I have to accept this as a viable view for someone who has developed along this path but to me it assumes a lot and begs a few questions, if I might be so bold.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by happy soul
Scott Peck said in The Road Less Traveled, 'Love is separateness.'
The philosopher Soren Kierkegaard said that the more one sees another as an extension of themselves, the further they get from love. He said that one's spouse should be seen primarily as their 'neighbor,' rather than as something that's THEIRS, as something that 'belongs to them.'
|
Things have moved on a lot with developments in euroscience and acknowledgement of the "social brain" by what's so far known of the social synapse. There's much evidence to support the idea, e.g. mirror neurones. So, yes, it's fine to say that in some cases people see others as extensions of themselves but it depends on the interaction and what's commonly called "personality types." I've encountered confronters who are no way extensions of myself, sometimes forced upon my by things like business; or blokes whose agendas are, let's say, a little too transparent. Once you move beyond one-to-one encounters the idea doesn't work well - a group. However, for a few people the author's idea no doubt holds.
Quote:
|
When we see others as extensions of ourselves, we often mistreat them. Romantic partners often disrespect and attack each other. Parents often mistreat their own children in ways they'd never mistreat a child who isn't 'theirs.'
|
If that's the case for this author it's his way but isn't for me. Agreed about parents mistreating their children...sometimes....but I'd suggest that a special case as are bosses.
Quote:
|
Most people with mental illnesses have this problem. They see others as extensions of themselves rather than as separate individuals. This lack of a healthy sense of separation may originate from poor brain health (the brain can function in a way that creates a lack of healthy separation), never having separated from one's mother, traumatic abuse in childhood, or lack of love (when the person just doesn't have much love in their heart).
|
To me, a precarious supposition in many ways. It relies on definitions of mental illness and at what point ordinary discernment or rebellion becomes mental illness. The term itself is questionable. There are plenty of people on this forum with mental problems but we'd hesitate to declare them mentally ill. Is someone turning to a spiritual life, avoiding social conditional where possible mentally ill...? because they're "not normal"
One has to be careful bringing the brain into it. Is it a flawed brain - damaged? Or chemical problems? - or is it the data; experiences yielding responses that don't correspond with conditioned expectations. Attachment is a feature of the "old brain" the limbic system whereas rationalising against it happens in a different part.
Quote:
It ultimately probably comes from a projection of one's relationship with THEMSELVES, and from a failure to sufficiently love oneself. Many people feel free to abuse and disrespect themselves because THEY'RE the ones doing it. But that's not self-love.
If you love yourself, then respect yourself, honor yourself. Don't feel free to attack yourself just because YOU'RE the one doing the attacking.
|
I'm never at ease with "relationship with oneself." nor "loving yourself." Even finding out about yourself without delusion can be a right problem. What do they actually mean? It would suppose there are two parts (at least) to an individual, joined by a functional link that somehow informs and/or regulates what's going on in the other part.
Is it, in simpler terms, what one thinks of oneself (which may not align with what one actually is)? Namely delusion, however slight.
As someone who feels individuality paramount and tries not to interfere at all with an individual during interpersonal congress (nigh impossible but one can tread as lightly as possible), other people are experiences. A developed awareness avoids any "regarding people as an extension of themselves" which is rather closed-minded, the province of people whose public front (ego, if you like) has deluded them into believing they're the centre of the universe - self-centtred. The open-minded person may feel the same but recognises they're but one of many universes.
Hence I have trouble with this viewpoint.
♥