Two opposite cognitive attitudes.
From: Peter F (fell_trapforspambot_in_at_ozemail.com.au)
Date: 10/29/04
- Next message: Catherine Woodgold: "First Mutation Was Biggish"
- Previous message: John Edser: "Re: Is bipedalism neutral? (was Re: Claims Of Abuse)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 15:43:48 +0000 (UTC)
[moderator's suggestion: Peter, could I get you to wrap your lines
at less than 80 characters, instead of letting them run on and on?
It would make your posts at least a little more readable. - JAH]
[This post might be considered a result of 'evolution-pertaining philosophical thinking' -- so guess it might squeeze past the off-topic post buster ;-)]
Broadly considered there are two "approaches to" (or qualities of) congitive-level living that are always diametrically opposite each other.
One of these can be seen to be aligned with and to draw strength from or be motivated by an innate force (made feeble by "a selectively hibernatory freeze" and easily overshadowed by flight or fight responses), that Jean Liedloff called a "sense of rightness". A metaphor for this "sense" might be "a compass or magnet" that orient the individual in line with innate endogenously and autonomously expressed primal needs (magnetic fields being felt); E.g., adequate freedom to move, express curiosity, be touched, and to experience emotional intimacy (primarily with emotionally healthy and balanced parents).
This "sense" steers indiviudals to pursue a state of visceral, emotional and cognitive self-regulatory (and henced, secondarily, a more *likely* effective *social* regulatory) specific connections that resolves a both (or either) cognitively and/or motor and/or emotionally sense disassociated or rerouted symptoms of potentially distressful motivations generated by permanently senzitized and potentiated neurons whose whose function and firing represents a chronically denied primal need.
Although incomplete as a self-regulatory solution, EPT is such an attitude (at a cognitive level of consciousness). It is so in that EPT takes the bull by the horn in an attempt to understand that - and what it is that - we have naturally evolved to be 'unwilling' to deeply and unifyingly grasp because this kind of understanding will tend to bring most people intolerably close to "too hot potatoes" (stored and kept on the boil in brain structures that are part of their "limbic system" or "circuits of Papez") IF they would profoundly and fully achieve such an understanding.
The other attitude is a cognitive attitude disassociated from (or out of touch with) "the sense of rightness"; and one that consist of more or less inEPTly AEVASIVE preoccupations (from physical/practical to philosophical/theoretical such).
P
- Next message: Catherine Woodgold: "First Mutation Was Biggish"
- Previous message: John Edser: "Re: Is bipedalism neutral? (was Re: Claims Of Abuse)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
