Why Is THIS So Catchy?

2024 Author: Harry Day | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-17 15:43

We all influence others and they influence us. This is clear. But there are especially striking cases. Extreme, so to speak. There are three degrees of them.

1) Something is happening that tickles the nerves. If only not to look in that direction!

2) The feeling that you are under a source of heavy radiation.

3) The action is captivating and you no longer belong to yourself.

Then we really want to understand what is “wrong” with us or with others. This need for understanding (namely, the need for partial protection from reality) is actively speculated on. Promising "secrets" and "tricks."

And the reason is always the same - a misunderstanding of Oneself. Not their mistakes (which they speculate on), but their human and personal structure.

That which sharply clings to us (even if we do not even seem to show) - also mirrors us. This is a reflection of parts of our psyche. We will always go again and again to the performance in which we saw ourselves. Whether we agree with this or not.

It seems to us that this play is not at all about us, because our consciousness is protected. This is a defense by the method of projections and partial understanding (relatively calming) - in which there is no direct evil, but there is self-restraint and unpredictable consequences. The mental impulse is thus transferred from oneself to another or to activity (the investigation of what is happening, for example) and consciousness suffers much less.

The trick is that the psyche is constantly striving to return to consciousness everything that it has. And consciousness seeks to push out parts of the psyche as unbearable. The multidirectional movement of energy is the cause of neurosis. The "victory" of the psyche over consciousness is either a breakdown in adaptation (temporary "victory"), or a borderline state (partial "victory") or psychosis (complete "victory").

Even if we try our best not to cling, but to quickly pass by something and throw it out of our head, IT beckons us to return to what was thrown out, and have at least indirect (through another) contact with it.

The other one who hurts us with his presence or absence, about which we often annoyedly remember, which influences us unpleasantly, we all the time try to explain it to ourselves - is he doing this to us or is it we created it for ourselves, as the author of the play creates her images?

If we are emotionally strongly involved, we cannot forget something, it infuriates or delights us, we want to understand what it is and why it behaves with us in this way?

All these questions mean that this is a part of me invisible to me.

I know this explanation doesn't help much. Therefore, I will give a methodology. And if you have courage and curiosity, you can practice it.

Methodology.

Imagine yourself in the place of the person influencing you.

Try very hard to do it. Put on his costume, his face, take his pose, walk through his mise-en-scènes. Feel yourself "in his shoes."

Did you feel it? How do you like it?

I dare to assume that the sensations will be sharp. Something like horror, pain, envy, greed, madness, delight, or rage. Or cloudless heavenly happiness, and longing that "this is not mine on all counts." And also categorical: "This is not about me!". Or pleasure: "Well, finally I found a part of myself!"

Let's repeat the technique.

Here you imagine yourself in the place of this person who strongly influences you.

Here you fantasize yourself "in his shoes."

And here are your vivid feelings. Catch and remember them. These are your repressed feelings of self, which for certain reasons (experienced strong fear, shame-guilt, prohibition, impossibility) turned out to be not yours. You have them, but you don't have the feeling that they are yours.

This is easily seen in the example of money or sexual desires.

If there is a prohibition on owning money, then wealth becomes an obsessive topic or stumbling block (which the prohibition will always be) - money is worth a lot in life, you constantly think about it. At the same time, you can be both fabulously rich and extremely poor! And other rich people (even the rich) evoke strong emotions: envy, delight, hatred, worship.

If this is the case with you, then it remains to decide what role of money do you define, and not your fixation on this topic?

If the ban is really lifted - alas, wealth will not come from this - but the ability to notice something else in your life and become much happier and more free will most likely arise.

About hypersexuality (obsession with the topic of sex) or now fashionable (which does not allow many to sleep or eat) homosexuality - you can think in the same way, as a result of fixation when it is impossible (forbidden) to have something from the field of pleasure simply and without problems. Then you constantly want it.

Sexualization of behavior usually speaks of a lack of experience of acceptance, love, and the ability to calm down with close contact with another. That is, again - about the prohibition (or impossibility) of the usual and banal bodily and emotionally good experience of intimacy.

More difficult - with dignity and trust and safety.

We are bribed, plunged into envy, or outraged to the point of wanting to humiliate them by people with a sense of their own dignity, IF we have a problem with this feeling. For the same reason, we strive to praise others.

Moreover, we basically invent all their qualities (both strong and weak).

We can also envy or resent trust and safety. For example, someone's frivolity and the simplicity of his life. Often - having invented all this for himself, that is, finding it inside oneself, assigning it to another - and criticizing recklessly. We can ridicule or despise someone's courage or cowardice (again, using our imagination). To elevate the brave or paranoid to the rank of idols (assigning these qualities to them as ideal!). But our active emotional involvement, the connection of fantasy and our activity in its development - will be evidence of our unmet needs for trust and security.

With charisma, too, everything is the same.

If we have the experience that we are not seen and heard, that we are nothing of ourselves, then we so want to join a bright and loud personality. Create an idol for yourself and worship him. Or humiliate and overthrow the created idols, experiencing the triumph of the winner. Or surround yourself with an even more gray mass and contemptuously condescend to its level, complaining that you have to deal with this bottom, continuing to change nothing. But all this will be the same - a reflection of myself and the fantasy that this is not about me, but about them.

These will all be fantasies. The beginnings and basis of creativity!

What grabs us to the living and what we persistently surround ourselves with (ideas, people or things) are all reflections of the affected parts of our personality. Otherwise, they would not have attracted and disturbed us so much. We would not have fallen in love with them, not admired or extolled them. We would not want to hate and destroy them. We could look at it from the outside, like a painting or a theater, with interest and sympathy. But we can't. Because IT is under the skin.

And no matter how sad it is, the chance to see yourself in the production is possible only when IT stops playing the notes, abandons us, leaves, refuses us, acts in its own way, does something completely different from what we expected from him, hits us in the very heart, giving us grief and disappointment. True, he can immediately be assigned the role of "evil".

But if you really wake up from fantasies, then it turns out that the significance of this person (or idea) is my creation, and therefore, in the image and likeness, all that I saw in him (and even remember all his hostile or commendable actions) is I AM.

The projections always collapse painfully. We assigned a person to one role in our life (so that he would play our repressed part for us) - and he, an ungrateful and vile traitor, threw out a trick that completely does not correspond to what we expected of him.

And I have to admit that I created this image for myself, from my own almost rib. And he is an apostate, he got his opinion and decided to live his life. Who is he? Get out of paradise!

And now the myth is gone. These stupid nonentities do not exist, there are no hostile persecutors, there are no omniscient, pure and infallible mentors-teachers, there is no support and support. Burst and deflated. There is only my vulnerable, lonely, needy and striving for the unattainable personality.

The actors are fired with a crash and dispersed to their usual household chores. The idols are overthrown. Passions have subsided. The director is sad and bored. Will he find himself a new troupe of projection puppets or will he draw his own creative and nurturing attention?

The ability to fantasize and imagine - where will we direct it? - On the creation of enemies and idols, on the search for support or evil in others (continuing to split off his parts from himself) or on the improvement of himself (restoring his human nature and caringly treating it)? The question of the survival of humanity, actually.