View Full Version : Gabor Mate video - 2 minutes in length


SB_UK
02-23-15, 12:03 PM
- summarises my entire position.

(see link in Peripheral's post below)

mildadhd
02-23-15, 03:41 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Est6nay4Z5E


We see the world, not as it is, but as we are, or...as we are conditioned to see it.


THE MYTH OF HUMAN NATURE


In a society which is predicated on competition and a, really, very often the ruthless exploration of one human being by another.

The profiteering off other people's problems and very often the creation of problems for the purpose of profiteering.

The ruling ideology will very often justify the behavior by appeals to some fundamental and alterable human nature.

So the myth in our society is that people are competitive by nature and that they're individualistic, and that they are selfish.

The reality is quite the opposite, we have certain human needs.

The only way we can talk about human nature concretely is by recognizing that there are certain human needs.

We have a human need for companionship.

For close contact.

To be loved.

To be attached to.

To be be accepted.

To be seen.

To be received for who we are.

If those needs are met, we would develop into people that are compassionate and cooperative, and have empathy for other people.

So, the opposite that we often see in our society is in fact the distortion of human nature precisely because so few people have their needs met.

So yes, you can talk about human nature, but only in the scence of basic human needs that lead to certain traits, if they are met and a different set of traits if they are denied.



-quote by Gabor Mate M.D. (See opening post)



i!i i!i i!i

SB_UK
02-24-15, 09:45 AM
Thankks - just distributed

"Archelaus (teacher of Socrates) said 'the just and the disgraceful exist not by nature but by convention' **
Here's that basic idea brought up to date.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Est6nay4Z5E
** from Socrates by GCW Taylor.

mildadhd
02-24-15, 02:31 PM
Please point out any other mistakes I may have may have made. Appreciated

Edit: I made mistakes quoting in the post #2 quote by Dr.Mate

Please see corrections in red.




We see the world, not as it is, but as we are, or...as we are conditioned to see it.



THE MYTH OF HUMAN NATURE

In a society which is predicated on competition and a, really, very often the ruthless exploration of one human being by another.

The profiteering of other people's problems and very often the creation of problems for the purpose of profiteering.

The ruling ideology will very often justify the behavior by appeals to some fundamental and unalterable human nature.

So the myth in our society is that people are competitive by nature and that they're individualistic, and that they are selfish.

The reality is quite the opposite, we have certain human needs.

The only way we can talk about human nature concretely is by recognizing that there are certain human needs.

We have a human need for companionship.

For close contact.

To be loved.

To be attached to.

To be accepted.

To be seen.

To be received for who we are.

If those needs are met, we would develop into people that are compassionate and cooperative, and have empathy for other people.

So, the opposite that we often see in our society is in fact the distortion of human nature precisely because so few people have their needs met.

So yes, you can talk about human nature, but only in the sense of basic human needs that lead to certain traits if they are met, and a different set of traits, if they are denied.





By Gabor Mate M.D.



i!i i!i i!i

mildadhd
02-24-15, 10:13 PM
"..basic human needs.." (Dr. Mate)

Primary unconditioned emotional, homeostatic and sensory response systems?

(Common pre experience operating systems)

((Layman) Paraphrasing Dr. Panksepp)


Opinions?


P

mildadhd
02-24-15, 10:35 PM
So yes, you can talk about human nature, but only in the sense of basic human needs that lead to certain traits if they are met, and a different set of traits, if they are denied. (Dr. Mate)

Primary unconditioned emotional, homeostatic and sensory response systems + Experiences = Secondary and tertiary conditioned traits?

Learning please leave room for learning.


Opinions?


P

mildadhd
02-25-15, 01:23 AM
- summarises my entire position.



Great find, thanks

Also excellent example of some of our similar positions focusing on different levels of control.

Really helps!


P

SB_UK
02-25-15, 11:41 AM
Primary unconditioned emotional, homeostatic and sensory response systems?

(Common pre experience operating systems)

((Layman) Paraphrasing Dr. Panksepp)


Opinions?


P

Back around to avoiding distress ?
eg

emotional <- eg being psychologically bullied
homeostatic <- drinking concentrated glucose solution
sensory <- sitting next to a very loud siren

are all (di)stressful at the three levels above.

Not sure if there are any distresses which exist which don't fit into one of those 3 labels.

Basic human need - not to be (di)stressed.
Certainly not to be chronically distressed.

SB_UK
02-25-15, 11:44 AM
Basic message maintain physiology avoid pathophysiology.

mildadhd
02-26-15, 09:50 AM
(Deeply subcortical) Emotional, homeostatic and sensory, primary level of control.


(Upper limbic) Emotional, homeostatic and sensory, secondary level of control.


(Neocortical) Emotional, homeostatic and sensory, tertiary level of control.




(Layman) focusing on common early infancy bottom up basic primary states level of control first, please leave room for more subjective complex learning, thought, and top down regulation, etc.., at the secondary and tertiary process levels of control, as we experience and mature.






P

mildadhd
02-27-15, 12:18 AM
Basic message maintain physiology avoid pathophysiology.

:) :) :)

Avoiding distress.

Promoting eustress.

Negative primary feeling systems are good, even if they feel bad, if they promote survival.

Example

We would not survive, without primary RAGE (fight) or/and FEAR (flight) response systems.



Opinions?






P

SB_UK
02-27-15, 08:49 AM
:) :) :)

Avoiding distress.

Promoting eustress.

Negative primary feeling systems are good, even if they feel bad, if they promote survival.

Example

We would not survive, without primary RAGE (fight) or/and FEAR (flight) response systems.



Opinions?






P

Rage and Fear were useful pre-emergence of mind and pre-completion of mind.

But in a sensible world (it has to arrive at some point) - I don't know that there's anything to fear or get into a rage about.

Rather than calling 'rage/fear' bad - I'd suggest that an appropriately intelligent world wouldn't really call on them.

SB_UK
02-27-15, 11:37 AM
Let's say we were defined (ie our own mind) by a social program within a social global context (that is - the world outside of our body).
And let's say we were intelligent (just knowledge).

Is there anything in that world which'd cause rage or to make us fear ?

I'm looking more at a model where experiences vary in degree of majesty.
One experience may be nice, another great, another amazing, another never to be repeated - ie a form of existence where pleasure does not necessitate pain.

mildadhd
02-27-15, 10:49 PM
SB_UK

I agree with everything in this thread so far.

I am sure parts of the discussion will come around and meet somewhere, if not already.

I am only talking about the primary level of control, most basic psychological needs, to understand human nature better.

If I understand correctly one reason why human nature can be only be understood "in the sense of basic human needs", is because the complexity of higher MindBrain Processes are much more broad, making all these very important learned topics highly subjective and much harder to prove?

The CARE, GRIEF/PANIC and PLAY mammalian primary emotional response systems are more social, than the reptilian emotional response systems they are built upon.

So yes, you can talk about human nature, but only in the sense of basic human needs... (Dr. Mate)


"Basic human needs", need basic primary unconditioned operating systems.

Babies consciousness is primarily affective consciousness. (Feelings)

Babies completely depend on primary caregivers cognitive consciousness. (Thoughts)



Opinions?




P

SB_UK
02-28-15, 07:17 AM
"Basic human needs", need basic primary unconditioned operating systems.


That's good - I think I understand.

'Primary unconditioned' here relates to regulatory systems at the level of gene or neurone which are not negotiably required for human physiological function.

So

homeostasis -- level gene
sensory -- level neurone
emotion -- level above neurone (eg mind intervenes here)

So order - homeostasis first, sensory second, emotion third.

mildadhd
03-01-15, 08:42 PM
That's good - I think I understand.

'Primary unconditioned' here relates to regulatory systems at the level of gene or neurone which are not negotiably required for human physiological function.

So

homeostasis -- level gene
sensory -- level neurone
emotion -- level above neurone (eg mind intervenes here)

So order - homeostasis first, sensory second, emotion third.


Thanks!

"mind means experience" (Dr. Panksepp)

primary affects + early experiences (preverbal) = the foundation of the mind? (Leave room for learning, Need to study more)

"BrainMind" (bottom up)

"MindBrain" (top down)

Let me study about the basic evolutionary order of the homeostatic, emotional and sensory affects, at the primary level of control and come back to this question in future.


P

mildadhd
03-01-15, 09:01 PM
Primary affective states/processes level of control (deeply subcortical) + Preverbal experiences = Secondary (upper limbic) "implicit memory processes" level of control, in early life?

Opinions?



The implicit memory circuits carry the neurological traces of infancy and of childhood experiences.

Encoded in them is the emotional content of those experiences, but not necessarily the details of the events themselves that gave rise to the emotions.

There may be at least three reasons for this.

First, as we saw in the chapters on brain development, the infant's initial interactions with people are based more on feelings than on conscious awareness of the environment.

Second, the brain structures that encode explicit memory, or recall, develop later than those involved in implicit memory.

Third, emotions may have been disassociated or repressed even as the events that first caused them were unfolding.

No conscious awareness is necessary for the encoding of implicit memory, or for its being triggered.

A tone of voice or a look in another's eyes can activate powerful implicit memories.

The person experiencing this type of memory may believe that he is just reacting to something in the present, remaining completely in the dark about what the rush of feelings that flood his mind and body really represents.

Implicit memory is responsible for much of human behavior, its working all the more influential because unconscious.

Whenever we experience ourselves caught up in feelings that seem to overwhelm us, we are likely in the realm of implicit memory--as we also are when we find ourselves quite cut off from feelings.

"[The] implicit effects of past experiences shape our emotional reactions, preferences, and dispositions--key elements of what we call personality," writes Daniel Schacter.

"...While our sense of self and identity is highly dependent on explicit memory for past episodes and autobiographical facts, our personalities may be more closely tied to implicit memory processes." (*4)


Quote by Gabor Mate M.D., "Scattered", (Chapter 26: Memories Are Made Of This (http://www.addforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1693889#post1693889)), P 250.



:) :) :)

mildadhd
03-01-15, 11:45 PM
The affects are the foundations upon which the beauty and ugliness of life has been constructed.

And affects also change with experience, but more quantitatively rather than qualitatively.



-Panksepp/Biven, "The Archaeology of Mind", chapter: Preface and Acknowledgments, p xi.






:) :) :)

mildadhd
03-21-15, 11:49 PM
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Est6nay4Z5E

"The only way we can talk about human nature concretely is by recognizing that there are certain human needs." (Gabor Mate)


We need primary positive feeling systems and primary negative feeling systems?

Survival requires primary positive feeling rewards (beauty) and primary negative feeling rewards (ugly)?

Punishment is not a human need?


P?