Redirecting Self Therapy Results: Fast?

Plenty of stuff to discuss in the world, with the focus on causes
John
Posts: 22
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 3:55 am

Post by John »

Here it is ( referred to in the last post). Message 225 of the archives. My concern would be the "declarative" way she presents the "memory"...which according to Jim Pularro is not possible. Perhaps she doesn't mean it in a declarative way. Nonetheless, here is the post. Something is going on here with RST. No question.

(Note: She never claimed a cure after 3 months....it was simply a point of getting the noradrenergic dumping done as soon as possible. The healing comes in a 1-2 year period..which involves lots of grieving and insights...just as Dennis has reported. Remember, Dennis cried easily as child. I didn't. This may have a big impact on results.)


Letter from VanWinkle, Feb 5 2000
-------------------------

About the early memories coming back...they may eventually surface in bits and pieces. This won't work early on in recovery, but you are so far along it might work for you. You might try a meditative way of remembering, just lie on the bed and flash back in time to around when you think something happened and see what comes to mind. This is what they do in Dianetics. It's also what happens in primal therapy, but I DONT recommend doing this for people who are not REDIRECTING, because self primalling can bring up too many emotions, and it is dangerous psychologically. It also is not likely to work for people who are not pretty much post flood. AFTER I was post flood I tried this and flashed back to birth and could recall some of it, like being wrapped too tightly. And also being held upside down. During that week I did this I developed bruise marks on my legs where I was held upside down, it was part of the healing. Janov has pictures of this sort of thing. I even flashed back prebirth, and found myself yanking on the cord and kicking my mother (I still had some anger at her, the muddy basin).
Ellie
Guest

Post by Guest »

Considering the information about Janov's primal therapy and memory (outlined so well in Pullaro's work), I think now what makes sense is....the feeling. Primal Therapy is like RST because it deals ONLY with the feeling. Janov had said that dreams are symbolic and all that matters is the feeling. RST is explicit in that is exclusively what it deals with. The "feeling attribution" in the form of a declarative memory in first line trauma ( sensory memory) isn't really that important. I think VanWinkle's declarative memory is false and discredits what she has done. She should just stick to redirecting. Not that her dream was "wrong". I just don't believe it could be a direct experience due to what I now see defined as first line trauma.

Perhaps a person could have a declarative style dream about their feelings, but I'd say Van Winkle misses the point ( her own point) about just redirecting "imprint intrusion" when it comes up. I don't think her "recall" is accurate and I don't think it could be. Her dream may have "happened" in re-constructed imaginings or dreams but I don't think that the dream is a record of her trauma other than what it symbolizes. As far as healing neurosis, it's not relevant. All that matters is the feeling. The relevance of dreams then is not necessarily to re-construct a story or monitor the chronological undoing of neurosis, but rather a way to get at deeper feeling. In this sense a dream is always accurate and of huge value in both RST and Primal ( if a person sticks with the feeling).

RST would always deal with primal ( first line) if there is a lot of trapped pain. According to Janov, imprint intrusion is a constant reality for a neurotic ( and it's a continuum for all human beings.....with integrated higher and lower brain function being the goal of a "cure" from neurosis).

RST ( according to using dumping of "first line" trauma as the integrative goal) done WHEN the person was being intruded by imprints ( detox crisises) would lead to "much faster healing". Assuming a person got on top of the work and really redirected constantly.....and got creative about redirecting nervous symptoms ( imprint intrusions) as they came up....it would make sense that RST is going to beat primal therapy ...which only relies on "getting down there" past defences. I'm sure RST has to face this problem, but not in the same way. Imagining a parent in various ways, with all the feeling and "file paths" ( Pullaro's sense) newly created via redirecting the imprint intrusions ( the neurosis), RST will detox the brain more quickly. The higher brain is constantly seeking to make sense out of "the world" and the lower imprints ( sensory data) are informing this process in the most profound way. The denial of this as a defence against pain is what codependency is. That's why I think RST is really about a codependency map. If I'm reacting and upset as a neurotic, it's likely that only a small part of that is coming from outside stimulous. Most neurotics aren't going to do the work until the pain becomes unmanageable. Same for primal. But that's the good news for RST. The bigger the pain ( or shame), the more powerful the release of atrophied noradrenergic neurons if a person imagines various "felt senses" of parents and early actors in life. As the brain heals, more "first line" comes up for processing....begging to be "defined" by outside events. The codependency map is revealed with ever more detail.

The outstanding work of Pullaro righted something for me. To not be as concerned about dreams as "meaning" anything other than getting at feelings. Releasing first line trauma is the point. Doing this via redirecting symptoms....means getting healed. At the same time, the better I have got, the more explicit dream meanings have been for me. But that's just a marker. A way ( for me) to show I'm on track ( which has been vital in my process). Dreams as a way of getting to more feeling ( such as what might be contained in practicing lucid dreaming...being aware one is dreaming) would probably be really good for a person wanting deeper cleaning ( more high-low brain integration) of neurosis.

More feeling. More healing.

Any other links to information such as the link about memory and trauma are really appreciated.

An informed comparison is key here....to understand the value of both these therapies.

...and speed of healing is critical. People ( who know) choose primal over talk therapy, because talk therapy might take 1,000 years to heal neurosis...if ever. What if RST did the job in half the time of primal....or less? It's not just about "getting the job done", but getting it done in the most efficient way. And Janov "owning" primal therapy is not a good situation. All the more reason to investigate RST. Although I investigated it by DOING it. And now I want to complete the therapy. To improve it. To understand what is happening. VanWinkle's claim
(and Dennis's agreement) that they are the same is a good start. I think more and more detail on this point is fantastic for both therapies.

John
Phil
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 4:31 am

Post by Phil »

Hi John,

When I am in a triggering situation, I am unclear on what I would do differently with RST as opposed to primal. Lets take a specific example:
My wife is being bitchy with me and nags a lot. This is a reoccuring trigger. When I have a chance, by myself, I express my anger towards her. This will start out as words and move to grunting sounds and as it comes out will usually end up as an early feeling of abandonment and neglect involving my mother. This is just a continuation of earlier primals I have had so I already know how to get there.
These are angry feelings. After this subsides I will often reach sad feelings and finally, rarely, feelings of need.
Each time I do this it goes deeper and deeper and this is a slow process.
And it is a physical process as well. I feel a lot of physical changes, blockages and tensions are permanently released. After that, I feel a little more present and connected to my own history.

In one or several of Janov?s books he states that individuals with defences consisting of large amounts of muscle tensions will have a long and difficult healing process. I have come to believe that he is right, and I am one of those people, because that is how it is for me.

If I was doing RST, what would I do differently?


Phil
Guest

Post by Guest »

Phil,

I would like to do what you are doing too in order to "mix and match" these therapies, but I won't because self-primalling is thought to be dangerous. I do of course wonder about the differences here in process (as you have outlined). The idea of tensions being permanenly released and noticing changes. This is based on relief and sounds most appealing. RST is about an instant relief during the process, similar to taking an anxiolitic or anti-depressant. This is because the same neurotransmitters are involved. But once they degrade the next toxicity comes to the front fo the line to be processed.
The principle neurotransmitter when you do this is norepinephrine. What you do differently is to go right to the branch on the atrophied nueron
( branches....or network arrangement creating the "sum feeling") and dump it.

I would find the work you do to be very helpful with RST because you have both the source ( first line) AND the projection in your personal feeling-based experience. I don't have that.....and failed completely to be angry at anyone other than my father in therapy work. So I just did this in a very simple way at the beginning. I would take any female in my environment which was causing an imprint intrusion ( nervous systems of any kind...any kind of sympathetic response) and immediately think of my mother and begin to punch. She recommended pounding on the bed. You do not continue along the path of opening up further the "wrong neuron" and deepening anger with the projected
(codependent) target. You immediately switch. It's the immediacy that
creates the impact. This is what you are not doing. What I would also do would be to "toggle" to go back and forth between feeling to image....and the image would eventually become a more complex feeling ( although any foto is going to provide something of a feeling that connects to codependent projections). But I would not think about it. I would simply aim the anger at the mother-replacement at my mother. Using as an impetus the anger about the mother replacement. As more "justification" for "committment and consistency" in judging the parent replacement emerged......more IMMEDIATE redirecting.

The good news is that the effectiveness of this is instant and undeniable. For me I found that the most effective way to keep at this was to count out 25 punches at a time. To really commit to a certain number. Others in the group don't do that. Others do one minute of complete intensity all out.....to complete exhaustion. In the second year mental redirecting while lying down with eyes covered and ear plugs
became the leader for me. That is very very powerful for me. Since the body is in detox mode in the morning, it's great time to do redirecting. That's when a lot of projections are up for detox.

If you want to try this, "dream posting" is also very effective. Just using "felt images" of parents for parent-replacements. Getting creative and eventually "finding traction" as one person put it. Photos at different ages will likely help make the redirect more powerful. The concept of "mother" needs to get more and more powerful. To really feel the anger at the parent replacement....and then redirecting it to a clearly felt image of the real target. This is critical. Again, the big difference here is the instant switch. This is what you are not doing. You seem to be building more and more of the parental replacement feeling. Which to me would be good leading up to the switch so that there can be more "being right" and "mother protection".....and then out of the blue this ends and redirecting starts. But remember, VanWinkle is talking in terms of neuro-biology, not concepts. A nervous symptom means a part of the lysosome has broken open and is flooding the synapse. That's usually when a wife will be most bitchy...to make sense out of that event ( and the defence is built in such a way that it's as confusing as which came first ..the chicken or the egg).

I have found that doing a lot of this at the beginning can produce dramatic hangovers ( for obvious reasons). One person had mania symptoms....and felt great for weeks. All had a variety of histamine reactions. The difference to me is not going deeper into a "feeling" that is already presenting itself and is creating an excellent marker for where the atrophied neuron groups are. The effect is immediate relief....but setting on down the road to grieving of the deepest kind. And THEN the permanent relief of neurotic symptoms. This is the theory.

I'm trying to learn as much as possible about primal because the relief of long term symptoms as you go is very attractive. RST is not about that at first. That's after it's all done apparently. I can feel great for about 25 minutes at a time when doing RST. Then I'd have to do it again...and it does top out.

It's about getting into a grieving process through IMMEDIATE switching to the original actors who were around during amygdalic programming. Behaviour of people attracted to us to "work out the trapped feelings" is a a spatial marker in the amygdala ...that gets better and better the more it is done.

Again, this quickly loses it's theoretical tone with even one intense session of RST.

That's how I see it after nearly 3 years. I only seriously started this ( daily) at the end of 2004.

John
Guest

Post by Guest »

Phil,

Something new jumped out at me in your last post that I think is very important in the therapies of Primal and RST. You said that you "rarely ask for what you need" as you go to the depth of your imprint. Could this be the core of the defence? So much focus on anger as a way in or "always the feeling", without being exactly clear about what it is we're angry about. Just getting out of the box for a moment....it would appear to me that it's pride and wanting to be right about identity as victim that keeps the "parent protection racket" in place so firmly. It's a survival mechanism. In the codependency map I've seen two actors: dependents and anti-dependents. Both seem to be pretty hell bent on not asking for what they need. The classic victim ( dependent) finds emotionally unavailable people to rage against or be nice to and fall into deeper nervous illness over ( this has been my profile....which is why I know I'm so much better.....my reference groups have slowly disappeared). The classic caretaker ( anti-dependent) bonds to the classic victim and both keep their first line traums ( systemically built or trauma built) in place. I mean isn't not getting what I need what it's all about? Isn't that the rock foundation of trapped pain?

John
Guest

Post by Guest »

Hi John,

Thanks for your responses.
I often start primalling with angry feelings because that is what is there. On the example I give, my wife being bitchy and nagging, I might start out being just a little annoyed. We also have our long term patterns, the codependency you talk about. But just a little anger triggered will often in my primal grow into rage.
I just am not able to often connect with feelings of need. I try but it doesn?t come out easily. It sometimes comes out for me after sad feelings.

About the immediacy of the redirecting, I just am not able to usually do that. I need a place where I am totally alone and can lie down. My family is not cooperative or understanding. What I do is lie down and start out vocalizing, and there might also be punching and kicking. If there is anyone around, it won?t work, I will be inhibited. But for primalling also, the immediacy of it will help. Some of my biggest primals were at retreats, where I could primal whenever I wanted after spontaneous things happened.
What I have come to realize through my therapy is that I started out with a very poor connection with my feeling memories. Those that concern my mother are extrememly fragmented, for example. There is not much for me to focus on. With primal the main thing is on staying with the feeling and not interrupting it. Moving the body and doing whatever to cause the feeling to grow. I wouldn't tend to toggle back to the current feeling once in the old one, but I could try that.
I am on vacation right now and can't do much.
Thanks for writing up in detail how RST works.

Phil
Guest

Post by Guest »

Phil,

You may have uncovered something regarding efficacy and speed of healing when it comes to primal-RST.
This is a broad topic and the scope seems to get even bigger bringing in two therapies. But of course in the end ( I imagine after healing to a great degree) it all ends up seeming very simple. I was taken aback by your comment of "not being able to do much" while on vaction regarding therapy. From what you have outlined as primal therapy, and what I've read, I don't think I'd be able to do hardly any work at all. I climb a mountain behind my house ( which is as high a 11,000 feet...I always go to 6,500 feet at least) and even there I feel self conscious....maybe another climber could be near. And in my house ( I live alone right now) I am typically concerned with what neighbours would think. A friend who does feeling work isn't ( or is much less). RST takes all that out of the equation. The immediacy point was in the switch over....and that can happen even a few minutes after the trigger ( and some people are in almost constant trigger state with muscle tension proving this to be the case). I simply do the RST in the bathroom, or in a room where there isn't anyone. Even if it's for a minute. It's cumulative. I'd say the value of RST is exponential if a person thinks they "can't do it" ( I think this all the time too) ...but I get around that by simply doing it anyway, since I know what is going on neuro-physiologically ( in a basic sense). The more primal pain I've got, the better off the chances I've built a world where "I can't express myself". I can't fight this, because I have had to accept it as true ( which of course I didn't at all in the past). I DO believe that I am driven by external cirumstances....that's why I got sick. It was (is) a defence.

I greatly admire people who do this work and aren't all that concerned about being supported in doing it or not ( I even have felt angry and embarrassed about it). So I know what you're talking about. But after reading your message about being on vacation...that was interesting. My friend has recently gotten involved with a difficult woman ( he does RST) and was previously living alone. His progress with RST skyrocketed. Precisely because he felt "inhibited by her" ( trigger). Some family members are openly hostile and even ridicule or completely discount the work. I don't even tell them anything about it anymore. They are reference group number one! They correspond to my deepest primal pain. Having said all of this, I can't imagine ( right now) doing this work while living with a family or a lot of people...but that is when it would have it's greatest impact. That's when the deepest cleaning occurs. That's when the idea of being "externally controlled" is challenged in practice...not in theory.

I was also impacted by what you said about Janov's comment ooncerning extensive muscle tension. I know a lot about this...and went through a ton of work to deal with that. It was good to hear that actually, because it confirms my own experience.

John
User avatar
Dennis
Site Admin
Posts: 249
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2005 2:06 am
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by Dennis »

Very interesting to read these posts of you, John and Phil. Yes, more feeling, more healing. But also more living, more connected and more real.

John, you wrote:
If loving is in our nature and a child does this spontaneously, wouldn't deep and complete grieving bring that back as the child is brought back?
Babies and small children cannot give love. They only have needs that have to be fullfilled by loving people. If one's needs are respected, than you respect other people's needs. You respect your own life and other life. When your needs are being abused and your reaction to that is being suppressed or ignored, you adapt to it until you don't know any better. That's why the poisenous pedagogy has such an impact. That was (and in a lot of cases still is) standard child-rearing. It's something most parents don't want to talk about: the reason why they wanted a child. Because often it will show that they wanted it for their own needs.

During the process of re-directing or Primal you also start to respect your needs again because you become aware of it. Post-flood or Post-primal isn't about a painless life, it isn't about a problem-free life, it's about a real life. Anger, sorrow, pain, they stay part of human life, but never at such extend that it takes over every aspect of your life. So I disagree that the goal of Primal Therapy or RST is 'to feel good'. It's about feeling real.

Phil, I agree that there can be huge traumas in someone's birth with a devastating effect. I just think it's odd that babies seem to integrate it within months while some adults need 20 or more years. (You can find some info on primal therapy and infants here: http://primal-page.com/emerson.htm)

There shouldn't be a pre-mature focus on birth or pre-natal traumas, unless the symptoms are already there.

I can understand the need for privacy during Primal/RST. But it can also be connected to fear for expression of pain. Most abused kids weren't allowed to express their hurt. They fear retaliation of their parents, later transfered to the police who might drop by if you scream. The family I grew up in, screaming was a daily event. People never call the police when someone is screaming. That only happens in movies. Just try it.

But then again, Primal is not about screaming. As Janov wrote: 'Scream is what some people do when hurt. Others simply sob or cry. It was the hurt we were after, not mechanical exercises such as pounding walls and yelling, 'mama'.'

Dennis
Phil
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 4:31 am

Post by Phil »

Hi Dennis,

Thanks for the link to Emerson's work. There is no contradiction here. Those same babies untreated would need much more time to primal birth trauma later on. Primalling birth trauma so early should have the effect of preventing much of the later compounding traumas. Babies do not yet have Janov's 2nd and 3rd line feelings to deal with. Yet, this is painful information for those of us who might need to take so many years to primal birth trauma.
The average person thinks that it is unbelievable to imagine that birth trauma could be effecting their psychology. They think it is completely crazy or just represents something metaphorical. So it is amazing that so many parents would bring their infants to Emerson for primal work.

About privacy in primal work; primalling is really an individual inward journey, allowing yourself to reach a regressed and vulnerable state(babies are already in a vulnerable state). It has nothing to do with challenging the world. The point is to try to arrange the conditions which encourage primalling. Privacy allows the individual to focus on internal factors and to let go of anything else going on. I know that I can't primal in a public place, I need as much privacy as possible.

Phil
Guest

Post by Guest »

These last posts brought up some interesting points again about primal and RST. Phil's comment that "primal has nothing to do with challenge in the world" shows a very different perspective. And this shows the very different approaches and potential efficacy between the use of these two treatments. People with primal pain HAVE the specific challenges in the world that they have due to unprocessed primal pain. The process of going into that pain using primal, does NOT have anything to do with that challenge as a process. Clearly a person would need safety ( subjective in it's definition...some like me would need a lot of it...as would Phil from what he is saying)....and safety almost always implies a powerful sense of boundaries. This can be achieved by privacy especially when poor identity in self and reference groups is a mediator of emotional life. Thus, primal has nothing to do with challenge in everyday life". It couldn't by definition. Yet RST and primal reach the same end. How is this possible? To answer that question, one has to look at beliefs. Someone who knows and has FELT the power of their own primal process is going to clearly begin to develop a belief that integrating higher and lower brain fucntion can only happen through re-living. Maybe that is true. From what I am seeing with RST, this has now been thrown into serious doubt. A person would never get to re-living via confronting challenge in daily life. Ever. Getting down past the defences requires the traditional primal processes. RST however by-passes this and the more one focuses on where the primal projection is going, the more primal pain he can liberate ( and this would improve with time...especially as the symapthetic nervous system release ( anger) moves to the acetycholinergic release ( parasympathetic and tears)). Mad at the boss? Worshipping a woman? Have a crush on someone? Perfect. I know exactly where the primal pain is and can do the bait and switch. Clearly this means challenge in the world is central, specific and vital to the primalling process using RST. Sometimes it's not so clear. I may feel nervous and worried with no apparent reason ( the higher brain hasn't gotten to that trick yet) and I can still do RST. And again, over time I can get a large amount of "felt sense" parent feelings to do that. It's hit and miss, but red blotches on your skin and terrific hangovers will tell the tale of how much of the amygdalic brain is opening up. Getting high is a good one too...but that's usually pretty early on in the process. Again, this doesn't need to stay in the theoretical box. It works the first time out, even done loosely. If I'm angry at my girlfriend or at someone at work and it's strong, it's a good time to do RST. Dennis, you likely know what that is all about after all your RST....and since I didn't have access to tears before and then did in a huge way, that is another indicator ( not so for you Dennis, again...beecause you were different and cried easily...you also yelled easily).

The traditional primal process would have nothing to do with challenge in the world then. RST has everything to do with it. Again, focusing on this and developing it in practice would certainly be of value to people who can't afford therapy. RST is free. You can do it by yourself. Challenge in the world is a starting place for the therapy since that is where people think nervous symptoms are coming from ( what primal therapy points out as being false).

Dennis, you really straightened out a huge point with what you said about babies not being able to give. And that focusing on unmet needs is where it's all happening. That's where the action is. As in RST. Atrophied neurons ( suppressed fight or flight) was in direct response to fearing not getting needs met....and sacrificing self ( feelings....the core mammalian response) in that environment. I clearly did not have that straight. It's just such a key point. Getting needs met. And that it's all about getting needs met. Unmet needs ( again this unfortunately rises back up to a conceptual level) drive so much in neurosis...and causes so much pain avoidance.

John
Guest

Post by Guest »

Dennis,

One more point. You were correct I believe when you pointed out that the reason for these therapies is NOT to "feel good" but to be real. Three years ago when I read the below paragraph at the end of the http://www.gocure.com forum, I didn't get it. Neurotics only think of relief. A healthy person thinks of "real".

John

Quote below from archives upon the death of VanWinkle and the end of the forum:

VanWinkle's assistant:

------------------

This is why I feel it is important to state the following :
? all information you need to succeed in your recovery is in the pamphlet and in the archives of this forum.
? for related literature reference, please read Alice Miller, Arthur Janov, Jean Jenson, Melody Beattie, Aletha Solter, etc?
? for medical or psychological advice, please refer in person to a certified therapist or doctor.
? for group support, please look around for AA or ACA-type of support group.
If after thorough reading, you feel that Ellie?s theory contradicts what you already know about your own health, please discard it without regret.

Please remember that you cannot rescue anyone but yourself, but recovering your own emotional balance is the biggest step you can make to save the world. However, although your current sufferings will be relieved to an extraordinary extent, emotional recovery is still a painful experience, and life afterwards remains painful, even if it is in a very different way.

On August 26th, 2001, at 2am, she told me "Farewell"
Guest

Post by Guest »

As I said, I see primalling as an internal process. Yet a result of this will usually lead one to make life changes. In fact, this is what leads to further progress in therapy.
Back to my example of my wife triggering my primals because of her bitchy and nagging behavior; in the future this behavior may no longer trigger me as I get through my primal process. Or I may discover that her behavior is something I want to avoid and so make changes in my life.
This is just an example, but it would have to do with the reasons why we chose each other as partners to begin with.
At least for me, I can change a lot of external things and it seems to have little effect on internal things bothering me.

Phil
John
Posts: 22
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 3:55 am

Post by John »

I see what you are saying Phil, and even though I am not someone who has done primal therapy, I think I grasp some of your point. I'm not clear on what you are saying about the internal process and your therapy, and I think it's because of my RST bias. The idea ( in theory) is that primal and RST both lead to the "post-primal" state. This is the idea. I personally believe that the reason this can work has a lot to do with triggers. For a neurotic person ( someone with a large amount of repressed pain) there is absolutely no difference between the outside and the inside world. Perception is projection. And the power of it in a codependent system is instant and complete. Changing the internal world will change the external world. What I don't think is being considered here is the USE of the projection as a path directly
(spatially...anatomically) into the wiring of the amygdala...where all the action is. And this would lead to anger-tears ( sympathetic-parasympathetic healing). It's not overly emphasized by VanWinkle, since she simply says "redirect nervous symptoms". Projection is perception. Thus the codependency map. And I also believe she doesn't talk enough about refining the targets of RST. Redirecting to "an abuser" is likely good...but wouldn't getting more and more of a library of "felt sense" around the redirection target ( parents, abusers, those who were idolized etc.) be even better. One person called this "traction". I liked that term. I can actually feel it very strongly when this happens.


I see a disconnect as you talk about primal therapy. It's almost as if you don't account nearly enough for family systems and codependency. This is where neurosis lives. In the social identity. The "we" comes before the "me" and most primal patients ( I'm sure you would agree) didn't get to the "me" well enough. It's an identity issue. Primal feelings didn't get integrated so the person becomes developmentally stunted. As a result, the nagging girlfriend or alcoholic boss is an arrangement made by the primal pain. It ( to me) is all about sending and recieving. This would make the bridge from external to internal vitally important in therapy ( assuming one is using RST).

You said "you can change a lot of external things and it doesn't seem to have an effect on the internal things bothering me."

The perspective RST seems to present doesn't make a distinction between these two things. However once a person is more free of primal pain, there would be this distinction. This would be health ( as you indicate about choices you would make once free of being bothered by the nagging and bitching...once projection isn't as active). The "we" is given up for more "me" and I have connection to my feelings. But to work from setting up a codependent network via family and family system repeats ( marriages, bosses, friends etc etc) and then to treat that as if it is NOT pure projection of primal pain ( really it's opportunity...seen in a positive light...it's the brain trying to heal). This is where I don't follow your idea.

The good news for some of course is that it wouldn't matter. If I was doing primal therapy and going down down down through all those defences and integrating higher and lower brain, I would get better and stop being as projective. Even if I didn't know about codependency or saw the external as "in some way connected" but didn't acknowledge it's bonding with primal pain. And I'm sure due to denial ( this has been certainly true for me) I wouldn't even KNOW that my surroundings were a projection of my primal pain. I wouldn't even be aware of this. At best I made an intellectual connection. The emotional connection only came with RST, and is still coming. It's very disorienting, and the insights ( the "aha's" are super simple). The are the most obvious points.

As far as RST is concerned, the importance of the external for me ( if very pain repressed) rests with it's connection to the amygdala and repressed pain. The same place Janov puts all his attention to. With the amount of recovery I've now had, and the evaporation of so many of my reference groups, this seems apparent to me now. Before I made no real EMOTIONAL connection to the outside and the inside. It was as if the outside was a "circumstance", not a projection. Again, if someone is doing primal therapy consistently I guess this wouldn't matter. It would likely be a very big deal to someone who didn't have money for therapy and wanted to achieve the same thing using his "external" attracted codependencies ( thinking widely into family systems as well ..not just marriages or girlfriends) as a way to get to where the pain is.

One thing that has stuck with me between what Dennis and Phil have brought up is about needs. The first awareness was what Phil said about going through his primal process and sometimes asking for what he needed at the end. But rarely. I hadn't even considered this. And the second was Dennis bringing up the idea that "babies can't give". This is something I hadn't even considered either...that it's finally all about taking responsibility for getting needs met, instead of being an adult child
(severely codependent). This now seems to be where the rubber meets the road.

John
Phil
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 4:31 am

Post by Phil »

Hi John,

I see codependency and distorted family relationships not as where neurosis lives but just as symptoms of primal pain. It is the individual who sets those things up. Maybe here is a difference between RST and primal.
Neurosis lives in the individual.
Also, only true psychotics live in a world of close to 100% primal projection. Neurotics operate on varying mixtures of reality and projection.

I am not sure what you mean about using the projection as a path directly, aside from neurologic theories. Primal triggers, the projections, are the starting point for primalling. So in that sense they are dealt with directly but only as a key to reaching primal pain.

Phil




Phil
Guest

Post by Guest »

Hi Phil,

I think this idea of a neurotic being a mixture or reality and projection is important. I may have been too black and white on that point. I think this point is true. Where I see some open space here in what we're examining ( Primal in practice and RST in practice) is the idea of projections being a starting point to get to primal pain. Now we're right at the point of clarification in my opinion ( your question):

"Projections as a direct path ( back to primal pain) ".

Yes, I think this is the point exactly and I think you've touched on what is the key confusion for most people about RST.....how could the author be so adamant that post flood ( when the blocked anger....or old norepinephrine is out) and post primal are the same. It does seem quite a stretch doesn't it. Can you imagine the implications of taking this idea OUT of neurobiological theory and putting it directly into practice....the first time out? This is RST.

A good explanation of what's going on here would be pages 31-34 in Pularo's Phd thesis on primal therapy and memory storage and retrieval.

http://www.primals.org/Thesis/pullaro%20thesis4.pdf

There you can see how he has put together primal and RST. And he started off his idea on page 8 of 73:

"It is clear then that the cell and it's environment, the individual and it's environment cannot be spoken of seperately. They are thought to be interacting aspects of a single and indivisible process. The ancient Chinese concept of yin and yang most accurately conceptualizes this relationships".


Again, I hope that saying this doesn't lead the mind back out into theory. This is all practice. Codependency is a detoxification process. And when you speak of symptoms you seem not to talk of that way. Remember that the codepedency represents a SPATIAL marker directly in the amygdala....right to the primal pain. Sure, the insights and follow up feelings all come later and in a mixed way....dep?ndent on the reality of each person. But relgating the symptom to the status of a "starting point" or a "trigger" alone may keep people going to therapists and primal centers...and Janov....as a SOLE SOLUTION to getting primal pain out. It's not the only way. I could not be sure, but perhaps it's possible that with time, and with practice.....not theory.....RST could end up being more effective. Who knows? That will be answered by results, not neurobiological theory.

You know it could be true. RST could well be one of the most important discoveries in mental health science in the last 100 years. That's possible. What might help it avoid the marginalization that primal has had is that it's free....and it doesn't have the dangers associated with regressive therapy.

Maybe our misunderstanding here is about terms of reference....neurosis, codependency etc.

Your mixture point was important....an elusive obvious I wasn't thinking about.

John
Locked