Psychology Articles

Mental illnesses are sneaky diseases that don´t appear on in the conscious surface and that are not apparent immediately in the patients´environment. However, various behavioral abnormalities gradually take off their mask of “normal person”, reflecting their neurosis, psychosis, schizophrenia or similar mental illness.

If you want to understand whether someone is mentally ill before waiting for various facts that will reflect psychological abnormalities in order to verify who they really are, you have to learn how to analyze the human behavior and observe the signs that indicate lack of balance, and absurdity.

This is very important, because you may trust a schizophrenic without knowing what you are doing, and decide to get married to a person that will only torture you, or have a negotiation with someone who is totally absurd and will ruin your business, but may mislead you with false impressions of sensibility and honesty.

There is a very big danger concerning business relationships with people you don´t really know, especially because mentally ill patients never show signs of abnormality in their work, but only in the moments when they are alone, or when they are with their family, and so on. So, it´s harder to discover signs of schizophrenia in a business partner than to perceive them in a future husband or wife, for example.

However, the bitter truth is that if you are not well informed, you will never be able to perceive important signs of abnormal behavior in a certain person, even if you are near them for many hours, because they can hide their absurdity from your eyes very easily. They act like normal people in too many ways, being absurd in only a few points that you may never notice before having a tragic surprise.

The details that reflect abnormal behavior and work like visible signs for the eyes that have learned how to recognize them are many, depending on the psychological type of each person. This means that if you want to have a total vision about the behavioral abnormalities that reflect psychological disorders, you have to learn everything about the psychological content of the human being.

This is possible thanks to the vision given to you by the scientific method of dream interpretation, since it shows you an internal map of the functionalism of the human brain and psyche, explaining you how the human behavior is determined by the various characteristics of each one´s personality.

You learn how to prevent the craziness contained a priori in the wild side of your conscience to invade the human side of your conscience.

There is too much absurdity accumulated in the anti-conscience, our primitive conscience, and this is why everyone is too vulnerable to mental illnesses.

By learning how to prevent and also cure all mental illnesses, you´ll be able to analyze everyone´s behavior, even if you won´t care about learning how to translate your dreams according to the scientific method.

If you care about interpreting your own dreams, the unconscious mind will give you objective information about other people in a symbolic form.

You only have to learn the dream language. This is not difficult as I have transformed dream interpretation based on long comparisons of dreams, into a fast and instant dream translation from images into words. Since I give you the meaning of the most important dream symbols, which you recognize in various dreams, you can discover the meaning of the other components that are not part of the symbol collection.

Christina Sponias continued Carl Jung’s research into the human psyche, discovering the cure for all mental illnesses, and simplifying the scientific method of dream interpretation that teaches you how to exactly translate the meaning of your dreams, so that you can find health, wisdom and happiness.

Click Here to download a Free Sample of the eBook Dream Interpretation as a Science (86 pages!).

The year is 2009 and it has been over a century since popular consciousness has widely accepted the fact that humans are just another type of animal. Curiously, even as humans are increasingly accepting of political and cultural pluralism, there is still insufficient focus on how pluralism in general arises from differences in breeds of humans. Populous mammals like dogs and cats have a number of breeds that cluster by physiological external differences like size and internal neural differences like aggressiveness, friendliness, and task specialization. Humans of course are no different (even if their neural computers are able to run remarkably advanced virtual simulation and symbol manipulation programs).

The implications stand to improve the psychological quality of life and raise consciousness for billions of people. Although short sighted knee jerk idiots may think implications will automatically cause a return to forced eugenics (as practiced by countries like Sweden, USA, and Germany in the first half of the 20th century) or measurement of skulls to filter potential criminals, such proclamations point more to the pessimistic nature of those who make them. Scientific inquiry and further development of concepts known to be true have historically brought more net positives (raised the living standard of the human herd by allowing them to live longer and do less labor through technology) than net negatives such as destructive wars (brought on more by non-democratic political arrangements than technology used to wage them). Advancing study of implications from humanity being comprised of numerous unequally distributed breeds is worth the risks. Treatment of different breeds and self esteem of individuals within each breed stand to improve if there is strong emphasis that each breed is logically as important as the other in its social usefulness (although social usefulness should never be the only or even main criteria in social sciences or policy).

Right now we have a world where the German Shepards, the Pitbulls, the Poodles, the Border Collies, and the Golden Retrievers are all rightfully treated the same but they suffer from the problem of more numerous breeds (as well as the most vicious/cunning ones) determining what breed is the universal ideal for a human. Each person judges all others based on what the one judging is good at physiologically. A very empathic person judges others based on empathy. A conservative one judges the rest on how good of a conservative they are. Same applies to all the others be they a partying hedonist, an introverted scientist, an artist, an athlete, or a social butterfly with highly developed taste buds (“how can others eat that crap!?”).

This is a very natural problem to have for humanity. Since every person subconsciously wants to expand personal power in all directions, for thousands of years, the strongest or more numerous breeds have tended to not just make their personalities and ideas into universal law for others but to actually buy into their own lies that everybody else should strive to be like the rulers. Even societies with caste systems were not immune as seen by India’s inegalitarian caste valuation (warriors over farmers) and transformation from a caste system with social mobility to the entrenched stagnant system we now mentally associate it with.

A previous article touched on how Myers-Briggs personality test is a good quick way to get a glimpse of what neural breed a person is, how numerical predominance of some breeds helps preserve status quo, and how the differences in neural architecture split and unite people a lot more than externally visible characteristics like skin and hair color. If we use a typology system like Myers-Briggs, it soon becomes obvious that although breeds can form natural dominant coalitions (SJs) and (SPs), there will still be a lot of socially tangible differences within each coalition. That is enough to pose a serious problem not just for rare breeds like INTJs but common ones as well.

That problem is depressed self esteem from comparison of one self to those breeds that thrive in whatever socioeconomic system exists at the time (and whose mode of being are widely emulated for this reason) and from feeling alone and excluded since no breed exceeds 15% numerically. Whether it is an athlete, an artist, or a scientist, they are always outnumbered which leads to wishing that everybody else or themselves was different. Even within dominant pro status quo coalitions of SJs and SPs, a difference, between an ISTJ and an ESFJ for example, can be so great as to make them not get along well at all. This problem is heightened for NF and NT coalitions. Depression and various neurotic behavior thus results on a large scale. When a person says that nobody understands them, the case often is that vast majority (90%+ people) really don’t fundamentally understand them. How can a German Shepherd understand a Chiwawa and vice versa? Only mutts provide the imperfect understanding bridge.

The often failed emulation of the most able to “make it” (or seen as more able) may be a more serious threat to the health of people’s ego, their self respect, and their pride. Just as an emotionally cold and aggressive person may feel distressed when living in a hippy commune, a naturally empathic and kind Golden Retriever will feel distressed and alone in a society that values warrior Pitbulls. Similarly, when the types who make it in United States financial sector (children of the rich, psychopaths, and some of the more cunning SPs and NTs), a vast social pressure is created to pound in square pegs in round holes and be more like what is deemed “successful”. It is no different than if soldiers were in charge and we all had to admire wars and go to bootcamps to be seen as having the right stuff.

As for psychopaths, their natural ability to blend in (so they can live off the herd better) makes them strong candidates to make it in any system. A super inegalitarian monetarist imperial system like our own is an extra juicy jungle to thrive in. Proportionally to psychopaths’ population (1% for the true clinical ones and up to 6% for the subclinical ones), they are overrepresented on Wall Street and in prison (8% and 20% respectively for clinical ones).

Subclinical psychopaths can just be some breeds backgrounds seem like good general prerequistives whose T function and lack of empathy is so high as to make them exploit the herd (rather than improving it as has been the trait most admired in leadership by history) without a second thought. In fact it may be unfair to even have the concept of a “psychopath” as it represents just another breed of human that is adept at preying on fellow humans with elaborate disguises. Psychological pathology after all, represents mental “sickness” and mental “sickness” is just majority’s flawed way to single out and focus on fringe breeds and individuals whose backgrounds make it extra difficult for them to make it. Not one breed is logically and generally more normal/abnormal or maladaptive/adaptive than the other since “normal” and “adaptive” is the bell curve average for a particular society.

Understanding these physiological differences can allow people to have more pride in who they are and develop towards a truly pluralistic and more compassionate society. Human breed science doesn’t have to be a nightmare world. People like Foucault, Rousseau, and Kaczynski have made strong and effective arguments on how the more technologically advanced society becomes the less free we are. We need to understand these concerns and consequences of progress in social sciences but we can’t turn the clock back since luddite solutions are not just impractical but inhumane.

Understanding that there are different breeds of Homo Sapiens (with often different needs and modes of thought) can allow society to:

1) Treat, help, and nurture each type better so as to make healthier hyperspecialized types. We can have healthier and better artists, cops, scientists, etc.

2) Treat, help, and nurture mutts better so as to have better ambassadors and communicators between the strongly specialized breeds

3) Develop better science as to which breeds work best with each other so as to prevent, mediate, and solve social conflicts

4) Help identify and isolate predatory humans better so as to lessen their abuses, reduce the number of their victims, and integrate them into society more productively

5) Strengthen proportional representation democracy and bring more harmony to the herd while preventing unhealthy caste structures from reemerging

6) Increase efficiency, productivity, and general happiness of society by allowing individuals to make full use of their strengths and be more proud of their neural architecture

Lets fully embrace what science has been telling us so we can graze on this planet with less confusion. A confused herd will make a poor recipient for when the singularity arrives. Lets end with a pro-mutt quote to balance the article and emphasize perils of too much specialization.

“A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.” -Robert A. Heinlein

Abstract:

In recent years psychology has tried to uplift the human spirit with lots of popular psychology terms such as, “Positive Psychology” or the numerous books released to tell the masses how to behave to lead a fulfilled successful life from talking about parachutes, ten steps to something, the mired of “how to” titles and much more. Most are nothing but misguided pop psych or a fad of the moment. Can life be as easy as reading the right book and following some basic concepts and everything is going to be OK for you and me? This paper is different, we shall explore the “Dark” side of the human mind – that part that sees disengagement, destruction, vile acts as part of the everyday human psyche that emerges in us all from time to time – that part that finds excitement, glee and pleasure in the dysfunctional part of our existence. How can society reconcile with its dark side? I use the word insane to refer to those in society who oppose the social norm.

Introduction:

First let’s examine how we can identify the “Dark Side” of psychological thought and behaviour. We need a measure, to know, what is normal and what is considered abnormal behaviour. Our first measure is social norms; this means in any society of what is considered normal everyday behaviour given a set of circumstances that confront our perception. For example in Western culture to strike another person violently is considered a criminal act and one that is repulsive to a peaceful society. However we condone violence when the person is given societal permissions such as a soldier in the act of war, a policeman in the act of apprehension of a dangerous criminal, a citizen defending his family from a serious threat from another person. These double standards can be misinterpreted in many ways. The soldier who commits war crimes such as genocide, the policeman who uses violence to intimidate a witness while interviewing them or the citizen who violates another persons rights in order to further their own position in some way.

The second measure is a moral one? How do we as a society decide what is right and wrong, who has the power to decide these rights, do laws follow moral conviction or do they become protection of the weak against the strong or the rich against the poor? Most societies agree that killing another human being is against a moral code – it is simply wrong to kill and should be punished by an act of equal severity, by the society that supports the moral legal stance imposed on the masses by its law-makers. To most societies this has been a religious code of conduct such as the 10 commandments of the Christian faith and other such codes from Buddhism to the Muslim Koran. Faith in divine reward and punishment are reflected in the legal language and laws seen as the bedrock of any civilized nation of people. Having accepted these rules why then do people readily deviate from these morals, laws and religious guidelines that allow us all to live in a peaceful society governed by agreed principals of behaviours that protect the individual from danger, hurt and abuse?

The third area of behaviour is that not set down in law or religious concepts but those everyday sets of behaviour the English would refer to as, “manners” or being “polite”. The conduct or way of acting that conforms to behaviour accepted as that of a superior member of a society who knows how to conduct themselves in the company of others to a set of standards that are seen as the mark of an advanced civilization. These can sometimes be seen in the etiquette of table manners or a man opening a door for a woman and allowing her to pass first, the recognition of man’s duty to protect and defend women. Today in some cultures women’s rights have cast doubt of manners towards woman as sexist and therefore demeaning to a woman’s independence. Never-the-less manners are seen as the mark of being well-bread and in the upper echelons of a society whether they are traditional Englishness or a Japanese tea ceremony.

Having set out societies differing ways of measuring behaviour either through, law, morals or social acceptable norms humans still manage a wide range of dysfunctional behaviour that often impacts on and influences others to the point where the perpetrators of this behaviour see themselves outside the law, moral codes and etiquette of the rest of society. Sometimes through the feeling of guilt we all recognise when we have transgressed those rules that we see as essential to a well ordered civilization. However there are those other people who feel nothing when faced with dealing out violence, destruction and death against others as merely their right to live without those rules and the freedom to live a life that is determined by nothing more than what they wish to own, possess or destroy.

The Dark-Side:

What posses the man who kicks the dog, when he is frustrated by society that pens his existence. What feelings does he release at that moment when the dog screeches and howls in pain and fright? Why does he smile and wish further harm to the dog and enjoy the sight of an animal in pain? On-lookers feel outraged by his behaviour and sympathy for the defenceless dog for which this man has sought to treat cruelly and without remorse. Who is this man? Why he is all of us from time to time. We all lose our sense of psychological calm and rational thoughts as we grapple with life’s unfairness or lack of opportunity. On the other hand – wait – for this man is wealthy, has all his needs fulfilled, yet still feels great delight in kicking and watching the dog suffer at his hands. A sense of power at his ability to inflict pain and the pleasure at feeling superior to other lesser humans whom he sees as incapable of taking what they want and so end up his employees and servants. This superior positional thinking leads to a lack of sympathy or empathy for others as only fools who accept the dominance of his kind as leaders and law-makers.

The above example is too give an insight into a behaviour that breaks our three measures of social norms, law (hurting a defenceless animal) moral (the taboo on senseless behaviour seen as wrong doing) socially acceptable behaviour, (while everyone might lose their temper and kick their dog, most will feel pangs of guilt and remorse). Here however we meet people who feel no guilt, no remorse and see themselves as exempt from laws they do not agree with. In England fox-hunting was a cruel sport mostly carried out by intelligent, professional, wealthy men and women? Yet these same people claimed a right to hunt and destroy a defenceless animal for nothing more than a good time as seeing their hounds rip apart and devour a fox. Even though the majority of English people voted on numerous occasions to ban this sport it took several years of campaigning to get this put into law. Now fox-hunting is an illegal activity however these same people continue to flout the law and hunt under local by-laws that have yet to catch up with national lawmaking. These people know what they are doing is illegal, immoral and against social norms as defined by majority opinion. Yet they claim they are superior parts of society and therefore above the day to day moral concerns of the ordinary masses. The surprising thing is in England these people are members of parliament, police, judges and others who control aspects of society in England such as estate owners (land given often by Royal consent in the past by robbing the rightful land of the poor). In others words the very people who should set an example to society are the same ones flaunting the law and socially acceptable behaviour.

In another example we have to look at the criminal. Criminals are often seen as the rejects of society as they have come from flawed backgrounds, disadvantaged families and poor parental upbringing. Yet in society the largest harm done to the public is often from corporate crime such as pension fund embezzlement, stocks and shares insider trading and theft of assets and wealth by CEO’s and government officials. This so-called white-collar crime is often undetected and the hardest to bring to justice. Everyday criminals are more visual to the public as their crimes cause localised distress and make the media cry for police action and civil authority action. Therefore most laws are about visual crime that is easy to understand and comprehend. Punishment of visual crime is also straight forward and dealt with everyday in our courts and media. How do we distinguish between the two types of criminal – the so-called victimless crime of white collar criminals who see no direct victim or the murderer who during an armed robbery kills and maims those who oppose his will to steal what he wants from society and the distress they leave behind?

So what does psychology have to say about the deviants who do not see their actions as a problem to themselves and feel others who do not take control of their lives as weak and therefore deserve to be victims of those who are smarter, stronger or more powerful? The media often cries about the passive masses that accept the status quo and in the same paper would condemn the local person who took the law into their own hands perhaps to avenge some wrong-doing against them or their families? The first area that psychology expounds the reasons behind this dark behaviour of others is “developmental” that upbringing is at the route of this behaviour, that the dog kicker was not loved or cared for in the correct manner. That during their formative years they were subject to cruelty, sexual abuse or lack of social education. That the same transgressors were victims of bullying at school and therefore need to act-out their own frustration on those in society that are weaker than themselves. The question we have to pose here is why some victims, in fact most, go onto being law-abiding citizens and it is only the few that turn into the monsters who kill and maim for reasons of developmental mistakes? At this point many scientists like to point to a genetic factor in behaviour. This old chestnut has been around for some time now. There is evidence amongst violent criminals that they often possess an extra Y chromosome (men) that gives them a high amount of testosterone leading to violent outbursts towards frustrating situations in which they use terror and fear as the key to getting what they need. However as a percentage of violent criminals this is statistically minute even though in the general prison population this may be higher. All genetic research so far has lead to speculation about genetic factors but with no firm evidence to back up the claims. The most often sited evidence is that from twin studies where twins separated at birth have high incidences of similar behaviour and outcomes. Again as a percentage of twins born and studied this evidence is weak for genetic determinism and high for developmental environments being similar and twins experiencing environments that are so accord that it is more likely to be a surprise if they did turn out differently from each other. So if we remove developmental outcomes, genetic predispositions then what makes some people flaunt socially acceptable behaviour and some who comply to everything society demands of them? This then is the propositional position that makes psychology hard to always see as a positive view or a deterministic way of the world and that in fact maybe it is in fact that normal behaviour amongst humans is to be cruel, deceitful, violent and tendency towards criminal behaviour under a variety of circumstances. Those morals are a luxury of a settled society where everyone is equal both economically and in caste or class.

The Psychology of the Survivalist:

There are those particularly in the USA that see the end of society as a real possibility whether they advocate nuclear annihilation (today more likely bio-warfare) or the breakdown of capitalism leading to social chaos and civil strife. These people are often referred to as survivalists. They store weapons against the uncontrollable hordes that would roam the country in the event of civil breakdown and food for the possibility of shortages caused by economic meltdown. (Looking at 2009 in the USA many survivalists would argue they in fact have a good case). The survivalists believe the have a basic right to defend themselves and their families in the case of societal breakdown and lack of protective laws. On occasions these groups come into conflict with existing legal statutes that become enforced by federal authorities such as the FBI. Therefore the survivalist’s mentality is while on the one hand in conflict with society and in the other seen as a genuine attempt at controlling ones own fate against future disasters. After all insurance companies survive just on that premise alone – and ironically would be the first not to survive an economic breakdown of capitalism as seen by the failure of many banks in 2008/9 around the world. Today the most popular movies at the box office are disaster films, those where flood, sun-flares, bio-warfare, alien invasion and other catastrophes cause the social breakdown of society. The heroes of these movies are always the resourceful survivalists who through violence protect their kin from all-comers. Why do the public find these people as attractive, as hero’s and yet the real survivalists are vilified as public enemies of the status-quo? Judging by the success of these movies ordinary people recognise that the breakdown of society is something that may happen or is if fact inevitable. So they look to these movies as a type of hope for another future that may come about by the demise of their own everyday world.

Psychology as Evolution:

In human history all people started out as survivalists as hunter gatherers roaming the land looking for easy accessible animals for food and warmth. As time goes by we see these societies settle into agro-cultural settlements that create rules, laws, leaders and a moral code. As they develop and grow these settled societies create art, music and religion to compensate for a limited existence within the constrictions of the very society they have formed. From these beginnings land and property become important. The possession of goods and chattels becomes essential to growth. As time goes by these settlements become villages, towns and cities which eventually form countries with boundaries. Survival becomes now the group and not the individual as was human’s natural instincts from the beginning of time. However eventually all these societies fade and crumble away. Some for unknown reasons such as the Mayan and other South American civilisations. Most fail as they grow into empires who dominate the weak with a version of their own laws and religions. However one thing history teaches us all is that societies do disappear for all sorts of reasons. (Greek, Roman, Egyptian in the ancient world and British, French, German and Japanese empires in the modern world). All of these societies had one thing in common they did not envisage their own demise. In today’s world a European and American could not imagine the fall of the EEC or the USA yet these new modern empires have their own Achilles heal, “Capitalism”. Although Karl Marx saw the evils of capitalism and its eventual failure he could not have seen how it would grip the modern world to such a point that wars over oil and gas would dominate the 21st century. Marx however would probably laugh with glee at the failure in 2009 of the banking system based on greed and debt around the first nations of the planet. Most of the failures can be contributed to mismanagement but in fact it was a loss of confidence in the financial system by ordinary people that caused a rush on funds and inability to service crippling debt through high interest rates and little return on investments. When people panic they go into survival mode – they look after themselves first.

The Dark Side Conclusion:

At this junction it is time to conclude from these observations that social norms, laws and morals are actually “not normal” for human beings and that society often forces group behaviour based on what the powerful want over the powerless. That in fact survivalist mentality is our norm and that what society tries to do in fact is control the wild beast in every human by training them from an early age to obey the laws, rules and morals of the controlling group, usually the rich, who dominate our governments and institutions. Therefore should we condemn those that feel society is not offering them a fair deal – which in fact they should take what they need in order to survive an often hostile environment where privilege depends on your school, family or wealth? Psychology itself needs to come out of the closet and admit that normal human behaviour is to oppose rigid societies and rules? That in fact people resent society but because they are powerless against those who control law-making and morality they feel certain helplessness in trying to live amongst the sheep. Is it any wonder then occasionally a lone individual takes it into their own hands to change society or their own environment in order to live a more free self-controlled existence away from the rigours of societies that as we have seen all eventually breakdown and reinvent themselves as the new rich and powerful take control once again. In the last century we saw China go from a Empire ruled by depots to a military regime controlled by the rich and powerful, to transform itself into a communist stare of the 1950’s where Marxism would determine a fair life for all and eventually to the China of today as a capitalist socialist state based on a ruling party that determines the lives of the powerless populace, that in fact fought for the rulers to lord over them much as the Emperor of old – nothing changed except the rich and powerful.. Will another revolution occur in China in the future – at the moment it looks unlikely despite the unrest in many parts of China by minorities forced to comply with central rule. All empires cannot see their own demise! How will psychology then deal with this question of human behaviour as a basic survivalist mechanism, that in fact humans are naturally violent, cruel and dominating of others who are weaker than themselves? Psychiatry in mental hospitals is often seen as the agents of social control – if you do not agree with society and its rules then you must be insane – therefore you should be committed and controlled for the safety and benefit of all. Psychology on the other hand is seen as the liberating aspect of mental health – where we help those out of synch with society of find their place and fit back into what is considered normal behaviour for that group. Where will the answer be for those who rebel against the society they live in and want another way of existence with out the interference of the powerful and the freedom to live a life they choose as suiting themselves? Or do we wait – for the movies to come true – the disaster that awaits all humans and a return to a dog eat dog existence called survivalism – the real social norm!

END

End-note: I should as the author point out I am not advocating the American version of survivalists or any counter-revolutionaries in China or elsewhere nor do I condone actions against society that would lead to unhealthy outcomes. I do however recognise that societies change and fall often by what we term terrorists when they oppose our way of life and freedom fighters when they oppose a way of life that controls or restricts our personal freedoms. This as always is a philosophical question rather than a psychological one! I have not used the word evil in reference to human behaviour in this paper as the connotation infers a religious outlook which I certainly do not possess.

Dr. Stephen Myler is from Leicester in England, an industrial town in the Midlands of the United Kingdom. He holds a B.Sc (Honours) in Psychology from the UK’s Open University the largest in the UK; he also has an M.Sc and Ph.D in Psychology from Knightsbridge University in Denmark. In addition to this Stephen holds many diplomas and awards in a variety of academic areas including journalism, finance, teaching and advanced therapy for mental health. Stephen has as a Professor of Psychology many years teaching experience in colleges and universities in England and China to post 16 young adults, instructing in psychology, sociology, English, marketing and business. He has been fortunate to travel extensively from Australia to Africa to the United Sates, South America, Borneo, most of Europe and Russia. Stephen’s favourite hobby is the study of primates and likes to play badminton. He believes that students who enjoy classes with humour and enthusiasm from the teacher always come back eager to learn more.

All nightmares are serious warnings for the dreamer. They are so unpleasant that many times the dreamer tries to avoid sleeping in order to stop seeing them, but their importance is crucial for his or her safety.

Nightmares reflect real dangers existent in the human brain and psyche as well as in the outside world.

They have the general meaning of an alarm, working like all alarms that try to protect you when someone is trying to steal your store or your car. They try to protect you from losing your mental health first of all, and many times, from losing other things that belong to your daily life.

As an example of a very important nightmare I can mention the case of a dreamer who participated in my summer offer of free professional dream translation in 2008. She saw a dream in which she was in her bed bleeding, but she could not move.

This dream was indicating great danger. Since she was in her bed, she was in the position of a patient who is sick. She could not move because she could not control her behavior: she was dominated by the wild side of her conscience. She was bleeding because she was suffering too much in this situation. Blood represents pain.

This dreamer had had a very strong suicidal tendency from the time of her childhood; however her family didn’t give any importance to her nightmares. Fortunately she was helped through dream translation, and this way, she could overcome her depression and continue living without thinking about death all the time.

Nightmares must be always respected as very serious indications of psychical abnormalities or indications that the mental health of the dreamer is in danger. Recurring nightmares try to remind the dreamer of a certain obligation, something that he or she is postponing, but that must be done, otherwise he will suffer very much, or they try to emphasize to the dreamer something that he or she must understand in order to be able to overcome all the difficulties of life.

Recurring nightmares are constant alarms, because the dreamer is in constant danger.

Another example of a classical nightmare is a dream in which the dreamer keeps falling, without end. This is a very common nightmare that indicates to the dreamer that he or she will have many deceptions, and lose the floor under their feet. This kind of nightmare works as a preparation, so that the dreamer may be strong when facing all the deceptions that are in his way.

You can avoid seeing nightmares by following the guidance of the unconscious mind in your daily dreams, since you’ll learn how to solve all your problems, and overcome all mental illnesses.

The unconscious mind won’t need to send you shocking nightmares in order to alarm you: you’ll be protected and guided by regular warnings that don’t have the horrible aspect of nightmares, since they give you gradual lessons.

Christina Sponias continued Carl Jung’s research into the human psyche, discovering the cure for all mental illnesses, and simplifying the scientific method of dream interpretation that teaches you how to exactly translate the meaning of your dreams, so that you can find health, wisdom and happiness. Learn more at: http://www.scientificdreaminterpretation.com
Click Here to download a Free Sample of the eBook Dream Interpretation as a Science (86 pages!).

Abnormal behavior is defined by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) with criterion that includes the following: unusualness, social deviance, faulty perceptions or interpretations of reality, significant personal distress, maladaptive self-defeating behavior, and dangerousness. Abnormal behavior has many definitions, but in most cases a combination of these criteria defines abnormality. Historically, it has been shown that people with abnormal behavior disorders can be very creative, making contributions to science, mathematics, arts, sports, and politics. However, given all the contributions these afflicted individuals make to society, they can still suffer greatly through the distress, pain, anger, and sadness mental disorders can cause.

Considering the stigma attached to mental disorders, society still benefits a great deal from these individuals. Scientists such as Einstein greatly enhanced our knowledge of the universe, Pythagoras improved mathematics, and Dickens authored many influential works of literature. All of these individuals endured from mental disorders. Although stigmatized, society values their abnormal behavior by supporting their invaluable contributions.

Consider a situation in which all abnormal behavior is removed from the individual. Would society still reap the benefit? This removal would affect both their creativity and their suffering. It would change cognitive and emotional processes including temperament and personality. This undeniably would affect the influence made to society.

Removal of abnormal behavior would eliminate suffering. The effects are innumerable but would certainly decrease individuals’ distress, pain, anger, and sadness. In addition, it could lessen violent and aggressive behavior, substance abuse, suicidal tendencies, and incarceration. Societal stigma would disappear and in its place acceptance, enhanced coping and a more balanced mood. It would have many positive implications for society.

However, removal would also devastate creativity. Removal of creativity would decrease societal contributions and advances made by those with mental disorders. Independent thinkers would vanish along with knowledge about those disorders, and consequently change what society refers to as abnormal. As creativity diminishes, conformity and indifference would undoubtedly increase.

Eliminating all suffering from the world would certainly be ideal. Sufferers would not be subjected to the misery a mental disorder may cause. However, removal of a mental disorder, abnormal behavior, or illness changes individuals. Irregardless of societal contributions, I would not want to change my cognitive and emotional processes, nor my temperament and personality. I do not suffer from a mental disorder, but I have endured from a chronic illness my entire life. I would not change that. I believe that despite all the intolerable cruelty associated with illness, those who suffer would not change to have the illness removed, no matter how society does or does not benefit.

My hope to live life in the light of optimism rather than one in pessimistic darkness was advanced by the work of Martin Seligman, a world renowned authority on depression and abnormal psychology. I became aware of him in 1999 as I prepared my master’s thesis. His early book Learned Optimism was a catalyst that provided me with deep insight into positive ways of thinking and being.

Seligman’s efforts are aimed to help us gain insight and to understand the why’s of our chaotic condition. He writes of how the human condition is one we do not choose. That choice is made by our parents who come together in a genetic splicing. We come to this world totally invalid, unable to survive more than a few hours without our parents help. As we grow our perceptions, egos, and economies are programmed like a computer. We are taught how fulfill expectations, contribute to society and fulfill the desires of the self.

Seligman invites us to keep an open mind and look further than the structure of the body in our quest for balance in both mind and body. For most of us the purpose of life is cloudy, with moments of clarity. A healthy life seems to be one where we become aware and develop a belief system that energizes our potential.The road is never easy, heath issues arrive as the trials of life bear down on our effort to control and execute our potential.

Since 1999 and my first encounter with Seligman he has expanded his efforts to help us understand our helplessness with his self help initiatives. Seligman’s insight was and is important in my education and solidifies my concept of what a healer should be and the true meaning of doctor.

My name is Bill Tallmon. I am an alternative health care doctor and offer homeopathic and naturopathic consultations, for people with both acute and chronic disease. My Doctorate degrees are Naturopathic Doctor and Doctor of Philosophy in Natural Health. I am a long time reader of ancient civilizations and ancient and modern philosophies of American, European, Greek, Chinese, Indian, Muslim, and other cultures. I am a collector of ancient and modern quotes. My PhD dissertation Natural Health and the Biotech Revolution investigates the modern wave of biotechnology and its potential impact on health.

• My biggest FEAR in life is becoming dependent.
• The idea of depending on my boss, a medical doctor, expensive insurance or the government for my health care does not feel right.
Are there Solutions?
The answer is YES
Bill Tallmon’s http://www.beyourowndoc.com

On why we have dreams and the functions of dreaming

The psychology of dreams has been explained either with the psychoanalytic interpretation of dreams and the psycho-physiological process of dreaming. Thus there are two distinct schools in the psychology of dreams – one school of thought believes in the relation between REM sleep and dreaming, the role of dreams in learning and dreams as a result of random neural firings further leading to random images that may not have any significance; and the other school of thought believes that dreams occur as a result of unconscious and repressed impulses and could be explained with psychoanalytic symbolism and in turn also explain psychic phenomenon or even lead to understanding the causes of mental illnesses.

According to Freud, ‘dreams are the royal road to the unconscious’, in the sense that dreams could be analyzed in a way that will reveal the hidden impulses in the unconscious. Dreams may thus reveal who we ‘really’ are, what we ‘really’ want and how we want to attain these desires. Yet many contemporary psychologists have moved away from this ’semantic’ view of dreams that emphasize on repressed desires and ‘meanings’ of dreams, and have suggested that dreams occur simply due to random neural firings in the brain when the body is at rest and these random firings produce images in the brain. There are several stages in sleep and the REM sleep is the final stage.

Dreams are related to this REM (rapid eye movement) stage of sleep and we tend to have several dreams in one night although we forget almost all these images. We don’t act out these dreams because during the process of dreaming, the body undergoes temporary paralysis which is a protective or bodily defense mechanism against any external injury.

Dreams according to psychology is also a defense mechanism as all repressed desires which could have harmful effects on our psyche are released through the process of dreaming, so both physiologically and psychologically, dreams have defensive or protective functions helping in release of excessive stress, traumatic thoughts, repressed impulses as also protect the body from external injury. Dream recollection and control through the process of lucid dreaming and hypnosis as used more frequently by traditional psychotherapists are not too popular any more although these processes provide more insights into images in dreaming and how these could be evoked or elicited in psychotherapeutic sessions or could be remembered and interpreted to provide more access to the unconscious.

The physiology of REM stage of sleep may be able to provide answers as to why we dream of certain images yet this mechanism would be unable to explain exactly why these specific images occur. Some theories have suggested that certain repressed thoughts and desires or repeated occurrences could manifest in dreams through images.

Sometimes trauma or any event with significant emotional value could lead to repetitive dreams with the same images. Considering existing literature, I suggest that dreams could have five principal functions – a clinical function of explaining mental illness, a cognitive function of aiding learning, an adaptive function of restoring body mechanisms, a cathartic function of releasing traumatic or repressed feelings and a defensive function of providing a protective shield to the mind and the body. So dreams could actually be explained both from psychoanalytic and psycho-physiological perspectives. In fact we have to understand psychoanalysis and psycho-physiology and integrate findings about dreams from both these fields to reach a comprehensive understanding of dreams.

The five functions of dreams are given here and the basic thesis of a comprehensive dream theory should be based on all these five functions.

Clinical Function of Dreams – Some psychologists believe that dreams are closely related to mental illness and that many post traumatic dreams represent anxiety and prolonged or repetitive traumatic dreams could suggest initial symptoms of mental disorder or failed physiological functions in the body. In fact many mental illnesses could be traced back to certain dreams and we can even understand the roots or causes of mental illness by studying why certain dreams occur in certain people. The clinical value of dreams has been recognized in psychoanalysis although the full potential of this function has not been very clear in physiology. Further scientific research is required to understand the role of dreams in explaining, preventing or even curing mental or physical illnesses.

Dreams could highlight issues of brain disorder, brain ailments and hormonal changes in the body and could have clinical value in identifying many diseases and abnormal conditions in the body.

Cognitive Function of Dreams – Dreams are useful in learning and scientific studies have proved that dreams play a cognitive role in children who have many more dreams and increased REM sleep than adults, thus children tend to learn while dreaming and dreaming and REM sleep could also have a positive effect on learning physical skills. This might explain how dreams could also provide insights into problems as solutions and many discoveries, inventions and novel ideas emerge in dreams. Dreams show various possibilities in our thought process and through permutations and combinations provide cognitive solutions to some of our life goals. Dreams could thus be very effective learning tools, help in self understanding and realization and improve and consolidate cognitive abilities.

Adaptive Function of Dreams – Dreams help us to adapt to our surroundings and although the evolutionary advantage of dreaming is not clear or has not been studied extensively, the fact that we continue to dream and even learn and defend ourselves through dreams makes dreaming an important part of our passive and active life. The adaptive function of dreams is however physiologically advantageous as it helps restore bodily mental and physical balance. Although this remains a controversial viewpoint, the complete psychological and physiological advantages of dreaming will have to be studied from an evolutionary perspective.

Cathartic Function of Dreams – Dreams are highly cathartic. They release stress, and through symbolic representation of images, purge out our fears, our impulses and urges and help us to confront our own mental lives. Dreams are more than the ‘royal road to the unconscious’, they are basic shields for our own defense and release. The thoughts and emotions that may be too dark, traumatic, shameful or dangerous for real life are manifested in dreams and help us to confront realities. Psychoanalytically dreams represent wish fulfillment and many images in dreams like elongated objects for example, are considered symbolic of sexual organs. It is however controversial whether all dreams are a type of wish fulfillment and some dreams could simply be a release of anxiety or completely the opposite of any wish fulfillment. If you repeatedly dream of your own injury or injury of close ones, you are simply releasing your unconscious anxiety through the dreams which in turn may help you to function better and be more cautious in reality.

Defensive Function of Dreams – This is related to the cathartic and adaptive functions of dreaming as when we release through catharsis, we also adapt to situations and this in turn provides a defense or protection for the mind and body to continue functioning without harm or hindrance. Although this concept is unpopular among many psychologists, dreams may have strong defensive functions. While we dream, the physiological changes in the body such as release of glycine, an amino acid highlight a defensive mechanism and both physical and mental irritations could be released through dreaming, providing in turn a shield for the body and mind. Dreams are thus not just the ‘royal road to the unconscious’, they are essential covers or shields to protect the mind or body against excess stress. Just like your boiling kettle has provisions to release excess steam, dreams too serve as a regulatory mechanism to release all excesses from the mind and body.

Dreams are finally mind’s excretions. The view that dreams have no evolutionary advantage and that they have no functions has been endorsed by many scientists, yet if we look deeper into the annals of psychology, the significance of dreams in explaining mental life cannot be overlooked. Only further research in physiology, imaging techniques and psychotherapy delving into the psychology of dreams would be able to tell us why we dream and whether dreams are rudimentary or regulatory.

Reflections in Psychology – Part I by Saberi Roy

http://www.lulu.com/content/5865445

They say when we answer a question it poses two more. That when old mysteries are exposed, revealing new and powerful information, this process eventually uncovers even more awesome unanswered questions. Such is the case with what we’ve discovered in the name of science, best exemplified by the patterns of attraction and connectivity between very tiny, atom, as well as very large, planet, objects, which mathematics helps us explain so well that we are constantly inventing new technological gadgets based upon this new information.

So what are the new questions being exposed? The answer is we’re not paying much attention even to what they are-all of which have at least something to do with our personal emotional experience. If science can explain the behavior of physical objects, can it unravel the spiritual and emotional aspects of being human?

For the most part we prefer to leave personal issues in the hands of lovers, priests and mothers, etc., as sacred events that must not be contaminated by the impersonal-big picture-perspective of science. When we do pay closer attention to human issues scientifically, specifically human nature, what we produce is a very highly over simplified application of reason. All that layman and professionals have in the name of psychology after 100 years of study are various half-assed notions of what’s normal, and what’s abnormal in human function-in other words “pathology”.

How in hell can a perspective based almost entirely upon a negative assumption help us build a positive model of ourselves? Indeed does anybody have a big picture view of what people are really all about? The answer is hardly anyone, though more likely probably no one.

And yet a closer examination of our personal lives reveals, curiously, that in human emotional experience, attraction and connectivity is the most powerful and influential aspect of who we are, and how we understand ourselves. We spend more time doing, fantasizing, moping, regretting, dreaming and hoping for a successful satisfying connectivity experience 10 times more often than we address any other human issue. Some people behave as if doing it meant binging upon nature’s sexual invitation; while others regard it as love, community and/or caring for each other. But all of these descriptions leave what is going on as mysteriously unexplained, in a big picture sense, as earthquakes, tsunamis, hurricanes, etc. were for the longest time in human history, thought to be acts of an angry god.

As 30 years of psychotherapy practice reveals, attraction and connectivity IS the most powerful influence upon human experience. But this doesn’t mean it’s the way things are supposed to be. If we take human intimacy out of all the tiny boxes we try and confine it within-religious marriages, fairy-book fantasies, sexual orgies, etc.-the most obvious thing we discover is that this overwhelming emphasis upon connectivity has been put there not entirely by good influences, but also, perhaps even primarily, by bad ones.

For a child attraction & connection are naturally the principle issues of survival, for the very simple reason that they can’t care for themselves, and need others to do it. The ability to cling successfully to others is essential for them to identify with and incorporate the strengths they need to cope with and understand the challenges of life-thus that irresistible baby-faced smile nature gives them.

But for those human issues to be the dominant force throughout life reveals to what extent we all still, at least to some extent, fail each other as caretakers, or we wouldn’t be so obsessed with connection. There’s only one reasonable conclusion. To a greater or lesser extent we have all had our hearts broken, and it happened originally before we reached age 16. For every failed adult intimacy, with children involved, there is a traumatized child. Divorce, endemic in western culture, is anathema to children. It fractures their lives, and, like humpty dumpty, there is no way to fix it.

Yet for adults it’s necessary to get in and out of relationships in order to find out how better to do them. We’ve never had much of a chance for such exploration before we’ve been so tied up in the knots of tradition and culture. The solution is probably to be found in doing family, in some ways, very differently than we’re used to doing it. Perhaps we need to rearrange the parts and the emphasis.

To mention just one of the many things we have to acknowledge and deal with in a real study of human nature is the following: the principle problem in the traditional family is that children and adults seek gratification at the same emotional trough. Clearly adults will always win that competition; they’re bigger and smarter. Whatever happens to their children will be both unacknowledged and buried for a shrink to dig up later when ambitious people try and figure out what happened for themselves. We pretend we see everything that’s going on between us, and our children; but obviously we don’t.

So what’s the conclusion? That our major emotional preoccupation with attraction and connectivity is both a sign of human virtue; yet is equally an indication of human ignorance, and the mistakes it produces-which hurt just as much no matter how unintentionally they may have been inflicted. As adults we are far too insecure in our connectivity, revealed by how much we’re willing to give up in order to have more and more of it.

The evidence is very simple: we make society and tradition-our connectivity places-more powerful politically than the individual human. Indeed we basically mistrust the individual human-the why our democracy has never matured beyond the writing of the Constitution; and its mistrustful attitude toward a direct vote by the people for all decision-making. So plurality doesn’t win elections or make decisions; politicians and electoral colleges, and their political machinations, do. Indeed it is most likely that my reader is horrified at the prospect of individuals running the world. What a disaster, they imagine, it would be to turn life over to us one at a time.

It’s not that we’re ready to do it now. But why aren’t we working toward that outcome? Clearly the individual human is much better off than they used to be. But in many ways we aren’t, or we would have erased homelessness and generic economic anxiety for most of us a long time ago. Why must the world run on an economy of scarcity when it is perfectly capable of running on an economy of abundance … if we only use our resources wisely instead of profitably?

Returning the discussion to psychology, what’s our preoccupation with connection sound like? The answer is addiction. We are addicted to being too safely connected to each other, far more unwilling than we care to admit to being differentiated from each other, afraid of the conflicts that will ensue with recognition of necessary difference as a normal part of the bearing forces of the universe.

Obviously the answer is for us, as individuals, to grow much stronger and wiser about ourselves, to become capable of handling much more difficulty and responsibility than we presently expect of ourselves. That is if we want, as individual voters, to run the world with all of its problems and complexity, instead of leaving it for others to manage-and then complain about how badly they do it. In order to accomplish that we need also to develop and provide a much higher quality to how we raise our children. Why do we keep insisting that what we do naturally is okay … when it’s not? Are we so fragile we can’t face the truth?

My additional works can be seen at this website: http://donfenn.com

Most reputable scientists now believe that autism has existed throughout the history of humankind. Some have speculated that ancient legends about “changelings” are actually stories of children with autism. Celtic mythology is redolent with stories of elves and visitors from “the other side” who steal a human child and leave their own damaged child in its place. The child left behind is usually mute, remote and distant, staring into space and unresponsive to its adult caretakers. We must bear in mind that in times gone by, and in some cultures today, children who are unlike the average expected child are seen to be victims of evil or some sort.

In 1801 the French physician Itard took into his care a boy who had been found wandering naked in the forest. It was believed at the time that the boy had lived alone in the forest since early childhood. The boy could not speak and was unresponsive to human contact. He has come to be known as “sauvage de l’Aveyron,” or “wild boy of Aveyron”. Itard’s tireless efforts to help this boy mark the beginning of special educaiton. Although autism was not a term used at the time there are those who speculate that the wild boy of Aveyron was a child with autism.

The real history of autism dates back only one hundred years to the time of the Swiss psychiatrist Eugen Bleuler. In 1911 Bleuler was writing about a group of people then identified as having schizophrenia. In his writing he coined the term “autism” to describe their seeming near total absorption with themselves and distance from others.

Writing in the early 1920’s, Carl Gustav Jung introduced the terminology of extrovert and introvert. Jung viewed these personality types as being present in all people to one degree or another. However he noted that in extreme cases, cases that in the language of his day were called “neurotic”, a person could become totally absorbed into himself or herself.

It was not until the late 1930’s and early 1940’s in America that the term “autism” joined the official psychiatric nomenclature. Psychiatrists Leo Kanner, who started working with a particular group of children in 1938, and Hans Asperger, both publishing findings and writing in 1943 and 1944, wrote about groups of children they had studied and called either “autistic” or children with “autistic psychopathy”. Both authors believe these children displayed a constellation of symptoms that were unique and represented a syndrome not previously identified. As the children they studied seemed unable to engage in normal human relationships they borrowed Bleuler’s term “autism” to identify the syndrome. The defining difference between the work of Kanner and Asperger and that of Bleuler is that for the former two the condition they describe is present at birth while for Bleuler the condition appears much later in life.

Another important difference in these early pioneers of autism is that Kanner group is quite self-contained and comprised of individual all sharing the same “core” symptoms. Asperger’s group is quite wide, ranging from the children like Kanner’s to children with near normal characteristics. The vestiges of these two differing descriptions, now bearing the names of their illustrious “discoverers” remains to this day. In the literature and in lay terminology we still hear people described as having “Kanner’s autism” or “Asperger’s syndrome.

Around the time of Kanner and Asperger another famous, indeed in autism circles infamous, name appears. This is Bruno Bettelheim. In 1944 Bettelheim directed the Orthogenic School for Children in Chicago, Illinois. There he worked out his own theory of the cause of autism and started intervention programmes. Bettelheim believed that autism was a result of children being raised in severely unstimulating environments during their early years. He believed it was parents, particularly mothers, who were unresponsive to their children that caused autism. The unfortunate term “refrigerator mother” arose during this time.

Although Bettelheim’s psychological theories were eventually discredited it was not for many years that science advanced to the point that mother’s were not blamed for autism. Indeed, the author’s own post-graduate training in the mid to late 70’s was characterised by lectures about “refrigerator mothers” having caused autism. The legacy of Bettelheim’s theory is undoubtedly one of terrible harm inflicted on so many mothers for so many years. [I cannot help but wonder if we really have progressed since I have so often heard mothers of children with autism being described as "over-anxious", "clinging", "over-involved" and "pushy or aggressive" by some educators, psychologists and physicians]

From the 1980’s onward considerable research has been undertaken to uncover the “cause” of autism. So many theories have come forward: genetic, environmental, toxins, endocrine, metabolic, unusual reactions to certain foods or additives and the current favourite, immunizations. Despite all this theorising autism still remains a puzzle. Little scientifically valid evidence supports any particular theory and research continues into the cause of autism.

What do we know about autism?

It is now and accepted fact that autism is a neurodevelopment (sometimes called neurobiological) condition. This places the site of autism within the human brain itself, not in the form of physical brain abnormalities that appear on physical examination or X-ray, but rather in the chemical and electrical activity of the brain. It is know that autism is present at birth, is more common amongst boys than girls and is a life-long condition with no “cure”. We know that autism can be treated effectively and there are a wide number of treatment options available. It is now known that education is particularly important in the treatment of autism and that early intervention is critically important. Children born with autism can improve along a number of pathways but they will always have autism no matter how seemingly like others they may become.

Having said what was said about autism being incurable and a life-long condition there are those who say it can be cured. Interesting forms of treatment being studied in New Orleans, Louisiana involve testing children with autism for low-level presence of lead in there system, then providing treatment to eliminate any traces of autism. This is said to have “cured” over 1,500 children of the condition (personal conversation with the lead physician). It has to be cautioned that such extreme and emphatic statements must be put to the rigorous test of scientific study and that the sorts of assessments being completed on these children in New Orleans are not in favour in Europe at the moment.

What is autism?

The neurodevelopment or neurobiological condition known as autism is highly variable. No two people with autism are alike. Having said that, all people with autism share common characteristics. These characteristics exist along what is called the “Triad of Impairment”.

The Triad of Impairment consists of significant deficits across three developmental areas:

1. Social impairment
2. Verbal and non-verbal communication impairment
3. Impairments of thinking and behaving

1. Impairment of Social Interaction

There are several sub-types of behaviours that characterise this group of people with autism. They can be quite aloof, behaving as if other people did not exist at all, making little or no eye contact and have faces that seem to lack any emotional display whatever. Less common is the passive group who will accept the advances of others, can be led to participate as a passive partner in an activity and who return the eye contact of others. Another subtype has been called the “active but odd group”. These people pay no attention to others, have poor eye contact and may stare too long and often shake hands far too vigorously and strongly. The last subtype is the overly formal and stilted group. They tend to use language in a very formal way when it is not called for, are excessively polite and try to stick to the rules of social interaction but don’t really understand then. They tend to have well developed language skills that can mask their real social deficits.

2. Impairment of Communication

Significant deficits in communication are present, to one degree or another, in all people with autism. They may have problems is using speech (expressive language), ranging from having no speech at all (about 20% of cases) to have very well developed speech. They make repeat words spoken to them (echolalia) or repeat phrases they associate with something they want (e.g. “Do you want to play” instead of “I want to play”). They will also have deficits in understanding speech (receptive language). Confusing between sounds of words can be present (e.g. meat and meet). Difficulty with irony, sarcasm and humour is often found in those with well-developed expressive language. They may have problems understanding when an object has more than one meaning (e.g. soup bowl, toilet bowl).

In addition to the problem listed about in receptive language people with autism can often have significant difficulty with modulating their tone of voice and putting expression into what they say. They can sometimes sound robotic and speak with a droning monotone. Sometimes they can emphasise the intonation of certain words with unnecessary force. Sometimes they are too loud, sometimes too quiet (more frequent).

It is important to recognise that communication is more than speech. Non-verbal communication is important for human social interaction to proceed smoothly. People with autism have deficits in understand non-verbal communication. They may not be able to interpret facial expression or to use it themselves. They may have odd and unusual body posture and gestures. They may not understand the body posture and gestures of others.

3. Impairment of Thinking and Behaving

People with autism have pronounced difficulty with play or imagining. The lack of the ability to play has a profound effect on the ability to understand the emotions of others therefore sharing joy or sorrow with another can be impossible. Repetitive and stereotyped movements or activities are often present in autism. They may want to taste, touch or smell things. They may have a need to twirl things before their eyes. Sometimes they may jump up and down and make loud noises. In more severe cases they may bang their heads against walls or floor or pull and scratch at their skin. People with autism have a strong need for consistency and sameness. They become unsettled when routine changes. All these behaviours and characteristics point to a pronounced inflexibility in thinking and behaving.

Although every person with an autistic spectrum disorder has deficits in all three parts of the triad each varies significantly in the nature of their deficits. This makes is imperative for people working with children with autism to individualise their interventions. Autism is a highly variable condition with no two children alike and with some children, seemingly near normal but having subtle deficits.

Problems that may accompany autism

In addition to deficits across the triad there are a number of problems often associated with autism, though it is not known yet if they are caused by autism. Among the most common are: epileptic seizures (particularly in adolescence), sensory integration deficits (difficulty integrating the reception of sensations such as sound, sight, taste, hearing or movement), general learning disabilities, Fragile X syndrome (about 2-5% of people with an ASD), tuberous sclerosis (benign tumours in the brain or other organs, occurs in about 2-4% of people with an ASD), ADHD, Tourette’s syndrome and dyslexia. Proper treatment of autism must include appropriate treatment of any associated condition.

Education of children with autism

Many children with autism can be educated in the mainstream with appropriate supports. These supports typically include speech and language therapy, occupational therapy, psychological services and special education. Though they perceive the world differently from those around them they benefit from placement in mainstream classroom and the other children benefit from having them in their class.

People with autism vary to an enormous degree as has been said above. As they progress through the educational system the types of supports they require and the intensity of these supports can vary as well. It is important to recognise that children with autism can be educated and reach their optimum level of potential. The task may be difficult and progress may be slow but progress will be made when supports are present and all work cooperatively together.

When autism is severe and accompanied by extremely challenging behaviour such as aggression, self-harm, extreme disorganisation and complete lack of language the education being provided often must take place in a specialist setting. The goal in these settings is to attempt to re-integrate the child back into the mainstream. For children whose autism is of such a severe nature psychiatric services may be required as an adjunct to the educational programme.

People with autism can be educated and a great many of them can enter the work force, sometimes independently and with great success, at other times requiring the support of a job coach and in some cases may require sheltered work settings. As well as entering the work force many people with autism can live independent lives, some will require structured and supported accommodation and some will require accommodation is specialist settings.

Autism and the brain

Considerable research is underway to investigate the exact nature of brain functioning in a person with autism. A lot is being learned but there is more to be learned in the future. What is known now is that there seems to be differences in the brain functioning of people with autism. With advances in nuero-imaging it is now possible to look at the brain with performing an autopsy. This makes it possible to study how the brain works while it is working. These imaging methods (CT scans, MRI scans PET scans and others) have shown that there seem to be a number of brain structures associated with autism and autistic spectrum disorders. These include the cerebellum, cerebral cortex, limbic system, corpus callosum, basal ganglia, and brain stem. These structures are responsible for cognition, movement, emotional regulation and coordination as well as sensory reception. Other studies are looking into the role of neurotransmitters such as dopamine, serotonin and epinephrine. There seems to be a genetic factor involved in some of these brain dysfunctions and some research indicates that unusual brain growth may take place in the first three months of life, is a genetic factor and that results in autism appearing in early childhood.

What is being learned turns other theories, such as Bettelheim’s, upside down. Autism is no one’s fault. It is a neurodevelopment disorder affecting more boys than girls (4:1), occurring in about 3-6% of the population. This makes autism less common than general learning disabilities but common than cerebral palsy, hearing impairment and visual impairment. Translating these statistics into something more comprehensible it can be said that about 1 in 500 to 1 in 150 people will be born with autism. The implications for these figures are alarming because it means that virtually every school in the country has a child on the spectrum and that the vast majority of these children have not been diagnosed and are perceived in a pejorative light by their teachers, sometimes seemingly odd or obstreperous and sometimes lazy or unable to learn.

Autism and the family

Autism is a family condition. When there is one child in the family with autism there is a condition present that affects every single-family member including those who do not live in the same home. On receiving a diagnosis of autism parents sometimes feel a certain relief, now knowing that it isn’t their fault the child is different. Others react with anger, grief, shame, denial or rage. Sometimes they become angry with the diagnostician and refuse to believe the findings. Although diagnosis at an early age is a good predictor of successful outcome if appropriate treatment is provided it is always accompanied by considerable trauma to family life. The impact of the diagnosis is always greatest on the mother.

The impact of living with a person on the spectrum has been shown to be harder on the mother than the father. The lessened paternal impact has a lot to do with factors associated with the gender role of the man in the traditional family: out of the home and working much of the time. Mothers are left in the major caretaker role and face the day-to-day stress of rearing a child with autism. For fathers the major impact of autism in the family is associated with the stress it puts on the mother. Figures in the US seem to indicate that the divorce rate in families of children with autism is not higher than in other families. This is something that has not been studied extensively in other countries however one study conducted in the UK indicates that the lone parent rate in families with autism is 17%, compared with 10% in other families.

Studies have shown that the emotional impact of autism on the mother can be quite severe. Many mothers experience enough emotional distress to require medication or psychotherapy. One study showed that 50% of mothers of children with autism screed positively for significant psychological distress and that this was associated with low levels of family support and brining up a child with challenging behaviour. Another study raised this figure to 66%. The emotional stress on the mother appears to have a significant effect on the work status. Many cannot work outside the home. For those that manage to work outside the home there is an increased incidence of tardiness, missed days and reduction to part-time status. Mothers are also the person most likely to be held responsible for their child’s behaviour by others outside the family including neighbours and teachers. Mothers tend to cope differently with these stresses than fathers. Fathers tend to hide their feelings and suppress them, the result often being increased episodes of anger outburst. Mothers tend to cope by talking about their difficulties with friends, particularly other mothers of children with autism. They also cope by becoming avid information seekers, often knowing more about autism then the educators of their children.

The impact of autism on the siblings is not to be underestimated. They know from an early age that their brother or sister is “different”. They will have a great many questions but most often don’t ask them for fear of hurting the parent’s feelings. The will have a deep love of the sibling with autism but this love is sometimes associated with anger and resentment due to the increased time the parents spend on the sibling with autism. They will often worry about their own future and obsess about whether or not they will “get” autism or will they pass it on to their own children one day.

The impact is not always negative and several studies have shown that being a sibling of a child with autism is associated with greater self-confidence and social competence. Care-taking skills often improve as well. Levels of tolerance to difference can be higher than in the siblings of children who do not have autism. So, what do we know about the impact of autism on the family? It is a mixed bag of results. At times is can be devastating, at other times it can lead to higher levels of coping skills and a sense of self-mastery. A lot depends on the family itself and the community in which it is embedded. A lot more depends on the supports and treatments available, especially the educational interventions and supports that can be provided. One this is certain: autism is a family condition affecting everyone.

David J. Carey, Psy.D.
297 Beechwood Court
Stillorgan
Dublin, Ireland
http://www.davidjcarey.com

We are almost completely unaware of the evolution of psychic function. We believe that people of ancient times were exactly like us, as if conscious human nature was born, like Paul Bunyan, in it’s present form, without any need for psychic leaps of understanding-perhaps most of which haven’t happened yet. Whether as archeologists, historians, sociologists, or anyone studying ancient times, we draw conclusions about motive and state of mind based upon present-time human consciousness, assuming that psychically we always have been like we are today, and always will be exactly the same.

Indeed the entity least studied on planet Earth is human nature. We know as much about ourselves as we know about the deep sea, less than 10% of which has ever been explored. We’ve found very exotic wonderful animals on the bottom of the ocean, and we’ve imagined strange and unfathomable traits in the dark recesses of our unconscious. But both deep places remain as mysterious and unknown as paleontology or archeology was 200 years ago-which may be how long it will take us seriously to understand ourselves.

After over 100 years of clinical study one would think that psychology would have revealed much more information. In a sense it has, though that knowledge is perceived so obliquely that we can’t see the forest for the trees. Studying ourselves is still very much like trying to understand the normal function of deep-sea creatures when the only way we can accurately examine them is to remove them from their natural environment. Indeed, except for psychotherapy, the study of psychic human nature is treated as a function of brain physiology, as if the human spirit derived from grey matter. Instead the human psyche is an intangible, ephemeral spiritual entity, unlike any other living creature, capable of observing and knowing itself.

Humanity has evolved some very virtuous and wonderful traits, like our ability much of the time to restrain a powerful tendency toward violence, and a capacity for thoughtful sensitive acts of caring and love. But in the study of psychology our principle efforts have been committed to discovering various kinds of psychopathology. Because of this emphasis upon illness, not much illumination has been shed upon normal human psychic function, which has been defined almost entirely in a negative way, as the absence of psychopathology. What a strangely dark cast to put upon what is assumed to be, in its normal state, at least in part the epitome of happiness and satisfaction? Why this predominant emphasis upon dysfunction?

Curiously, in spite of this clouded perspective, most of us regard ourselves as perfectly normal. If so, why do we spend so much time studying human pathologies? The average person would explain this as evidence that it’s the shrinks who are crazy, looking for insanity everywhere else but in themselves. In contrast professionals mostly avoid the issue, or put a positive cast upon what is by definition negative phenomena-in other words, pathology. There is at present a strong cultural movement to regard everything previously perceived as abnormal, as if it were indeed the epitome of normal. This includes everything from food binging to criminality.

In trying to make everything okay, yet professionally continuing to study the intimate details of psychopathology, what are we wrestling with? Insisting that we’re all perfectly normal, yet secretly worrying about things that feel quite beyond our capability, we struggle with how to put the pieces of this strange contradictory puzzle together. As a result of the environmental movement, many of us have begun to think of ourselves as a cursed and destructive species that deserves to be annihilated for the safety and survival off all other living things. Most likely, if we put all of this contradictory evidence together, it means that we’re gnashing our teeth in the sometimes-frightening dilemma of finding out just who we are-in spite of our pretense that we already know.

Until the last 200 to 300 years we’ve been exclusively the property of God, Who has, since time immemorial, defined who we are and what we’re not, or shouldn’t be. Though all of this defining was, and still is for many, done in the context of good and evil-which, if you look at it carefully, is a very primitive system of understanding. It has only two alternatives-instead of millions, a number that characterizes the complexity of the ecosystems that science has revealed to us.

The multiplicity of options our study has unveiled in the realm of physical reality has made possible the proliferation of our proudest achievement-technology. We are so enamored of the miraculous power technology has given us, we can’t stop watching the thrill of it erecting and exploding things. There’s strong evidence that we would prefer to be a machine in order to give us superhuman strength. In a sense we’ve all become computer nerds in order to occupy and master what many regard as the brain-god of the future.

Meanwhile back at the farm, psychology-actually psychotherapy, the best laboratory for the study of the human psyche-continues to unravel the mysteries of psychopathology. In our private thoughts, and sometimes within a social context, we fully accept the guilt of this negatively charged concept of human nature, while we also strongly resist it openly being applied to ourselves. So which view is true?

The answer is perhaps a mixture of both perspectives, meaning what we’ve discovered in psychopathology is true about us, but on the other hand, these dysfunctional traits aren’t pathological, though they can be very painful and frightening. Is it perhaps normal to be, and do what for so long we’ve called crazy?

Lets consider this radical option and see where it takes us. What we discover immediately is that a remarkable man, a Princeton psychologist, Julian Jaynes, has been here before us. He proposed just such a theory in the 1970’s (The Origin of Consciousness), which asserted that prior to about 3000 years ago, the vast majority of humans hallucinated! If that is so, perhaps what we call psychosis, with its delusions and hallucinations, represent a normal stage in the evolution of the human psyche.

What Jaynes discovered both academically, and in his own life-he occasionally hallucinated, as do many non-psychotic humans-was that the human brain evolved to make hallucination very easily accomplished. Electrically stimulate the only connective tissue between the brain’s right and left lobes, and most people will momentarily be delusional or hallucinate. But for what purpose would nature play what seems, at first glance, to be such a dirty trick upon us? The answer is in order to be able to off-load much of human experience until it could be gradually understood and integrated into a more evolved mature psyche, capable of containing what, to an earlier human, was unimaginable.

Having lost the ability to hear commanding voices telling us to do what we could not internally comprehend, humanity suffered deeply for eons of time, revealing why oracles, the use of psychedelics and trances, for instance, were so terribly important to ancient civilization, and up to the present time, in our efforts to bring the voices back.

To illustrate what may well have been a gradual and painful evolution of psychic capability, consider just one concept it has taken humanity tens of thousands of years to evolve-democracy, in some ways that is still poorly conceived. This enlightened political idea failed to happen for so many centuries not because of oppression, as we normally assume, but because a sufficient majority of humans were not yet capable of assuming the responsibility-or even imagining it-of being sufficiently independent of the social matrix to presume to have a mind of their own, putting them at odds with, and outside their family or social group. Imagine the emergence of selfhood in a child growing up as a reenactment of that evolutionary process.

A second question emerges. If hallucination is an evolutionary part of human nature, then what psychic strategies followed it as a replacement? Total psychic maturity most likely didn’t follow immediately, and may never entirely be accomplished. The answer is to be found in today’s most-studied form of psychopathology-borderline personality, more accurately known as someone who employs dissociation.

Psychosis exists in a psyche unable to contain all of its personal experience as something, at least partially, originating from inside. Instead part of what that psyche is, feels and thinks must be heard and obeyed in large part as a command from an external source. In sharp contrast, dissociation is a psyche capable of containing much, if not all experience, but who is able to pay almost no attention to what is external. The severely dissociated personality operates instead from a made-up, pretended, personal fantasy system that makes it possible to live in what we like to call the real world, but to regard all external stimuli as completely unreliable, threatening and perhaps even deadly.

Whole societies, obviously of a very warring nature, have functioned in this way.

The psychopath is perhaps the best-known example of severe dissociation, as someone who appears utterly without conscience, meaning any regard whatsoever for anyone else. Though they pretend they do, becoming very skilled at appearing entirely sympathetic to others, but only in order to be able to entice them into being a pawn in their usually malevolent game plan-treating the world the way it treated them, as dog eat dog.

In general dissociation means literally to put out-of-sight, out-of-mind-the way we used to regard and treat children precisely because they are primitive in their function, and we didn’t want to be contaminated by this primitive content. Denial is one of the strategies of dissociation.

In the case of non-psychopathic dissociative personality, others don’t suffer; they do, very deeply. They have cut themselves off from the real world because the one they occupied as a child was so utterly mortifying, terrifying, and dangerous, that they could arrange to survive by occupying primarily their own fantasy/body system. They remain fiercely loyal to their family of origin, ironically by learning not to see this terrible villainy; only in their private fantasy world could they believe in an ideal loving space, turning what is malevolent into something holy. They may pretend the outside is safe, but they meet it with indifference.

Perhaps the best-known example of such psychic functioning is in the book, and then movie, I Never Promised You A Rose Garden. It’s a story of a very disturbed girl who lived honestly only in the company of her private invented gods. The extent, to which children will go to prove their parents are good and they are bad-to protect the connection envelope-is beautifully revealed in the movie, Ordinary People, where a young man attempts suicide in order to take personal responsibility for, and conceal his mother’s hatred of him.

There is evidence to suggest that dissociation may be a generic defense of all humans, more or less. Truth is we ignore most of the evidence that passes in front of our noses every day. It’s not because we’re bad. It’s because we haven’t learned to integrate it. By way of illustration, lets consider a piece of history that is not well known, which has to do with the enormous difficulty of achieving a more perfect democracy.

“The Constitution will inevitably produce an oligarchy.”

It was Thomas Jefferson who said this, following ratification of the Constitution. That’s when he wrote the Bill of Rights to counteract that eventuality, though historians don’t teach that. Much of the how of governing ourselves by direct-vote-a true democracy- is something we can’t yet even imagine.

At first Thomas Jefferson tried to insert into the body of the Constitution the convening of a Constitutional Convention every 25 years-every generation-to facilitate updating it. So what have we made of it instead? A sacred document that will never change; responsibility is indeed an awesome experience, intimidating to consider.

But we should not be discouraged. In spite of all our shortcomings, humanity continues, with much stumbling, to make progress. The fact is we have evolved probably far more than we realize. Taking just a small piece of that movement, perhaps the greatest achievement of the 20th century will be the discovery that war, as annihilation-what it’s always been within the limits of technology-is unwinnable. The Bomb taught us that. This has begun to lead us to the realization that war must become exclusively preventative, to stop conquest and racial extermination-in other words to exterminate itself. This could make it possible for centuries of peace ruled by democratic principles instead of by tyrants, who have brought long years of peace before, but only as absolute rulers. Such prolonged stable conditions are required if the human psyche is to grow significantly larger.

My additional works can be seen at this website: http://donfenn.com