Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
theory:secondary_worlds [18/02/2011 05:35] – admin | theory:secondary_worlds [05/04/2018 15:51] (current) – [Trauma] admin | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
====== Secondary Worlds ====== | ====== Secondary Worlds ====== | ||
- | These are the worlds that are created at points in our chronological life when we are forced, through an event, circumstance or a defining moment in our lives (usually trauma), to change our sense of being, our ontology ((The science or study of being; that department of metaphysics which relates to the being or essence of things, or to being in the abstract.)) to such a degree we can no longer be who we were. Metaphorically the boundary conditions (rules and structures) that made up and protected our Primary World have been broken. | + | ===== Introduction ===== |
+ | These are the worlds that are created at points in our chronological life when we are forced, through an event, circumstance or a defining moment in our lives (usually trauma), to change our sense of being, our ontology((The science or study of being; that department of metaphysics which relates to the being or essence of things, or to being in the abstract.)) to such a degree we can no longer be who we were. Metaphorically the boundary conditions (rules and structures) that made up and protected our Primary World have been broken. | ||
- | [[people:Donald Winnicott]] had his own idea about this concept. He said that when the environment impinges to this degree, it is an ‘annihilation of being’, hence that original ‘beingness’ can no longer ‘be’, and another has to take its place, one that has sufficiently developed to allow for this unpredictable event (impingement). | + | ===== Trauma ===== |
- | + | [[http:// | |
- | ;#; | + | <WRAP round notice 80% center> |
- | | + | “Trauma is an impingement from the environment and from the individual’s reaction to the environment that occurs prior to the individual’s development of the mechanisms that make the unpredictable predictable.” |
- | | + | </ |
- | ;;# | + | <WRAP centeralign> |
- | ((Boundary and Space (pg. 58) - (1967) ‘Clinical Regression Compared with Defence Organisation’)) | + | < |
- | ;;# | + | </ |
- | ;#; | + | |
At this moment of creation, a new [[theory: | At this moment of creation, a new [[theory: | ||
- | These Secondary Worlds then become ’Lost Worlds’, and our prior ontology (the beliefs and resources that used to be our Primary World) is held within them. It is as though the internal construct/ | + | These Secondary Worlds then become ’Lost Worlds’, and our prior ontology (the beliefs and resources that used to be our [[theory:Primary World]]) is held within them. It is as though the internal construct/ |
- | These Secondary Worlds contain the information that we need, and can be helpful to us in resolving the problems in the here and now. However, we do not have direct access to them, they are outside of our Primary World. | + | |
+ | These Secondary Worlds contain the information that we need, and can be helpful to us in resolving the problems in the here and now. However, we do not have direct access to them, they are outside of our [[theory:Primary World]]. | ||
+ | |||
+ | ===== Fragmentation ===== | ||
+ | Also held within these Secondary Worlds are aspects/ | ||
+ | |||
+ | During the journey of Emergent Knowledge these parts of us are given the opportunity to communicate through other channels, the semantics or words we use, non-verbal gestures, visual metaphors, somatics or feelings and the scribbling and drawings of the client. These younger manifestations of you are already indirectly communicating through these channels. In fact before Emergent Knowledge processing nearly all of our general communication is from these younger manifestations. | ||
+ | |||
+ | This concept of being ‘frozen in time’ makes perfect sense when considering the moment of trauma, because this younger you stays back in that moment just prior to the trauma as a natural defence against the trauma of an unthinkable anxiety, hence it is a way of relating to reality without betraying the ‘True Self’ or [[theory: | ||
+ | |||
+ | (see also [[theory: | ||
+ | ===== How Secondary Worlds Evolve ===== | ||
+ | We begin our life with our first [[theory: | ||
+ | |||
+ | Winnicott proposed that a baby has no distinction between itself and its environment (including Mother) during the first weeks of life, they are the same; the state of omnipotence continues but only intermittently, | ||
+ | |||
+ | However, there will come a moment when baby wants food. The baby makes all the successful noises and movements of the past, but food does not appear. The [[theory: | ||
+ | |||
+ | Here the baby is beginning to realise that it is separate from the external reality, it is becoming self-aware. Watch a baby observe and experience its own hands and feet as they move. The baby is becoming an individual, recognising there is an inside and an outside, with a limiting membrane in between (the skin). | ||
+ | |||
+ | This process of separation between the external world and the internal world is also a process of integration; | ||
+ | |||
+ | True integration is when the environment becomes permanently external; this is achieved once the individual has: | ||
+ | * Become orientated in 3D space | ||
+ | * A sense of finite time | ||
+ | * A sense of process | ||
+ | * A sense of scale | ||
+ | |||
+ | At this point we are fully aware of what is ‘Me’ and what is ‘Not-Me’. | ||
+ | |||
+ | The evolving state, where the environment has a positive reflection on the individuals [[theory: | ||
+ | |||
+ | Taking the Emergent Knowledge journey takes advantage of this potential for positive re-alignment in the [[theory: | ||
+ | |||
+ | At the point where the environment has a negative effect, i.e. impinges causing a defining moment, we can no longer be who we were as represented by our internal world, this is the ‘annihilation of being’ that Winnicott described. | ||
+ | At the defining moment, you lose both the original you and the worldview that contained that you; it becomes a Secondary World obscured and separate from the new Primary World, which has been born in the mind the very next moment. This new world begins developing again with a new you, as an observer; you have effectively split. | ||
+ | |||
+ | That previous part that was safe and secure stays behind in what is now a Secondary World preserving the ethos of that era, the safety and security that the younger you knew. The new part develops a ‘New World’ and a new you to try and be better fitted for the real world that now exists, after the defining moment. This new real world is now categorised and filtered by this new development. | ||
+ | |||
+ | As this new [[theory: | ||
+ | - One in whose mind this world was created and is now ‘frozen in time’ | ||
+ | - One in the here and now | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{ theory: | ||
+ | <WRAP centeralign> | ||
+ | < | ||
+ | </ | ||
+ | |||
+ | The consequence of this process is that we have a large part of our mental history and sense of being (ontology) unable to participate in the new world order. | ||
+ | |||
+ | These Secondary Worlds contain useful information and positive wisdom. However due to the structure of our model, the negative memory of that defining moment is having a greater impact (i.e. shielding us from the Secondary World) than the positive wisdom existing in the Secondary World. | ||
+ | |||
+ | This gets even more interesting when we consider that in our [[theory: | ||
+ | |||
+ | This positive wisdom then, is cut-off from us or shut out from us, this is the wisdom (knowledge) that we don’t have direct access to, as these Secondary Worlds lie outside the boundaries of our [[theory: | ||
+ | |||
+ | Each of these Secondary Worlds is controlled by a unique intelligence encased within, which is at odds with the Core or True Self of who we are today. This intelligence may come from several sources such as the younger fragments of ourselves, our ontological, | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{ theory: | ||
+ | <WRAP centeralign> | ||
+ | < | ||
+ | </ | ||
+ | |||
+ | There are two boundaries shown in Figure 5: | ||
+ | - One encasing the world we are now in | ||
+ | - One that defines the world prior to the one we are now in | ||
+ | |||
+ | After we have given up this Secondary World, or in some cases had it ripped away from us, it becomes a ‘Lost World’ and the you that is held within calls out; he/she begins to perpetually communicate to the outside world, until the message is listened to and understood. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Here we present some examples of the language people use to describe an emotional experience of when this occurs: | ||
+ | |||
+ | * “I was beside myself with rage.” | ||
+ | * “I was out of my mind with worry.” | ||
+ | * “She made me feel like a child again.” | ||
+ | |||
+ | In the first two of these statements there are two I’s, one that is experiencing the rage or worry and is outside of the second I in the here and now. Note the association into the state of ‘rage’ and ‘worry’ and the spatial dissociation from ‘myself’ and ‘my mind’. | ||
+ | |||
+ | It may be useful to construct this as an I existing in the [[theory: | ||
+ | |||
+ | In the last statement, the client has associated back into the child’s world, within their body. In this state they may be feeling small, out of control or even humiliation. This is an example of when our internal world is incorrectly scaled to the real world. | ||
+ | |||
+ | A figure of speech used by a person to describe their experience is thus translated literally into its metaphorical equivalent. | ||
+ | |||
+ | ===== A Client Example ===== | ||
+ | Here is an example from one of my clients; who was experiencing problems of insecurity and embarrassment, | ||
+ | |||
+ | Taking a Journey with Emergent Knowledge we discovered an early Secondary World where he had just joined a new school in the middle of the school year. In the school assembly a question was asked of all the children, which he couldn’t answer but he joined in and held up his hand anyway, to fit in; all those children with their hands up had to go to the front of the hall. He was confused as to why he was there; he was anxious about what would happen and as he began to blush and his safe and secure world broke apart, the teacher stood in front of him, towering over him. Demanding an answer as to why he was there, an answer that he didn’t have. | ||
+ | |||
+ | It can be seen how the feelings held within this Secondary World are currently showing up as problems in the [[theory: | ||
- | Also held within these Secondary Worlds | + | ===== Where The Knowledge Resides ===== |
+ | When we are discussing our problem from the you in the [[theory:Primary World]], it is not that our perception of the problem is wrong; it’s just that it is irrelevant. When a facilitator is asking questions like “How do you feel about …?” they are of no or very limited value to the client, because that you in the [[theory: | ||
- | During the journey of Emergent Knowledge these parts of us are given the opportunity to communicate through other channels, the semantics or words we use, non-verbal gestures, visual metaphors, somatics or feelings and the scribbling and drawings of the client. These younger you’s are already indirectly communicating through these channels. In fact before Emergent Knowledge processing nearly all of our general communication is from these younger you’s. | + | next --> [[theory: |