to see things in a balanced way.  In order to be whole,happy and Integrated we need to be able to see things in and people as wholes and in constant process.  By avoiding black and white thinking, we are better able to respond to things as they really are, rather than what we believe they should or should not be.  This requires the nurturing of gentleness and kindness towards ourselves and to others.

Administrationalism and its Relentless Drag on the Advancement of Civilisation

Bobby Deep has never been a fan of beaurocracy. Besides from the obvious inconvenience of jumping through paper hoops like a circus poodle,  he doesnt like the pernicious power of administrative systems that take away from the power and efficiency of the core business of any creative endeavour.  

Of course businesses and public services need administrative systems to make them work.  But uncontrolled administrationalism I believe is one of the central reasons why many state-run endeavours are in trouble worldwide in this early part of the 21st Century.

Let me tell you a story.  There are many similar stories, but hopefully, it will highlight one of the biggest problems we face in this amazing era of science and technology.

The Diabetes Unit

Once upon a time there was a diabetes unit in a beautiful kingdom.  It was staffed by five very cable specialist doctors and two rehab therapists.  The unit was very busy and had one administrator and two secretarial staff.  The unit was busy but functional and the people working there were happy.  

One day, the national health executive decided to restructure the then-current unit system to an "integrated health flow system", a term coined by the minister of health who thought it was a very good idea. He had after all won his seat in parliament on the slogan: 'Modern efficiency for all!.'

A wise wizard had let the minister of health know that the latest international buzzwords was "integrated health flow system".  So he decided that such a system was necessary.  It needed specialist administrators and accordingly created new administrative posts for ex-units. Posts were advertised, and as you may expect, most existing administrators re-applied for there own jobs.  None of them got these posts and each was faced with a choice:  leave or accept a sideways demotion. Salaries would remain the same, so most opted for the latter option.  

It was a busy time.  The new administrators were hired, and unsurprisingly, they proceeded to implement new "quality and flow efficiency measures" and a raft of new policies for the clinicians to follow.  For example,  they noted that all the clinicians used paper files and so implemented new computer systems to augment the paper file systems.  This meant that all clinicians had to keep paper AND computer records.  In addition, in line with new policies, doctors had to fill in new pink forms for each test they ordered with a clear rationale for the order.  On receipt of the test, the doctor would need to fill in a green form and a duplicate computer form to prove that results had been actioned.

The therapists had to follow similar protocols.  Instead of direct ordering via secretarial staff, therapists were now required to make orders to the central head office for health appliances.  For example if a therapist had to order 50 pressure gadgets they had to be ordered on the computer system which would issue an order number. Each gadget would be assigned a serial number which would be allocated to a particular computer file on fitting, and accordingly the therapist's stock would be updated.  

On occasions, the central office would forward an order to a manufacturer who might only be able to fulfill a partial order. Thus only 40 out of 50 appliances might arrive, but unfortunately it would be only possible to accept a whole order on the computer and impossible to allocate appliances to patient files without full accepting of the stock.  Thus the therapist would need to keep a special discrepancies log.  

Therapists complained that they were spending a full day a week managing stock and computer systems but the new administrator felt that the secretarial staff were already overwhelmed processing the new pink and green forms the doctors were now completing.  The new administrator felt that a new secretary was justified on a part time basis to cope with the heavy administrative load of the local diabetes health flow system.  The new secretary would manage the growing waiting list and act as a public relations officer for the growing number of complaints from the public.

In the mean time, the previous administrator decided It was time to implement a quality review program of the health flow system. Subsequently each member of staff would have to complete a detailed review of their health practices within the system and justify the use of each hour of their work week.  The second administrator had his eye on a new post in head office and was pleased of the opportunity to implement a quality improvement planned for the system.  All medical staff found that their work week has lengthened and that they were  working overtime without extra pay.  Waiting lists had also lengthened and the minister of health couldn't understand why both costs and waiting list had almost doubled. It just dint make sense. So he decided to send an auditor to the diabetes unit to sort matters out... 

A decision was taken to create a moratorium on new posts.  So when one secretary took maternity leave, her post was not covered.  Similarly, when a doctor and therapist each took sick leave for anxiety-related illness, they could not be replaced.

The End.

The story you have read is what I believe is one of the key factors that makes living in the 21st century often so frustrating.  It paints a picture of what I believe often happens in modern work systems; and which results in a bloated and expensive public service.  Not to mention the human stress, the waste of time, and the control of professions by people who have no real concept of the actual purpose of the work carried out.  The consequences of this are as follows:

1.  Severely decreased availability of funds for core-business activities, like continuing professional development of coal-face staff.  

2.  Reduced funds for updating instrumentation and new methods.

3.  Demoralisation and consequent suppression of innovation and research by workers.

4.  Burnout, exhaustion, illness and an increase in error rates.

5. A rise in customer alienation and dissatisfaction.

6.  Decision -making about and prioritization of core-business activities either forced or heavily influenced by unqualified administrators. What some people call the tail wagging the dog.

It really is disheartening that in this age of science, technological advancement and amazing discovery, that administrationalism is dragging its feet kicking and screaming into the future.  Bobby Deep, doesn't complain often, but he ain't got no time for dat.