Silently thinking...

photo on Joseph LeDoux.

Facing new betrayals of trust- can that be too much for some people (for not so few), why they stay in destructive and abusive relations/circumstances of all kinds: in abusive partnerships, at bad work-places, in therapy that doesn’t lead anywhere etc.

Blaming oneself can be very practical for people in the environment!? Women tend to admit these sides in themselves, tend to blame and accuse themselves more than men, generally… Men tend to hide this more (not least to themselves), afraid of being "revealed"!? But there are also men who tend to blame themselves more openly…

So more harmed people stay in relations that are more or less harmful instead of leaving them… Maybe trying to change the relation, the other person… The more the more hopeless this is?? And often the more stuck she/he gets!?? Occupied with the fight to change a situation/relation that is impossible to change? The more impossible the more stuck? The more energy is used and the more narrow the person struggling sees things?

A therapist and psychologist (working with both individuals and couples/pairs) once said to me:

“You can’t imagine what people tend to do in avoiding to be left alone!! How many strange things they can do!!”

And people are also afraid of hearing:

“How could you be so stupid!!???”

Probably they are thinking in those patterns too?

“Stupid me!! My own fault!! I can’t blame anyone else then myself!! I have it as I deserve!”

Bosch calls this “tendency” (it’s more than a tendency) of blaming oneself a defence, the Primary defence. The stronger the more this is a sign of being a defence and thus being about the past! Maybe very early in life too?

A defence which the child resorted to firstly: it was easier to blame itself instead of the persons it was totally dependent on.

The child, client, wife, husband, employee etc. who stays in the bad relation resort to hope of changing the situation/relation, the more hopeless the more (if she/he has a lot of unprocessed things). Or resort to a false power of anger, and/or a false power of denial of needs: I don’t need this or that! Does it matter!? I can live without this and that! Etc.

Just stop doing this isn’t easy… You can’t just tell yourself to stop doing these things… Or, yes, you can!!?? But the best would be if you could deal with the feelings of disappointment and sadness and fury or whatever it is about, and if these feelings are strong (the stronger the more tied up you are, because the more difficult a truth is to face, because it is triggering something in the past) this is a sign it is about past things. OR if you under react this can be a sign that old things are touched upon…

Maybe many are satisfied with solving things more on the surface… They can’t do more??

What needs are we trying to fulfil? Adult or childhood? Does it matter what sort? Or?

What does this cause, for individuals, for relations, families, the nearest environment, the society, the whole world maybe? Is this uninteresting?

Addition: came to think when I was making lunch... Bosch thinks (and I think she is right) that therapists have to avoid strengthening this defence (my interpretation?? Or my words).

Because all defences are protections against the truth... If the client goes on blaming her/himself this will more likely hinder healing than curing anything.

Instead one ought to explore what's behind this self-blame??? On the clients terms and in her/his pace?? Sensitively, compassionately, empathically, and the therapist must have worked on her/his own to not be afraid of facing truths...
Addition in the evening:
I read in a forum:

"'Karen wrote: We are back to the point where the ones that need help the most (are more harmed, i.e., have more to process) also are the most vulnerable.'
'Catch-22. I can't think of an easy solution to this dilemma. What makes it worse is that these vulnerable people are the ones who can most easily be persuaded that a therapist's theories or 'thorough training' are the important factors. Neither of those things can impart empathy if the therapist wasn't already an empathic person before choosing to become a therapist'."

So true. The brain-research by LeDoux was also pointed out at another place so I got interested to know more than I have read in Bosch book, see about him at Wikipedia. His lab. Blogposts about LeDoux's work here and here.
In one of the links in the blog that is linked it stood about LeDoux that:

"We have to put emotion back into the brain and integrate it with cognitive systems. We shouldn't study emotion or cognition in isolation, but should study both as aspects of the mind in its brain.

Neuroscientist Joseph LeDoux seeks a biological rather than psychological understanding of our emotions. He explores the differences between emotional memories (implicit--unconscious--memories) processed in pathways that take information into the amygdala, and memories of emotion (explicit--conscious--memories) processed at the level of the hippocampus and neocortex."

See how Bosch interpret LeDoux finding. She writes at page 46 in her book:

“LeDoux’s research illustrate that certain information is repressed in a place not accessible to our conscious mind, and influences our behavior without our conscious awareness of it.

A part of our brain that plays a major part in this process is the amygdala, an important part of our brain when it comes to strong fearful emotions. The amygdala is the part of the brain that stores the memories of strong, fear-producing experiences, without needing to be connected to or communicating with the neo-cortex, that part of the brain involved in conscious and more rational processing. The amygdala, therefore, is capable of storing emotional experiences of which we have never been fully conscious, resulting in Repression and the resulting divided consciousness.”

Bosch about the brain page 117-118:

“Those things that we could not process as children are stored in our brain (the amygdale stores emotional memories and via the hippocampus factual memories are stored) and body (body sensation memory). These truths remain hidden and
only parts of the memory show when we are adults and are confronted with a
symbol. Most often bodily sensations and feelings will manifest themselves when
confronted with a present-day event that is Symbolic. The factual parts of the
memory (the facts of what happened, how, by whom), however, usually remains
hidden from consciousness. If the factual part of a memory would show up as
well, we would instantly know we are feeling something about the past.

Unfortunately this doesn’t happen since, as we have seen, the hippocampus and
the amygdale are separate memory systems, and the old, stored painful memory is
not accessible for rational processing [occurring in the neo cortex, things in
amygdala and hippo campus has not been integrated and processed in neo-cortex,
because these things were too pain to experience consciously then] /…/

Joseph LeDoux’s research revealed how the processing in our brain takes a shortcut when it comes to assessing danger[it did then and it still does a roundabout by neo-cortex.

According to Bosch these findings are recent (her book was written 2002).

She writes further at page 118:

“In non-threatening situations the brain assesses the meaning of a particular situation in the neo-cortex. The neo-cortex is the part of the brain believed to be responsible for rational thinking and logical reasoning. However, when it comes to dangerous situations, this more evolved part of the brain is bypassed and instead the brain activity goes straight to the amygdale. The amygdale is a less evolved part of our bran and is responsible for intuitive, nonrational judgment. Bypassing the neo-cortex results in the inability to profit from logical, rational, cortical processing.

When threatened (be it a perceived or actual threat), however, we derive meaning from the processing that is done by the amygdale (which is very instinctive) instead of by cortical processing [“His logical thinking you know!!!” Isn’t what it should! And why not? Because something threatening of some kind is triggered and touched upon*] /.../

LeDoux’s brain research implies that therapies directed at the rational/cognitive level will not be able to change our basic way of reacting to emotionally threatening stimuli. In those instances [when we encounter a threatening stimuli, the reaction can be so immediate so we don’t even realize that this has happened and don’t even feel the fear or pain that is there beneath actually] the brain just bypasses the cortex, the ‘home of logical reasoning’ and is governed by the amygdala’s alarming response. All events that we needed to repress as children fall into the category of emotionally, threatening stimuli. Therefore anything that resembles or seems to resemble these original painful events, in other words anything that works as a Symbol is perceived as a threat (by the amygdale). The results of LeDoux’s brain research indicate that when we symbolize we bypass cortical processing and instinctively and immediately employ defensive behaviors [protection-mechanisms, adequate then for the child we once was, as to fight or to avoid or putting the blame on ourselves]. We can’t break through this defensive cycle of defensive behavior because we remain the ‘prisoners’ of the amygdale, which tells us we are in danger and need to protect ourselves.”

Bosch writes at page 56:
“Daniel Goleman writes: ‘The lack of precision of the emotional brain at such times (reacting to the present as if it were the past), is increased because o f the fact that many emotional memories date from the first few years of our, from the relationship between the child and its caregivers. This holds especially for traumatic experiences such as abuse or neglect. During this early period of our life other brain structures still needed to be developed, especially the hippo campus, crucial in the formation of narrative memories, and the neo-cortex, the seat of rational thinking. In memory formation and retrieval the amygdale and the hippocampus work hand in hand; each saves and retrieves its own special information. While the hippo campus is retrieving information it is the amygdale that determines whether this information has any emotional significance. But the amygdale, which develops quite rapidly in the brain of the young child, is much closer to full development at birth.’ [And this means that early trauma gets such a great effect and is felt as so horrible: the child just can’t handle them on her/his own!! Amygdala is closer to full development while the parts where processing take place aren’t!! Therefore small children should need much more help and support and sensitivity to handle difficult things to a much higher degree than they usually get or we think they need??]

LeDoux confirms that the interaction during the first few years of life will lead to the imprinting of emotional lessons based on the harmony or disruption of the contact between parent and child. These emotional lessons have so much influence and yet are so difficult to understand from an adult perspective because they, according to LeDoux, have been saved in the amygdale as undefined wordless blueprints of emotional life. These earliest emotional memories are imprinted at a time when a child does not yet have words for her experience. One reason why we can be so surprised by our emotional outbursts is because often they date from a very early time in our life when things were still confusing and we had no words to understand what was happening. We do have the chaotic feelings, but we lack the words for the memories that formed them/…/

The mentioned inaccuracy of the amygdale can have disastrous effects on our life because we might e.g. fight or flee from the wrong person or situation. Before the cortex, the seat of rational thinking knows what is going on; the amygdale can react with an outburst of raw anger or acute fear. Reactions which would have been accurate a long time ago [but isn’t any longer, most often, if we aren’t confronted with a person and situation we can’t defend ourselves against at all].”

Bosch also writes at page 104 that:

“… thinking and analyzing can also be misleading. When we are in a rational, neo-cortical state of processing information, which is where we are when we are
talking about and analyzing what we consciously remember about our childhood, we cannot retrieve he information stored with the help of the hippocampus (factual) and in the amygdale (emotional) that are usually associated. And if we
misinterpret the cause of the feeling we can inadvertently hinder the healing
process, since in order to heal we need to be aware that a specific feeling goes
back to something (be it a general or a specific situation) and let ourselves
feel that.”

*) Bosch writes at page 47:

“In our western society there is a strong tendency to think that although love, respect, physically affectionate touch, emotional warmth and safety, etc. are important, a lack of such things could not be life-threatening.”

Also see this "talk" with LeDoux "Putting emotions back into the brain"

Even more about the brain…

Bosch writes at page 54 in her book:

“There are several ways to deny the truth. We [PRI] define three. All of them serve to substitute another reality for what is the truth: False Hope, False Power (Anger or Denial of Needs) and the Primary Defence [they mean that all people use all these defences to different degrees, but we prefer some before others. Women usually False Hope, False Power Denial of Needs and admits more to the Primary defence. Men usually use False Power Anger, False Power Denial of Needs and, without admitting it, Primary Defence]. All three defence-mechanisms helped the child we were to survive childhood, and all three continue to operate when we are adults. However, when we are adults we don’t need them anymore. The past is over and knowing the truth isn’t life-threatening anymore, although it was when we were children [and although it still feels life-threatening, when we really are confronted with these feelings from past events we couldn’t process then].

Unfortunately our mind doesn’t recognize this. Every time we come across a Symbol (anything that reminds us unconsciously of the past) our consciousness shifts from the adult state to the childhood state.

LeDoux’s brain research explains how this mechanism works on a neurological level. A part of our brain, the amygdala, has a special function concerning threatening events [and they trigger the defence mechanism we used as children]. When something threatening happens the memory of that event is stored in the amygdala. The amygdala is able to operate independently from the part of our brain that is more rational and so memories of threatening events are stored in the amygdala without our rational brain necessarily being aware of it. The amygdala functions as a storage place for strongly loaded emotional memories. This storage process has an explicit survival function /…/

… many events the amygdala still has ‘on file’ have become outdated, since they were threatening to us when we were children, but are no longer to us as adults [and thus cause unnecessary problems, sometimes causing us great troubles]/…/

Everytime the amygdala sounds alarm it is because something is working as a Symbol (it reminds us/our amygdala of something threatening in the past), and as a result we go into Childhood Consciousness: reacting to the present as if it were the past [and reacting in a ‘childish manner’, as the child reacted then!?].”

We have learned to switch so immediately between Adult and Childhood consciousness that we are often not even aware of that's what’s happening.

What was life-saving then has become a problem now. We are more or less unable to process difficult events in the present properly, and some of them not at all... With all what that means for our life now...

About neocortex, hippocampus, and the amygdala in English. Brain-info here.

Om neocortex, hippocampus, reptilhjärnan och amygdala på svenska.

More about the brain…

Just some morning-thoughts I just had to get out, need to pour out. I am still wondering a lot about phenomena occurring in society, the world, in forums, in debates etc. Ideas that are opportune today, and why they are. Because I think many of them are horrible… And not least the way of passing these ideas further. Triggered this morning when I once again skimmed what Miller has written on "Child mistreatment, Child abuse - What is it?" and the role Enlightened Witnesses can play.

Bosch writes at page 46 in her book:

“LeDoux’s research illustrate that certain information is repressed in a place not accessible to our conscious mind, and influences our behavior without our conscious awareness of it.

A part of our brain that plays a major part in this process is the amygdala, an important part of our brain when it comes to strong fearful emotions. The amygdala is the part of the brain that stores the memories of strong, fear-producing experiences, without needing to be connected to or communicating with the neo-cortex, that part of the brain involved in conscious and more rational processing. The amygdala, therefore, is capable of storing emotional experiences of which we have never been fully conscious, resulting in Repression and the resulting divided consciousness.”

The reactions are immediate, and without consciousness involved, on triggers. We aren’t even aware what’s happening. Even if we (which try not to harm others consciously) have the best will in the world!! But we can ALL work on this and the knowledge is there for us all!! So this is never an excuse to harming others...

I have been thinking about how we have been raised… More or less authoritarian and totalitarian, which means learned to obey without questioning the treatment we endured, punished without even being informed about the crimes we have committed. Was the child so evil so she/he didn’t even deserve to know, born evil/with the devil?? Or worth to be treated without respect and without losing her/his dignity and human worthiness?

What can this result in later in life? If we don’t have the luck to encounter a helping witness of some kind? Or if the regime at home is so authoritarian and totalitarian?

So now, if and when people in power-positions, for example politicians (and later leaders for whole nations) use this way of speaking and behaving; very authoritarian, condemning (against certain groups), maybe even totalitarian (questioning, explanations information, cooperation isn’t allowed or hardly exists) this is applauded by these who were raised by very authoritarian people?? And if the society and leaders and politicians etc. gives the permission to use this style of behavior the more harmed praise these ideas??

And what we see as “rational” people and decisions, are they? Always? Or sometimes not at all? Even if they seem to be to many of us? And the ones expressing themselves with a lot of emotions are less reliable?

Less sound leaders what can they create? Who do they talk to, which now gets rights to play their unconscious sides out? Sides they aren’t aware of and denies? Denies more the more harmed they are and the less they are inclined to work with them? Or acknowledge their problems?

Who needs power and gets it? Why do they need it?

One use to say that power corrupts… And, I don’t know, maybe one has to be very strong and self-aware and sound/healthy to resist what comes with power? Which is no excuse at all for any power-abuse of maybe any kind?

How does one more effectively handle this as individual, when one joins debates in forums, blogs etc.? And does one handle it in the public debate if one goes into it or when one analyzes what people say in media, what media pass forward?

The less you have suppressed/repressed the better you can handle it I guess? Now I am thinking out loudly… I am searching for something… The clearer you see and perceive things and the world and phenomena… And can handle it more constructively!?

I think I will write more about this and more about the amygdala and the brain later!! :-)

See earlier blogpost about the brain. And what people in power-positions also use is playing on guilt-feelings some people have a lot of!?? Or some acknowledge more than others. To make them feel ashamed and quiet and "turning" their heads to the ground... And this method isn't only used unconsciously but also consciously I would say... And horribly many approves of this and why is that? See the recent blogposts about guilt and manipulation-brainwashing: "Guilt - part one" and "Guilt - part two".

Contempt for weakness, and needs for revenge on someone (a scapegoat/s because we are still so afraid of our early parents, so we can't react on them even now as adult and not power- or helpless as the small child we once was, but have to act these feelings of anger etc. out somewhere. The fear is still so enormous, stored in parts like the amygdala), and do it as violently as possible , even if it's "only" about emotional/psychological violence/abuse?? And in the wake also coarser physical and sexual violence occurs... And the amount of this also increases! (all rage we couldn't show or even feel then has to get some outlet, and usually we let all these feelings out on weaker. But this will never cure or heal us, only cover things up even more and make us even more distanced to our/the truth).

See the American neurologist J.H. Pincus on for example the criminal (serial killer) Trent Scaggs, and the other blogposts on his research about his findings on what creates the worse criminals and what upbringing "only" creates bigotry (trångsynthet)... All with authoritarian parents/caregivers, but more or less violently...

English word of today "the wake" which in the case above means "kölvattnet".

About the brain/om hjärnan…

Bosch about the brain page 117-118:

“Those things that we could not process as children are stored in our brain (the amygdale stores emotional memories and via the hippocampus factual memories are stored) and body (body sensation memory). These truths remain hidden and
only parts of the memory show when we are adults and are confronted with a
symbol. Most often bodily sensations and feelings will manifest themselves when
confronted with a present-day event that is Symbolic. The factual parts of the
memory (the facts of what happened, how, by whom), however, usually remains
hidden from consciousness. If the factual part of a memory would show up as
well, we would instantly know we are feeling something about the past.

Unfortunately this doesn’t happen since, as we have seen, the hippocampus and
the amygdale are separate memory systems, and the old, stored painful memory is
not accessible for rational processing [occurring in the neo cortex, things in
amygdala and hippo campus has not been integrated and processed in neo-cortex,
because these things were too pain to experience consciously then] /…/

Joseph LeDoux’s research revealed how the processing in our brain takes a shortcut when it comes to assessing danger[it did then and it still does a roundabout by neo-cortex.

According to Bosch these findings are recent (her book was written 2002).

She writes further at page 118:

“In non-threatening situations the brain assesses the meaning of a particular situation in the neo-cortex. The neo-cortex is the part of the brain believed to be responsible for rational thinking and logical reasoning. However, when it comes to dangerous situations, this more evolved part of the brain is bypassed and instead the brain activity goes straight to the amygdale. The amygdale is a less evolved part of our bran and is responsible for intuitive, nonrational judgment. Bypassing the neo-cortex results in the inability to profit from logical, rational, cortical processing.

When threatened (be it a perceived or actual threat), however, we derive meaning from the processing that is done by the amygdale (which is very instinctive) instead of by cortical processing [“His logical thinking you know!!!” Isn’t what it should! And why not? Because something threatening of some kind is triggered and touched upon*] /.../

LeDoux’s brain research implies that therapies directed at the rational/cognitive level will not be able to change our basic way of reacting to emotionally threatening stimuli. In those instances [when we encounter a threatening stimuli, the reaction can be so immediate so we don’t even realize that this has happened and don’t even feel the fear or pain that is there beneath actually] the brain just bypasses the cortex, the ‘home of logical reasoning’ and is governed by the amygdala’s alarming response. All events that we needed to repress as children fall into the category of emotionally, threatening stimuli. Therefore anything that resembles or seems to resemble these original painful events, in other words anything that works as a Symbol is perceived as a threat (by the amygdale). The results of LeDoux’s brain research indicate that when we symbolize we bypass cortical processing and instinctively and immediately employ defensive behaviors [protection-mechanisms, adequate then for the child we once was, as to fight or to avoid or putting the blame on ourselves]. We can’t break through this defensive cycle of defensive behavior because we remain the ‘prisoners’ of the amygdale, which tells us we are in danger and need to protect ourselves.”

Bosch writes at page 56:
“Daniel Goleman writes: ‘The lack of precision of the emotional brain at such times (reacting to the present as if it were the past), is increased because o f the fact that many emotional memories date from the first few years of our, from the relationship between the child and its caregivers. This holds especially for traumatic experiences such as abuse or neglect. During this early period of our life other brain structures still needed to be developed, especially the hippo campus, crucial in the formation of narrative memories, and the neo-cortex, the seat of rational thinking. In memory formation and retrieval the amygdale and the hippocampus work hand in hand; each saves and retrieves its own special information. While the hippo campus is retrieving information it is the amygdale that determines whether this information has any emotional significance. But the amygdale, which develops quite rapidly in the brain of the young child, is much closer to full development at birth.’ [And this means that early trauma gets such a great effect and is felt as so horrible: the child just can’t handle them on her/his own!! Amygdala is closer to full development while the parts where processing take place aren’t!! Therefore small children should need much more help and support and sensitivity to handle difficult things to a much higher degree than they usually get or we think they need??]

LeDoux confirms that the interaction during the first few years of life will lead to the imprinting of emotional lessons based on the harmony or disruption of the contact between parent and child. These emotional lessons have so much influence and yet are so difficult to understand from an adult perspective because they, according to LeDoux, have been saved in the amygdale as undefined wordless blueprints of emotional life. These earliest emotional memories are imprinted at a time when a child does not yet have words for her experience. One reason why we can be so surprised by our emotional outbursts is because often they date from a very early time in our life when things were still confusing and we had no words to understand what was happening. We do have the chaotic feelings, but we lack the words for the memories that formed them/…/

The mentioned inaccuracy of the amygdale can have disastrous effects on our life because we might e.g. fight or flee from the wrong person or situation. Before the cortex, the seat of rational thinking knows what is going on; the amygdale can react with an outburst of raw anger or acute fear. Reactions which would have been accurate a long time ago [but isn’t any longer, most often, if we aren’t confronted with a person and situation we can’t defend ourselves against at all].”

Bosch also writes at page 104 that:

“… thinking and analyzing can also be misleading. When we are in a rational, neo-cortical state of processing information, which is where we are when we are
talking about and analyzing what we consciously remember about our childhood, we cannot retrieve he information stored with the help of the hippocampus (factual) and in the amygdale (emotional) that are usually associated. And if we
misinterpret the cause of the feeling we can inadvertently hinder the healing
process, since in order to heal we need to be aware that a specific feeling goes
back to something (be it a general or a specific situation) and let ourselves
feel that.”

*) Bosch writes at page 47:

“In our western society there is a strong tendency to think that although love, respect, physically affectionate touch, emotional warmth and safety, etc. are important, a lack of such things could not be life-threatening.”

But they can! And thus the child can have to suppress these things. She writes about the phenomenon “marasmus” in connection with this as an example on this. I have written about this somewhere in one of my blogposts here with the label “I. Bosch”??

It struck me now in the shower when I should wash my hair how awful it was when I got shampoo not mixed up at all with water into my eyes a couple of times this summer. Came to think about when I was babysitter to my nephew which then had no siblings, and he got soap (or maybe only water) in his eyes when I should shower or bath him in the shower and almost panicked because of that… As adult to be calm and let the small child feels and be empathic and calm him/her with something…

And I also thought now (as I have done earlier too I guess) that we as grown ups are probably totally insensible to things children experience and how they feel for phenomena around them… We just don’t understand how frightening and painful things can be and are??? And we grown ups are more or less insensitive depending on our own early experiences and if, and to what extent, we got an opportunity to process them then or later on…

This is no excuse for our insensitivity, only an explanation. We can work on this or chose not to work on it…
-//-
Bosch om hjärnan på sidorna 117-118:

”De saker som vi inte kunde bearbeta som barn lagras i vår hjärna (amygdala
lagrar känslomässiga minnen och via hippocampus är faktiska minnen lagrade [av
det som faktiskt skedde, händelsen, eller av den allmänna känslomässiga miljö
där vi växte upp]) och kroppsförnimmelse (känslan i kroppen). Dessa sanningar
förblir dolda och bara delar av minnet visar sig när vi är vuxna och
konfronteras med en symbol. För det mesta kommer kroppsförnimmelser och känslor att manifestera/uppenbara sig när de konfronteras med vardagshändelser som är symboliska.

De faktiska delarna av minnet (fakta och vad som hände, hur och av vem), förblir dock vanligen dolda för det medvetna. Om den faktiska delen av minnet också skulle visa sig, skulle vi omedelbart veta att vi känner något som handlar om det gamla. Tyvärr så händer inte detta eftersom, som vi har sett, hippocampus och amygdala är separata minnessystem och det gamla, lagrade minnet inte går att knyta an till för att rationell bearbetning ska kunna äga rum [en bearbetning som sker i neo-cortex, vilket betyder att saker i amygdala och hippocampus inte har blivit integrerade och bearbetade i neocortex, för att de var för smärtsamma då att upplevas medvetet] /…/

Joseph LeDoux’ forskning visade hur bearbetandet i vår hjärna gör en omväg [???] när det handlar om att uppskatta fara [det gjorde då och gör fortfarande en omväg förbi neocortex].”

Enligt Bosch så har de här fynden om detta sätt att fungera hos hjärnan kommit nyligen (hennes bok trycktes 2002 och de var alltså nya då, för fem år sedan).

Hon skriver vidare på sidan 118:

”I ickehotande situationer uppskattar hjärnan betydelsen i varje enskild situation i neocortex [där det medvetna bearbetandet av saker sker]. Neocortex är den del i hjärnan som anses vara ansvarig för rationellt tänkande och logiskt resonerande. Dock, när det handlar om farliga situationer, så passeras denna mer utvecklade del av hjärnan och istället går hjärnaktiviteten direkt till amygdala [reptilhjärnan??]. Amygdala är en mindre utvecklad del av vår hjärna och är ansvarig för intuitiva, ickerationella bedömningar. Att passera förbi [utanför??] neocortex resulterar i en oförmåga att dra nytta av logiskt, rationellt, kortikalt bearbetande.

När vi är hotade (vare sig det är ett uppfattat eller verkligt hot), erhåller vi dock betydelse av det bearbetande som sker i amygdala (vilket är väldig instinktivt [vi reagerar känslomässigt och direkt]) istället för genom kortikalt bearbetande [”Du vet – hans ’logiska tänkande’!!! Är inte vad det borde vara! Och varför inte? Därför
att något hotande av något slag har triggats och blivit berört *] /…/

LeDoux’ hjärnforskning innebär att terapier som riktas mot den rationella/kognitiva sidan [hos oss] inte kommer att kunna ändra våra grundläggande sätt att reagera på känslomässigt hotande stimuli. I dessa fall [när vi möter ett hotande stimuli, kan reaktionen bli så omedelbar att vi inte ens inser att detta har hänt och känner inte ens rädslan eller smärtan som faktiskt finns under] passerar hjärnaktiviteterna bara förbi cortex, ’sätet för logiskt resonerande’ och styrs istället av amygdalas alarmerande svar. Alla händelser som vi behövde tränga bort som barn hör till kategorin känslomässiga, hotande stimuli.
Därför kommer allt som liknar eller verkar likna dessa ursprungligen smärtsamma
händelser, med andra ord allt som fungerar som en symbol, att upplevas som ett
hot (av amygdala). Resultaten av LeDoux’ hjärnforskning indikerar att när vi
symboliserar så passerar vi förbi kortikalt bearbetande och använder försvarsbeteenden [eller skyddsbeteenden, adekvata hos det barn vi var, som att
kämpa eller undvika eller lägga skulden på oss själva] instinktivt och omedelbart. Vi kan inte bryta genom denna cykel av försvar därför att vi fortfarande är ’fångar’ i amygdala, som talar om för oss att vi är i fara och behöver försvara oss själva.”

Bosch skriver på sidan 56:

“Daniel Goleman skriver: ‘Avsaknaden av precision hos den känslomässiga hjärnan vid sådana tidpunkter (att reagera på nuet som om det var det förflutna), ökar på grund av faktumet att många känslomässiga minnen är daterade till våra första få år i livet, från relationen mellan barnet och dess vårdnadshavare. Detta gäller särskilt traumatiska upplevelser sådana som kräkningar/övergrepp och försummelse [vilka alla kan vara eller är väldigt traumatiskt]. Under denna tidiga period i vårt liv behöver andra hjärnstrukturer fortfarande utvecklas, speciellt hippocampus, som är avgörande/kritiskt i formande av berättande minnen, liksom neocortex, sätet för rationellt tänkande.

I formandet och återvinnandet så arbetar amygdala och hippocampus hand i hand. Medan hippcampus återvinner information så är det amygdala som bestämmer om denna information har någon känslomässig betydelse. Men amygdala, som utvecklas ganska snabbt i hjärnan hos det lilla barnet, är mycket närmare full utveckling vid födseln.” [Och detta innebär att tidiga trauman får sådan stor effekt och känns så hemska: barnet kan helt enkelt inte hantera dessa!!! Amygdala är närmare full utveckling medan de delar där bearbetning sker inte är det!! Därför skulle små barn, redan den lilla babyn och troligen redan fostret, behöva hjälp att hantera svåra saker i betydligt högre grad än de får och vi tror de
behöver!!??]

LeDoux bekräftar att interaktionen under de första få åren i livet kommer att leda till inpräntande av känslomässiga lektioner baserade på harmonin eller störning i kontakten mellan förälder och barn. Dessa känslomässiga lektioner har så mycket inflytande och är också så svåra att förstå ur ett vuxenperspektiv därför att de, enligt LeDoux, har blivit sparade/lagrade i amygdala som odefinierade ordlösa Blueprints av känslomässigt liv. Dessa tidigaste känslomässiga minnen skrivs in vid en tidpunkt när barnet ännu inte har ord för sin upplevelse. En anledning till varför vi kan bli så förvånade/överraskade av våra känslomässiga utbrott är därför att de ofta är daterade till en väldigt tidig tidpunkt i vårt liv när saker fortfarande var
förvirrande och vi inte hade några ord för att förstå vad som hände. Vi har
verkligen de kaotiska känslorna, men vi saknar orden för de minnen som formade
dem /…/

Den nämnda ickeprecisionen hos amygdala kan få förödande effekter på vårt liv, vi kan till exempel komma att fäkta eller fly från fel person eller situation. Innan cortex, sätet för rationellt tänkande, vet vad som pågår, kan amygdala reagera med ett utbrott av rå vrede och akut rädsla. Reaktioner som skulle ha varit riktiga för länge sedan [men som inte är det längre, om vi inte befinner oss i en verkligt farlig situation med människor som är farliga].”

Bosch skriver också på sidan 104 att:

”… att tänka och analysera kan också bli missledande. När vi är i ett rationellt, neokortikalt tillstånd i bearbetande av information, vilket vi är när vi pratar om och analyserar det vi medvetet minns om vår barndom, kan vi inte återvinna information som lagrats med hjälp av hippocampus (faktisk) och i amygdala (känslomässig) som vanligen är förenade. Och om vi feltolkar orsaken till känslan kan vi oavsiktligt hindra helandeprocessen, eftersom vi för att kunna helas måste vara medvetna om att en särskild känsla går tillbaka till någonting (vare sig det är en allmän eller särskild situation) och låta oss själva känna detta.”

*) Bosch skriver på sidan 47:

“I våra västerländska samhällen finns det en stark tendens att tänka att fastän kärlek, respekt, fysiskt tillgiven beröring, känslomässig värme och säkerhet osv. är viktiga, så kan en avsaknad av dessa saker inte vara livshotande.”

Men det kan de och är de! Och därför kan barnet måsta tränga bort dessa saker. Hon skriver om fenomenet ”marasmus” som ett exempel på detta. Och detta fenomen har jag skrivit om i ett tidigare blogginlägg (med etiketten ”I. Bosch”?).