Love is a hormonally modulated binding between two individuals that
ranges from mild through obsessively overwelming and affects
emotional responses. The typical lifespan is measured in years
although decay does occur and reinforcement as well. The mind is
mostly capable of managing the effect but the emphais is on mostly.
In fact is often welcomed and nurtured.
Understanding also that all decissions made by the human animal have
an emotional loading in order to drive decissions it is no surprise
that this is at the center of much of human interaction.
The one aspect of love that is poorly understood is that its initial
impact comes as a sudden surprise, welcome or not and thus we have
the pressing need to define the disease and understand symptoms
because it does behave as a disease rather than a personal choice.
That is certainly true for the first time after which the victim
resolves his or her response and understanding and becomes careful in
his or her dealings that may lead to a similar impact.
Thus we learn of many marriages in which the partners grew to love
each other from often fuzzy beginnings.
I do not know how our society will make out except that it is now in
flux. My own agenda to develop the natural community would
completely resolve all those remarked issues but that is still the
future which can not come fast enough. In the meantime folks are
figuring things out on the fly and finding their own way through and
home.
I know that I am also one of those and so are you.
What is Love?’ –
Why We Need to Reframe the Big Questions
September 5, 2014
Marion McGunnigle
Sometimes, I come
across a piece of information, a statement or happening from
around the world that knocks me for six. An event that signals the
direction in which humanity is heading. The sort of harbinger that I
like to imagine Orwell, Huxley or Bradbury used as inspiration. While
the media fixes its lens firmly upon the latest war zone, little
alarm bells are ringing in our living rooms.
The Crisis
Of what crisis do
these alarm bells warn? Put simply, it’s a breakdown of
human communication. Evaporating emotional intelligence. You’ve
heard it before, but consider it’s impact. It strikes at the core
of our being and leaves us resorting to harmful coping mechanisms.
Evidence suggests a growing trend towards people intellectualising
their emotions instead of feeling them.
The therapists and
healers among you will know this is old news, but it’s a neurosis
that’s rapidly evolving.
And then the
Divorces. In 2009, The Guardian reported a growing number of US
Lawyers claiming Facebook [is} a top cause of relationship
trouble. "We're coming across it more and more. One spouse
connects online with someone they knew from school. The person is
emotionally available and they start communicating through Facebook,"
said Dr Steven Kimmons, a clinical psychologist and marriage
counsellor at Loyola University Medical Centre near Chicago.[1]
Are they really
emotionally available or using Social Media as a means of escape?
The next time you are
in a restaurant where couples are dining of an evening, have a look
around and count how many are actively engaging with one another.
When they stare into their smart phones instead of one another’s
eyes, does that signal a healthy connection to social media and work
commitments?Perhaps their relationship is unfulfilling and
connection to the tablet or phone seems a fair substitute.
However, is the permanent connection to the internet actually causing
their relationship issues?
Have they ceased to
communicate with one another on a heart level?
Although we use the
term more loosely today, Freud first
theorised intellectualisation as a psychological defence
mechanism used by humans to avoid emotional pain. The interesting
point here is that unlike rationalisation, intellectualisation is a
pseudo-rational justification of irrational acts.[2]
We need only witness
the demonisation of entire nations to glimpse these psychological
mechanisms at play. While dehumanisation lies at the far end of the
spectrum, emotional absenteeism is the thin end of the wedge. It’s
a horrible, barren human interplay that has emeshed with family
dysfunction over many years. Smart gadgetry has recently been
identified as the new agent of this dysfunction.
Historically it was
the misuse of alcohol and drugs.
The crucial
distinction is this: Substance abuse ultimately kills both
human spirit and human bodies. Gadgets can keep us alive,
merge with us, make our lives more convenient until we’re pushed
onto the threshold of transhumanism. So convenient that our
opportunity to feel human emotion is removed. But the need is still
there. So convenient that the sacred journeying of human existence is
eliminated. But the child is still within.
I’ve had many
conversations with people at dinner parties, networking groups or
with friends on the topic of emotional dysfunction. I found it
striking that so many have discussed the trauma of being raised in an
emotionally barren family. Struggling for years to maintain the false
construct of their lives, they finally “cracked” around their mid
thirties, and ran from the rat-race at one hundred miles an hour.
Straight into the consulting room of a therapist.
I’ve heard it so
many times, it’s almost a rite of passage. But are we repeating the
same destructive pattern with the younger generation?
Alarm Bells
On 26th August 2014,
The Independent reported on a recent experiment carried out by
scientists at the University of California, Los Angeles. That
study suggested that a heavy use of screens from a young age may
be impairing children’s ability to develop social skills.[3]
“The study,
published online in the journal Computers in Human Behavior, found
that a group of 11 and 12-year-olds who went five days without
looking at a smartphone, television or other digital screen became
better at reading human emotions than a group of their peers who
continued to spend hours every day looking at their devices.”
No surprise there
then.
I’ve also heard from
shocked friends and parents. A few have found their primary aged
child searching the internet using words picked up from the
playground. Words the parents didn’t think to block and filter.
Google can be a cruel teacher. This is not a reason for censorship,
however. It’s a wake up call to have a human conversation.
A recent party
political style video made as part of the Scottish Referendum
campaign depicted a mum stating that her kids “Never have their
heads out their phones.” Is this really the norm in today’s
society? It’s not in my household.
I believe humanity
becomes the product of its own behaviour. Sometimes it’s a good
thing. An athlete who trains daily for a long distance race calls it
discipline. For the person who has their behaviour modified through a
process of reward or punishment, until they associate an action with
pleasure or distress, it is conditioning. When an egocentric parent,
partner or sibling uses this tactic upon a subordinate to exclusively
further their own agenda, the seeds for emotional dysfunction are
sown.
When parents are
emotionally absent from their children’s lives, either through
alcohol, gadgetry, workaholism or keeping up with the Jones’, their
preoccupations ensure that they set the wrong example. They fail to
teach their children about feelings. They can’t show them what real
love feels like because they don’t know. Kids then look for
stimulation elsewhere.
In 2012, Google
announced the most searched for term by humans on planet earth that
year. There are over 2 Billion internet users, and those who used
Google in 2012 made 1,873,910,000,000 (One trillion, eight hundred
seventy-three billion, nine hundred and ten million) searches. [4]
For me, that’s an
unfathomable number of searches.
Even more
unfathomable, then, is Google’s revelation that the most searched
for term that year was:
“What is Love?”
Is that love as a noun
or a verb? The definition of an abstract concept is totally
different from human experience of it.
In seeking a
definition or explanation, we are looking outside of ourselves for a
the answer. How utterly bizarre to imagine so many souls across the
globe asking a computer, an electrified metal box, to define love.
That was the news that knocked me for six.
And herein lies the
problem with gadgetry and it’s harmful effects upon social skills
and emotional intelligence. My friend, Life Coach and NLP Specialist
Colette Reilly suggests the key to solving this problem lies in
reframing it. “The only way to find out what love is, is to have a
conversation with another human being. So, if someone asks, ‘What
is love?’, perhaps we should be responding with, ‘What is love,
to you’ and ‘How do you know you are loved?’ or ‘What makes
you feel loved?’”, Colette advises.
Marriage is a
commitment. A promise to nourish one another with our intentions and
our actions. It’s a promise to engage and support one another on
the human level, meaning heart as well as head. It’s practising
loving behaviour. It’s finding out what makes your partner and
family feel loved and contributing to that.
When humanity asks a
computer “What is love?”, I’m reminded of this line from Mary
Shelley’s Frankenstein, “With how many things are we on the brink
of becoming acquainted, if cowardice or carelessness did not restrain
our inquiries.”
So you don’t need to
ask a computer about emotions. And why wait until someone asks you?
Go, tonight, and ask your loved ones:
“What makes you feel
loved?”
I guarantee they’ll
put down their tablet or mobile, and you can start being human again.
About the Author
“Marion McGunnigle
is a Creative, an Alternative Thinker, Visionary Healer and Wedding
Celebrant living in Scotland. This article was originally posted on
Marion’s website marionmcgunnigle.co.uk”
References:
2. George E. Vaillant, Ego mechanisms of defence: a guide for clinicians and researchers (1992) p. 274
3. The Independent, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/parents-set-bad-example-by-staying-glued-to-smartphones-9689979.html
4. Google Annual Stats, http://www.statisticbrain.com/google-searches/
This article is
offered under Creative Commons license. It’s okay to republish it
anywhere as long as attribution bio is included and all links remain
intact.
No comments:
Post a Comment