Aftab writes: “In some cases of psychosis at least, the unitary nature of the self can itself appear to break down, and people seem to be recipients of communication from unknown parts of their own minds (a person hearing hallucinations, for example).”
This is a vital insight. Without understanding that we have parts and that these parts communicate with each other we can’t even begin to understand any mental condition whatsoever. Our parts communicate via hallucinations in psychosis, via emotions in depression and anxiety, via paranoia in anyone who has been hurt by the people who are supposed to love and support them, via obsessive actions and so forth.
I would add that the “unitary nature of the self” is an illusion, but perhaps that is understood. It’s an illusion, but it can be devastating if it seems to be breaking down.
Warren responds: “Indeed. Just as such an encounter takes place between two individuals, several encounters are simultaneously taking place within each individual (or between different parts of them) and additionally at the extra-individual level, i.e. between them and the surrounding elements of their environments. I would argue, however, that this is always the case, even if it’s much more intense and obvious with someone experiencing psychosis.”
Yes, this is always the case. And these parts come into therapy and if the therapist doesn’t know they are there, therapy fails.
One of many thoughts: It can often be difficult, even impossible, to really remember what it was like to be in a completely different state of mind. That goes for remembering events from your childhood, it goes for remembering a night out when you were really drunk, it goes for remembering psychotic experiences. All this is true enough.
However, I also think people can feel an implicit - and yet intense - social pressure to talk about their past psychosis as completely incomprehensible to them now. Because psychosis is so stigmatized, there's pressure to sharply separate your "mentally healthy self" from the psychosis. I know that in the past, I really used to stress to everyone who heard about my condition that I OBVIOUSLY KNOW WHAT'S REAL and what's not!!!
No, I don't. No, not really. No, not a lot of the time. I'm pretty much fully out of the closet now and I've published about this matter both on my own and co-authored with fellow mad philosopher Paul Lodge ... But for a long time, I insisted both to other people and tried to trick myself into believing that I OBVIOUSLY KNOW WHAT'S REAL!!!!
In hindsight, this was clearly due to social pressure and stigma - this pressure to construe a "sane self" and present madness as this thing that sometimes fall over me but is ultimately quite separate from that sane self.
For some people, this may be an accurate picture, but for others, it's something we're pressured into pretending.
A spectacular dialogue.
Aftab writes: “In some cases of psychosis at least, the unitary nature of the self can itself appear to break down, and people seem to be recipients of communication from unknown parts of their own minds (a person hearing hallucinations, for example).”
This is a vital insight. Without understanding that we have parts and that these parts communicate with each other we can’t even begin to understand any mental condition whatsoever. Our parts communicate via hallucinations in psychosis, via emotions in depression and anxiety, via paranoia in anyone who has been hurt by the people who are supposed to love and support them, via obsessive actions and so forth.
I would add that the “unitary nature of the self” is an illusion, but perhaps that is understood. It’s an illusion, but it can be devastating if it seems to be breaking down.
Warren responds: “Indeed. Just as such an encounter takes place between two individuals, several encounters are simultaneously taking place within each individual (or between different parts of them) and additionally at the extra-individual level, i.e. between them and the surrounding elements of their environments. I would argue, however, that this is always the case, even if it’s much more intense and obvious with someone experiencing psychosis.”
Yes, this is always the case. And these parts come into therapy and if the therapist doesn’t know they are there, therapy fails.
Wow, this is so interesting.
One of many thoughts: It can often be difficult, even impossible, to really remember what it was like to be in a completely different state of mind. That goes for remembering events from your childhood, it goes for remembering a night out when you were really drunk, it goes for remembering psychotic experiences. All this is true enough.
However, I also think people can feel an implicit - and yet intense - social pressure to talk about their past psychosis as completely incomprehensible to them now. Because psychosis is so stigmatized, there's pressure to sharply separate your "mentally healthy self" from the psychosis. I know that in the past, I really used to stress to everyone who heard about my condition that I OBVIOUSLY KNOW WHAT'S REAL and what's not!!!
No, I don't. No, not really. No, not a lot of the time. I'm pretty much fully out of the closet now and I've published about this matter both on my own and co-authored with fellow mad philosopher Paul Lodge ... But for a long time, I insisted both to other people and tried to trick myself into believing that I OBVIOUSLY KNOW WHAT'S REAL!!!!
In hindsight, this was clearly due to social pressure and stigma - this pressure to construe a "sane self" and present madness as this thing that sometimes fall over me but is ultimately quite separate from that sane self.
For some people, this may be an accurate picture, but for others, it's something we're pressured into pretending.