Behaviors express needs? How about bullying?

MP shared this photo (and made this comment: “Yes, for all the children – all ages, even us when we are triggered and regress to age 2, 4, 6 – what lies beneath, fear, scarcity, loss of… the unmet need.”)

  • To the extent that behavior is an effect of a physiological condition, the #1 factor in behavior may be things like neurochemistry, which is itself a function of things like nutrition, pH (electromagnetic charge), hydration, and breathing. For instance, why do modern infants so infrequently sleep through the night? They have far inferior nutrition to many populations of “traditional cultures.”The same logic applies with veterinary science. If a lab rat is fed well, that ample nourishmenteffects all other behaviors. If a lab rat is not fed or is fed poorly, they may die or at least have greatly reduced endurance, coordination and cognition. By the way, in the image above, the item “am I nourished?” is listed.So, “comforting” an organism can produce an interruption to “unfavorable” behavioral patterns. However, to the extent that “comforting” does not address primary unmet needs, that may not be enough to make a “fussy” infant sleep well. You can also shoot them up with drugs to put them to sleep, but that will still fail to address nutritional issues.

  •  MP: Good one, when triggered the question is: is this emotions based, or is it a chemical imbalance? The Immediate switch to cognitive thinking disables the amygdala and sets up a different reaction. It becomes the opportunity to step out of victim mode, to empower the self and recalibrate the Self developing new pathways, and to shrink the triggered dendrite.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn In certain ways of labeling phenemenon, there can be a set of presumptions that are unexamined. We can set up an “either/or” presumption that (1) chemistry and (2) emotions are two entirely isolated realms, then ask “which one of those two is the cause of _____?” That may actually be an unexamined use of language.From a purely grammatical analysis, we can say “the Switch is the name of a living entity that produces results like the disabling of the amygdala.” Then we can say, “that Switch (to cognitive thinking) is the one that disables the amygdala. It is the Swtich (the one over there) which can empower the self (the one over here).”
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn So, if someone in my midst displays certain patterns of behavior that I could call distress, I could notice myself saying “I can feel the distress and I was very surprised about it, so I stopped focusing elsewhere because I was suddenly so curious about how we can learn from what is actually happening.” All of that is “suggestive.”I can also say “you are clearly possessed by the demon of a mental condition called Incurable Sincerity, type 3. After we do surgery to remove the demon from your mind, I have some pills for you which are very safe because they have been used for over 6 years with no major successful lawsuits yet against the manufacturer.” All of that is also suggestive.

    Speaking is always suggestive. There is no speaking that does not suggest a particular point of view. That is inherent in speaking.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn So, in my own experience, there are many ways to influence the behavior of others. That includes “getting someone drunk” as well as giving someone some cayenne pepper (like putting a small spoonful of it in to their mouth). Both are powerful interventions. Both produce consistent results.Most “civilized people” are notably undernourished relative to my standards of “optimal.” An example would be that the vast majority of teenagers lack the sufficient nourishment to develop a fully wide jaw, which results in painful crowding of teeth (which leads to surgical removal of “wisdom” molars) and also crooked teeth. Usingorthodontic manipulations to straighten the teeth does not provide the nutrition to create afully-grown jaw. So, the vast majority of people in our culture are “under-developed” in regard to narrow jaws and crowded teeth, even if theirteeths have been re-aligned by force and “look straight.”The mainstream culture may be obsessed with appearances and terrified of science and logic. The “war on science” and the “war on health” are not accidents. Further, because of the huge advances in technology and wealth, promoting personal health is not a priority for most people. If they ever need a new kidney, they hope that they can just get a “free” one from the insurance company, right?

    So back to the managing of human resources, when a herd of organisms is being managed by a bureaucrat, the bureaucrat is attentive to their own guidelines and short-term results. Their caseload may not correspond to studying health or focusing on individual cases and long-term results. Their job is may be to make measurements of the organisms and sort the organisms, then implement other interventions such as to prevent certain results amongst “high-risk” organisms.

    A parent can say to a public school teacher “I wish that the system was how it should be, which is obvioulsy not how it is.” A teacher can say in repsonse, “yes, and I think it is all because of the Switch, which resulted in the disabling of the other thing.”

    Isn’t it odd to say “this system is not designed to produce these results?” Of course the results of a system are always a perfect match for it’s design. Statements about “intention” are often rationalizations and promotional propaganda. If you are interested in what a system is designed to do, just look at what it does- measure the results.

    If you only use the measures that the system itself uses, that is not measuring the system. That is applying the system.

     

  •  MP: Thank you For your share and your commitment to clarity and a deeper appreciation for what lies beneath, hugs
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Appreciation is close. Respect & courage are big too. You wrote at the very top “for children of all ages.” That is an important note. I can label something “misbehavior.” Why? I may “need” to! My “needs” are what result in this social behavior now of typing (and my needs structure the specific usage of language).

    Some people experience a “need” to define some pattern as “wrong” and then focus on preventing it or interrupting it (if perceived as present). That can be defining the behaviors of others as wrong, like “stop bullying or else I will spank you and then make you hold a humiliating sign on the street corner!”

    That can also be defining some aspect of reality as wrong, like “parents should never give a preference to one of their children over the others.” The main problem with an ideal like that is that no one really believes it. Of course we give preference, like taking one child to the emergency room even if it means waking another child up abruptly and tossing them hastily in to thecarseat. The shifting preferences are totally natural.What ends up happening is that people may “need” to operate from a conversation for shame. They go around looking for what to shame: “did you see the horrible thing that one government was doing in 1942? Did you hear about the horrible thing that Obama said about Robin Williams? Did you know that one of my new puppies peed on the floor AGAIN yesterday?”

    They may “need” to wave their grief around like a flag. They manifest a social behavior related to explorations like “who can bear my grief with me? Who can give me validation?”
    Of course grie*f (disappointment, sadness) can be repressed and then explode as a grie*vance (rage, resentment, frustration, etc). Of course grief can be admitted openly and expressed as a fear about the future (which is not so much the root of grief as an actual definition of grief).
    Why does an infant cry? For help! That is the basics of grieving. The infant is frightened or otherwise has some sense of “unmet need” (like seeking the relief of having the sponge of cold urine removed from their crotch).This is not even about humans. Once we can see the veterinary simplicity of these issues, we can avoid the common antagonisms of grieving people who invest time in arguing about “the right way that all those other people 1,000 miles away should be parenting their kids.”

    People can campaign for the latest political salvation. Often, grievances and grief is the root of their campaigning. The other popular reason for campaigning is “for-profit campaigns” like when a group hires lobbyists to get some government to give them an annual cash flow of $500,000,000,000. When “for-profit campaigners” can enlist a huge mass of “emotionally-driven” campaigners, that can dramatically improve the results of the for-profit campaign.

    “I need to feel like my life has real meaning.” Really? Not false meaning, but real meaning, right?

    That is not regression to an infantile or animal state. That is not even true at all. It is just repeating some slogan in language. It is totally a pretense.

    When people are avoiding their own grief, they “need” strategies to maintain the suppression. I personally have never felt any grief, so please understand that I am just repeating something here that I was taught in a room full of people once. Everyone clapped for me when I stood up and repeated the popular slogans.

    “We’re all in this together!” Then we all dispersed and several years later we occasionally interact on facebook.

    What really bothers me though is that other people grieve. Isn’t that just some kind of immature regression? That is why I do not even like those people. They are not how they should be. Oh, plus they saw me grieving once and I am just not that kind of a person.

 

Advertisements

Tags: , , ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: