Can We Speak Things Into Existence?

Part 4 on perceptions in the Spirituality Series

You can listen to the podcast of this article.

Perception leads us into the hard question of, “What does it take to be conscious?” That’s a section of the trail we’re on in these podcasts toward spirituality. I’m following the trail from the ground up, so to speak, so that we can properly separate the tangible universe from the spiritual.

This week I’ll reference several scholars and practitioners for whom I have high regard, and who have influenced my thoughts in cognitive science, psychology, and philosophy.

We’re continuing with Stevan Harnad’s elementary research into brain cognitive function to springboard into how we communicate with symbols. Human thought is higher level and able to deal with concepts and abstract thought, which is much more difficult for animals and computers. We’ll use this as a springboard into Eugene Gendlin’s work on symbols and felt meaning.

We also begin to look at the intriguing question, can we speak things into existence?

Image Speaking a New World Into Existence by Dall-e, informed by Internet images

Something funny about how we perceive each other. I found this on Psychology Today. Two psychotherapists pass each other in the hallway. The first says to the second, "Hello!"

The second smiles back nervously and half nods his head. When he is comfortably out of earshot, he mumbles, "God, I wonder what *that* was all about?"

Harnad found in his research of emotion's sensorimotor connection that a brain-body connection is essential to feelings. Sensory feelings and emotions help strengthen neural networks.

We all have experienced butterflies in our stomachs when we’re anxious, a hot head when we’re angry, a sinking feeling in our gut when situations look ominous. But are these things real?

These body feelings associated with emotion are real. A telling clue is that people who have had their spinal nerves severed or injured often lose some of their overall emotional response. The nerves of the Sympathetic Nervous System which enable our fright or flight response are part of the spinal cord.

If the spinal cord is severed, they have no pathway to parts of the body. The face is usually an exception because the nerves connect much higher in the neck. If the spinal cord is severed there, you are usually dead.  

Opposite the Sympathetic Nervous System is the Parasympathetic Nervous System, part of which is the Vagal nerve that leaves the spinal cord high in the neck and extends down through the face and into the abdomen. These nerves are how our brain regulates emotion, whether automatically or by choice.

This vagal nerve usually isn’t severed in spinal cord accidents. Both sympathetic and parasympathetic nerves exist in the face even after spinal cord injury. The parasympathetic nervous system balances against the Sympathetic.

Many nerves that are responsible for emotion are in our face and gut, the places where we show and feel emotion. PsychCentral gives examples of physical emotions in our bodies:

These feelings include anxiety, typified by a lump in your throat, churning stomach, trembling, dry mouth, sweating, shortness of breath, feeling weak or tense.

Anger which may be displayed as a hot or flushed face, clenched fists or jaw, shaking, jerky body movements.

Joy is euphoric, a feeling of lightness in your body, warm heart, “butterflies” in your stomach.

Sadness includes feelings of “heartache,” heaviness in your body, tightness in chest, fatigue, drooping face.

Shame makes our body display a hot face, lowered eyes, sunken body posture.

Fear. Well, jumping out of our skin maybe? It’s the fight or flight response.

The body also affects our emotions. Have you ever noticed that when your body is chilled and you are in a new situation, you feel anxious? This is an example of what you feel in your body, a chill, making your brain think you are anxious. The mind-body connection works both ways.

Another example is smiling. It changes your mood. When you smile you may become happier. This is especially true when it makes others wonder what you’ve been up to.

The amorous sensations are another example in touch, kissing, and sex. These physical things cause feelings of contentment, connection, and euphoria.

Examples of human touch are in the NPR broadcast. Human Connections Start With A Friendly Touch, on NPR.

Harnad’s work has implications about consciousness and about what it would take for computers to become conscious. These will be considered more in a later podcast.

Eugene Gendlin on words

We’ve been considering Stevan Harnad’s cognitive research which explains the underlying cognitive processes of basic brain function. He explains the brain-body mechanism. Harnad’s research is what we’ve been looking at.

Now we turn to Eugene Gendlin and his significant work. There won't be a test so you don’t have to memorize these names.

Gendlin was a philosopher who became a psychotherapist. He did advanced study with psychiatrist Carl Rogers who was a proponent of  client-centered therapy, AKA person-centered therapy, which brought a sea change to psychology and counseling. Rogers and Gendlin influenced each others’ thoughts.

Gendlin moves us towards understanding consciousness, how we assign meaning to words as we bring them into our brains, and how we think creatively based on our brain-body connection.

Gendlin is partly known for his book, Experiencing and the Creation of Meaning.

Have you ever had the experience of trying to express a feeling or idea with a word but just can’t think of the word. And you search and search and find there is no word? It’s meaning without a symbol to represent it.

While Harnad told us about the brain-body connection and how it is a key piece in the feeling of emotions, Gendlin took this a step further and related it to how we use symbols to represent meaning. Symbols are commonly words, since that’s how we communicate. But symbols can be anything such as words, things, behaviors, etc.

Meaning is felt in our bodies through experiences. This feeling, and the neural networks that go with it, are represented by symbols. Meaning is felt.

Some background about me is in order here

I’m not a clinical psychologist and never hope to be, so I’ll simply restate some of Gendlin’s findings. But first, note that I majored in psychology and religious studies. While the university was on a ridiculous behaviorism bent, I studied attitude change which at the time came from the field of marketing. Ha, ha! I used this in several fields of work to help individuals change and avoid faux pas, AKA foot in mouth disease, and in working with corporations to make necessary change.

My thinking about personality, meaning, morality, and communications was informed by the work of many psychologists, philosophers, and others who I list at the end in references.

I counseled as a pastor. I only work with psychosis as a frontline worker when people won’t go to a therapist. For example the person who thinks God hates them and reads the Bible in front of you spouting words that aren’t actually there, but has seen many counselors and won’t be returning.

I do it to get people to see a psychotherapist, or when a psychologist refuses to see them. It happens, especially when they are misogynists, or literally shoot themselves in the foot. Most counselors are women, so some may have difficulty working with misogynists.

No one appreciates that their client has a gun and shot himself in a rage. I hung around with a lot of clinical psychologists in professional groups. I was even once in a listserv group named after Anna Freud, Sigmund Freud’s daughter. She had passed by less than a decade.

This has been way too much about me – my fields are communications, attitude change, technology, morality, and spirituality.

Gendlin and bodily feeling in psychotherapy

Gendlin found something very revealing. Regardless of the theoretical orientation of a practitioner, also called a school of psychology, clients describe therapy as an ongoing felt physiological change. They understand it mentally and feel it physically.

A parallel example is, massage therapists may work with their clients to identify where stress physically manifests itself in their bodies.

Many psychologists have found, and I think Gendlin would have agreed, that the DSM-5, is a medical model that lists mental disorders as a way of billing insurance companies. Everyone is unique and their disturbance is unique to them.

But labels aren’t always bad. Often the ability to put a name to the disturbance helps the person focus on the specifics of their disturbance. This helps to clarify and increase the intensity of feeling so that it’s more able to be addressed.

Once again bodily feeling is very helpful in bringing a mental disturbance to the fore so that it can be addressed more effectively. The physiological change in feeling represents that the person has overcome what has been tearing up their lives.

Gendlin and science

Gendlin wouldn't describe people as having containers of problems. That’s more of a scientific description that isn’t applicable to behavior. People aren’t defined by their problems, nor do the factors that create a problem necessarily need to be extinguished. Our many experiences are learning that may be essential to our lives.

Problems are experiential and Gendlin saw people’s cognitive states as processes that weren’t static or fixed. I see people the same way, as processes.

Science can’t be extended to understand human behavior because it's very complex and individuated – no one has the same experiences or interpretations of their meaning, or can even communicate them using the same words.

The scientific method does not label experiences. Science is about fixed properties and about tools of observation of those properties. This applies only somewhat in fMRI studies of language.

In addition, concepts resist direct observation and measurement except in very rudimentary ways. There are no physical properties of concepts to measure. This is just as Harnad found that the brain labels concepts differently than more concrete things and works with them in the prefrontal cortex.

Just like in science, our human experiences, concepts, and behaviors are real and through psychoanalytic processes can be illuminated and dealt with.

Speaking things into existence

An intriguing notion is that we can speak things into existence. In framing this I’m reminded of Jesus' words about if you have faith enough you can move a mountain into the sea. So far I’ve seen hills moved but not mountains, so I have to assume he was speaking metaphorically as he often did.

Another way of framing this is the power of prayer. In reading scientific studies on this I concluded that prayer actually works except in the aed dying, where it mostly doesn’t. And I don’t think the very physical world is much altered by prayer. Those with calcium plaque in their arteries are much less likely to have it removed by prayer.  Prayer appears to affect living things such as bacteria and people. More studies need to be done.

The ancients believed that we speak things into existence. The writer of Proverbs said, “Death and life are in the power of the tongue, and those who love it will eat its fruits.”

Through our actions we change the world, and those actions are often in the form of words that persuade others. Ancient Bible thought said, “Give justice to the weak and the fatherless; maintain the right of the afflicted and the destitute. Rescue the weak and the needy; deliver them from the hand of the wicked.”” “I said, “You are gods, sons of the Most High, all of you; nevertheless, like men you shall die, and fall like any prince.”

“Whatever you ask in prayer, you will receive, if you have faith.””

This is a very intriguing idea that we are lesser gods. I think this speaks to the God within us aspect of our being, and to our creativity. As cocreators with God, we bring things into existence. It’s purposeful in that it applies to making our world a better place. And if we ask God we will receive what we ask for.

In more modern times people speak about manifesting what they want through mental visualization. Certainly the power of focus gravitates us toward people and opportunities that will bring what we want. There may be an underlying spiritual connection at work.

In very practical ways we do speak our world into existence. For example when someone tells another that they love them and want to be with them always, this opens up an entire new world. When someone asks for a divorce this also makes a major change in the person’s world, creating a very different world.

When someone announces they are going to college or trade school, new worlds open up for them.

When a jury announces a guilty verdict, they and the judge create a new world for the offender.

I believe that most people can create new worlds for themselves, even in prison. Some may be providentially hindered by circumstances from achieving exactly the world they envision. However, they can create a world in which they can achieve their personal growth objectives.   

None of these new worlds I mentioned are complete. They are simply spaces. In the next podcast I’ll talk about spaces and creating new worlds.

What does this mean to us?

We all can speak things into existence. We change the world with our words, which is incredibly important for us to realize. We need to understand the impact of what we say to others so that we don’t say hurtful things but help others.

Felt feeling has wide application in many fields including communications, education, and speaking things into existence. We’ll explore these in future episodes, Including the implications of felt meaning in oral communications such as business speakers, actors, pastors, spirituality, understanding meaning in life, and improving education, and speaking things into existence. And I introduce a new concept, spaces.

Thank you for reading my post. If you are intrigued by my posts, please subscribe.

Google Bard on Describing the neurology of felt feeling

The neurology of felt feeling is a complex and fascinating topic. It is still under investigation, but scientists have learned a great deal about how our brains process emotions.

The first step in the process is the thalamus. This is a small, egg-shaped structure that sits at the top of the brain stem. The thalamus receives sensory information from all over the body, including information about touch, pain, temperature, and emotions.

The thalamus then sends this information to the amygdala. The amygdala is a small, almond-shaped structure that is located deep in the brain. The amygdala is responsible for processing emotions, such as fear, anger, and joy.

The amygdala then sends this information to the prefrontal cortex. The prefrontal cortex is the largest part of the frontal lobe, which is located at the front of the brain. The prefrontal cortex is responsible for higher-order thinking, such as planning, decision-making, and social behavior.

The prefrontal cortex then integrates all of this information and produces a felt feeling. This is the subjective experience of an emotion, such as happiness, sadness, or anger.

The neurology of felt feeling is a complex and fascinating topic. By understanding how our brains process emotions, we can better understand ourselves and our relationships with others.

Here are some additional details about the neurology of felt feeling:

·         The amygdala is not the only brain structure involved in emotion. Other important structures include the hippocampus, the insula, and the anterior cingulate cortex.

·         Emotions are not just processed in the brain. They also involve the body's nervous and endocrine systems.

·         Emotions can have a powerful impact on our thoughts, behaviors, and physical health.

·         Understanding the neurology of felt feeling can help us to manage our emotions more effectively.

Reference – Dorian’s influences and pursuits

My thinking about personality, meaning, morality, and communications was informed by the work of psychologists Viktor Frankl (meaning), Rollo May (psychology and faith), Eugene Gendlin (symbols, communicating), Erik Erikson (developmentalist), William Glasser (reality therapy), Sigmund Freud (psychoanalyst), Albert Bandura (decision making research, social learning theory), Abraham Maslow (hierarchy of needs, social psychology), Jon Piaget (developmentalist, social psychology), Lawrence Kohlberg (Morality, social psychology), Sheila McNamee (social construction), Kenneth Gergen (social construction), Robert Neimeyer (constructivisim), Elizabeth Loftus (misinformation effect, false memory), James Fowler (developmentalist, psychology and faith), Lois Shawver (narrative and Postmodern psychology – we argued amicably), Carl Rogers (client-centered therapy), Jerome Bruner (meaning, social psychology), Gordon Alport (social psychology), Irving Janis (social psychology), Jeffrey Schwartz (neuroplasticity), Seph Fontane Pennock at Positive Psychology, Springtide Research Institute on young adult research, cognitive researcher Stevan Harnad, Semiotician and philosopher Umberto Eco (excellent writer), Philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein (symbols), Social Anthropologist William Ury (conflict resolution), Senator George Mitchell (conflict resolution), Michael J. Sandel (Justice), the fine folks at NICABM.com, and even B.F. Skinner. Skinner’s Operant Conditioning actually works. I can’t remember anything specific that these influencers said but they left an impact.

My point of reference is realism, pragmatism, post-Postmodern, nonlinear development, education, attitude change, conflict resolution, faith (former pastor-counselor), constructivist (constructivism, meaning), social (psychology), narrative (life stories, nonfiction and fiction writer), positive-realism (psychology), leadership, marriage enhancement guide, spiritual counselor (spiritual growth and process), focus group monitor, and a good listener who can’t remember names.

Attitude change is about moving willing people forward by overcoming their challenges and helping them define their goals (life coach, counselor). I have zero interest in clinical psychology but it keeps slamming me in the face as a frontline worker because so many people are affected.

A difficulty I see with Kohlberg’s theory is phrased on Wikipedia: “… growing empirical supports that individuals are more likely to use intuitive "gut reactions" to make moral decisions than use reason-based thought.” This is exactly what I see. I believe that the inability of New Adults to fully understand the repercussions of their actions until around age twenty-seven is partly responsible.

I also think that in our society individualism reigns and the examined life is fully out of fashion, even though there is deep spiritual hunger in this age fifteen to thirty group.

I see all of life, in that it was all created by God, as spiritual and to be engaged in and celebrated. The exceptions are when it harms ourselves or others. What those harmful things are is always debatable. Our expressions of love for all others are most relevant.

My experience in psychology tells me this: When people are ready to change, and have the capacity to change, just about any method will work to get them where they want to be. It might be magic sticks, a counselor with whom they have rapport, a meditative practice, a religion, a spiritual connection, a motivational speaker, or any other thing. But if they aren’t ready to change and don’t want to you can’t drag them with a dozen horses.

My pursuits are modifying the world through communications, technology, conflict resolution, life skills, and spirituality, so make it socially, educationally, legally, and economically just and equitable and able to resolve conflict, so that all people can progress in life to realize their full potential. I write mostly for New Adults age 15 to 30, and I research and write on all of these pursuits.

In technology I do engineering technology in broadcast, Internet, computer coding, residential and commercial building and inspection, and medical electronics.

In education I’ve done course development for major companies in technology, sales, and other fields as well as research into future education. I feature gaming techniques (not play) and timed reinforcement, as well as just making it interesting and challenging.

I’m a founding financial sponsor of Springtide Research Institute and TED Foundation (TED Talks, education), and a sometimes student at EdX. 

I find life and faith to be a wonderful mystery that varies in content for everyone, and find communicating with people to be a rich tapestry of challenges. Women are an even deeper unsolved mystery (I love to exaggerate our differences and help them achieve).

References:

PsychCentral on felt feelings

Human Connections Start With A Friendly Touch – NPR broadcast

client-centered therapy, AKA person-centered therapy

Rogers and Gendlin impacted each others’ thnking.

A difficulty I see with Kohlberg’s theory: Wikipedia