I'm loving graduate school and one of my classes is Loss and Grief. Recently we reviewed styles of attachment which can influence how a person handles loss. But before going into that, we learned about how early experiences, especially those before the acquisition of language at around 2 years, become "implicit memories" stored deep within the psyche in the amygdala of the hippocampus, part of the limbic system and located in the midbrain. These deep, pre-verbal memories, consisting mostly of sensations, have profound effects on our experience in the world, including influencing our perceptions and what we believe to be possible.
Developmentally, during these first few years, there is no differentiation (sound familiar?). Children's experience of reality is non-dual and completely contiguous. There is no separate "me" yet. Some consider when children first refer to themselves as "I" as the birth of the ego and dualism, at about 3 years. If parents are able to meet most of the infant's needs most of the time (perfection isn't necessary), then this creates positive implicit memories which serve as an excellent resource the child can later draw on the rest of their life.
Attachment styles are also established early, about this same time. There are four attachment styles, according to Wallin, including secure, insecure/avoidant, insecure/ambivalent and disorganized. As is typical when learning new psychological theories, I found aspects of myself that fit into each category (which is a common way to integrate new information).
These four types were defined through objectifiable behavior, by having the mother and toddler enter a room with a stranger (the tester/observer) and some toys. The observer would record how the mother interacted with them, with the child, how the child responded to the toys and the stranger as well as their overall behavior throughout. At some point the mother would leave, stay gone for a short while and then return.
For the purpose of this article, let's focus on the behaviors of a secure attachment. The child would explore freely, taking note of how the mother responded to the stranger. In the secure attachment style, the mother was usually appropriately friendly with the observer so the toddler was also free from concern. While the child might express the whole range of emotions, including crying when the mother left, the loss was not overwhelming and they would be able to calm themselves and play. When the mother returned, the child would express happiness at seeing her, they would embrace and then the child would return to playing with the toys.
Basically the theory is that people with a secure attachment style experience the full range of emotions and they are able to cope with loss, hardship, or even death, without being overwhelmed. They are able to find the resources and support they need to move through whatever challenges they are presented with.
Here's something that surprised most of us in class: 45% of the general public have secure attachment styles! We thought that was high, perhaps because, as social workers, we focus on solving problems and so get too "problem" focused. After thinking about it for a while, I really liked the implications of 45% having secure attachments in their lives.
This means that almost half of us have implicit memories of God as Ain Sof, of Adam Kadmon and of Keter. Which makes sense of how these experiences are difficult to put language to, being based in experiences we had before we were verbal. I believe this could also have positive implications for ours, and other Kabbalistic, path(s) attracting more followers. There are a lot of folks out with the potential for--or who have already experienced--gnosis!
No comments:
Post a Comment