ah Reality is overrated. We think that we make decisions, but that statement is redundant. Do we think ever that is not decision? Is there a thought that is neutral and not a representation of a choice in-itself?
Well, most say no, that they don’t know what I’m talking about. And some say yes.
I’d say it’s both. We make decisions that are based in the decision that is us, is the individual. But in reality we don’t behave that way.
In truth, the individual has decided. But in reality we have yet to decide.
The issue for mental health seems to always side on what decision we are going to make now. Now that we come across some sort of mental thing, some anxiety or worry or bad relationship, what shall we decide, but more properly the question of effectiveness, and thus resiliency, is what are we able to decide.
We like to think that we decide about everything. But for some reason, especially when we’re anxious or depressed or have some sort of “mental issue” that we notice, it seems that our ability to decide out of the situation has been compromised.
It is interesting to me then that many mental health approaches seem to represent an orientation upon what the psyche is or what mentality is, and what might be healthy about it, and is always oriented in making a decision out of a condition of decision that has been compromised.
Of course, we have to start where we are at. And so the decisions, the real work, usually takes place by finding out where that ground of compromise is, what decisions we are able to make. And if we can come to that sense of agency, if we can find that level of ability to make a decision within that condition of a compromised ability to decide, then we work slowly to regain our self efficacy and mental health￼￼.
That is the overwhelmingly regular and usual method of any kind of therapeutic approach one will usually come across.
It is what we have to do methodologically, because we aren’t dealing with people usually who want to think about things philosophically.
For the practitioners, though, I like to think that education equals intelligence, but what are usually find, what I think we are finding more and more, is that intelligence and education really only have to do with real skills, and not so much with an ability to reflect upon one’s situation truly.
Nevertheless, I would ask into that approach from the standpoint of the practitioner, from one who is implementing a strategy towards mental health.
Perhaps what the compromise is telling us is that indeed there is some underlying substance that is prevented by the kind of resilience we are seeking when we are trying to achieve through the orientation that we have an ability to decide at some level or condition. ￼
I think this orientation, this real approach, would take the condition where we really have already decided, and move it or apply it to the “either or” situation that is so real, and then take it as a sign of existential futility or contradiction￼.￼￼ What I’m saying here is that most people who are oriented in the substance of reality would take the idea that I am already determined in everything that I do as an intellectual decision of futility upon the decisions one must make in real life.
But what I’m really saying is that the contradiction in itself is a philosophical fallacy, based in a real orientation upon things, and not from a true orientation. That From the orientation that reality holds all the cards, all the truth, every way of thinking that is rational and valid.
So in a way, I’m kind of pointing to the issue of mental health may be the inadequacy of our real conceptual models. The inadequacy of hanging on to a version of the human being in the world that is inadequate and basically faulty, and thus the preponderance of mental health issues in our modern society
Leave a Reply to landzek Cancel reply