Anger, Blame, Guilt and Sorrow:
by David Brazier
This paper is concerned with the ways in which people respond to change, conflict, threat and hurt. It considers the proper place and function of "negative" emotions and the role of therapy in helping us to learn from them. It draws on the authors practice experience and upon the theory of humanistic, analytical and phenomenological psychology, both western and Buddhist.
INEVITABLE SUFFERING
a) A culture of repression:
In this life we all experience frustration, loss and injury. Our culture, however, does not provide us with very reliable ways of coping with these events. The culture of the personal growth movement offers some alternative approaches but these too seem often inadequate to the task. Neither the doctrine of the stiff upper lip nor that of letting it all hang out seem to do full justice to our needs.
Every society encourages some emotions and discourages others. A great deal of effort can be expended on "impression management" (Goffman 1959). Keeping face can be even more important in some other cultures than in our own (see eg Doi 1986). In our society, anger, blaming, guilt and sorrow are generally regarded as negative states and discouraged. Although the Victorians believed in the stiff upper lip and the maintenance of proper decorum by the imperial race, it was probably the experience of the first world war which led to the general adoption by people in Britain of a policy of keeping emotions hidden. In a situation in which everybody had lost someone, one person's weeping could bring everyone to tears. People learned to bury their feelings in order to get on. This is understandable. The cost of such repression to individuals can, however, be high if it is sustained without respite. Emotional wounds may be kept out of sight but in that condition they do not seem to heal very well and people who have nursed their hurt for many years may suffer a great range of psycho-somatic disturbance. Also, repression does not eliminate, merely remove from consciousness.
Jung showed through his studies in word association and later through dream analysis that repression creates a "shadow" consciousness where the thoughts and feelings which one is unwilling to accept nonetheless continue to exercise an unrecognised influence over one's behaviour, relationships and decision making. "The shadow consists of those psychic qualities which, because of their incompatibility with conscious values and goals, have been denied a place in the person's consciousness. These suppressed aspects of personality must be integrated with the rest of the personality if we are to become the authentic and whole persons that we should be" (Benner 1988, p56)
Psychological repression in our society also owes something to the rise of science. There is a widespread belief that pain, discomfort and trouble are unnecessary and that when they occur it is because something has gone wrong. Showing a negative feeling thus becomes an admission of failure. In our materialistic society we believe that the answer to all problems is a material one. And when things are not going as they should, science even provides pills to help us repress the unwanted feelings which arise. Science and technology are expected to be able to put everything right. Of course, this is a delusion.
Perhaps this delusion is beginning to fade. We are perhaps beginning to be a little disenchanted with the mirage of endless comfort which modern civilization seemed to promise. Fortunately or unfortunately science has not eliminated distress. It has given us many good things and we can enjoy no longer having to live in hovels but it has not stopped people from quarrelling nor has it stopped them from dying. Rather it has given us a larger range of ways by which we may die and more things to quarrel over. It has eliminated some diseases and created others. It has given us bombs as well as washing machines. Compared with life in third world countries we all live better than kings, yet, on the whole, we are no happier. The materialist approach brings some tangible benefits but does not solve the problem of human misery.
Essentially, the materialist approach consists of believing that all will be well if only circumstances change. This doctrine is faulty on a number of counts. Firstly, the world is not so constituted that a change of circumstances - any change of circumstances - will yield enduring satisfaction. Secondly, it is change itself which is the trigger for most of our misery. Thirdly, the very idea that there is some other better place or time than this one is itself an idea which causes distress.
More recently a different idea has come to the fore. If repression does not work then the answer must be to become self-expressive. This is the idea that is commonly found in growth groups. There is no doubt that for a person who has repressed feelings for many years to have an opportunity to express them in circumstances which provide safety can be immensely healing and this is an important aspect of psychotherapy to which this paper will return later. On the other hand, there is also undoubtedly something wrong with the extension of this into a doctrine of selfishness in which individuals feel they have a right to special consideration at all times. It simply is not possible for everybody to have the largest slice of cake.
Continue reading "Anger, Blame, Guilt and Sorrow ~ Dharmavidya David Brazier" »