1. Repeat your worry until you're bored silly. If you had a fear of elevators, you'd get rid of it if you rode in one a thousand times in a row. At first, you would be very anxious, then less so, and eventually it would have no effect (except to make you sick of riding in an elevator.) So take the troublesome thought that's nagging at you and say it over and over, silently, slowly, for 20 minutes. It's hard to keep your mind on a worry if you repeat it that many times. I call this the 'boredom cure' for obvious reasons, but it sure beats feeling overwhelmed by anxiety.
2. Make it worse. When you try to hard to control your anxieties, you only heighten them. Instead, exaggerate them and see what happens. For instance, if you fear that your mind will go blank during a presentation, fake it intentionally in the middle of your next one. Say, "Gee, what was I saying?" Notice how this makes no difference. It's nothing to worry about, right? I did this at a lecture once and no one raised an eyebrow. (Perhaps they weren't listening anyway.!)
Ed. note: these are by Robert L. Leahy, PhD and director of the American Institute for Cognitive Therapy in NY, NY.
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Monday, February 22, 2010
Virginia Woolf - Mental Illness Defined Her Craft by Richard Cytowic
"Virginia Woolf’s To The Lighthouse opens in opposition, with a fragment of conversation already in progress: “Yes, of course, if it’s fine tomorrow,” says Mrs. Ramsay to her son James. “But,” contradicts his father two paragraphs later, “it won’t be fine.”
The novel is unbalanced from its first line. Within four paragraphs, points of view shift among mother, son, and father; then an omniscient voice reveals the thoughts of all three members of the Ramsay family, “that great clan which cannot keep this feeling separate from that.”
Could such opposing attitudes reflect Woolf’s own considerable ambivalence? Do the author’s real-life equivocations echo in the indecisiveness of her fictional characters and her inconclusive plot arcs? In her diaries, Woolf regularly described a recurrent “madness,” referring to the disruptive mood swings that plagued her career and ultimately led to her suicide. As a doctor who has studied neurological disorders for 35 years, I recognize such periodic and cyclical fluctuations as manic–depressive illness, or bipolar affective disorder.
Woolf could not piece herself together when unpredictable mental illness fragmented her world. “Virginia could be a very enchanting person,” said Vogue editor Madge Garland, “but there were times when I felt that she was more nearly enchanted.” When depressed, Woolf took to bed and withdrew, viewing the world as meaningless and without hope. On the upswing to mania she wrote at breakneck speed, the words seeming to compose themselves.
Because the distorted thinking of bipolar individuals persists even when they are neutrally poised between mania and depression, Woolf read meaning and portent into events that were likely coincidental. This tendency may be one reason Woolf’s novels are strewn with odd, minute details that lure readers to hunt for significance in them.
Critics and therapists often presume psychodynamic explanations of causation despite lack of evidence in Woolf’s writing. The thinking goes that because the young Virginia was sexually abused, she portrayed the sexes as incommensurable, misogynistic in the way Richard Dalloway is in The Voyage Out or Mr. Tansley is in Lighthouse. The modern habit is to think about mental forces in terms of cause and effect.
What if instead one took a biological perspective and asked how the distorted perceptions and self-absorption typical of bipolar individuals might have colored the thinking of one of the 20th century’s most celebrated authors? Such a mind makes it hard to see objectively, let alone distinguish facts from its projections. Though Woolf confused subject and object most often during manic upswings, she also did so to varying degrees all the time.
From my perspective as a neurologist who studies minds and as a creative writer who imagines characters’ inner lives, Virginia Woolf’s mind is a marvel to behold. No two books are alike. “Not this, not that,” she seems to be saying as she rejects convention and hones her technique in a lifelong experiment to portray consciousness and the character of thought. Her ideas about the unreliability of language were prescient given what science now knows: that the very structure of human brains allows language to introspect only a fraction of consciousness."
Read all of this insightful article here.
The novel is unbalanced from its first line. Within four paragraphs, points of view shift among mother, son, and father; then an omniscient voice reveals the thoughts of all three members of the Ramsay family, “that great clan which cannot keep this feeling separate from that.”
Could such opposing attitudes reflect Woolf’s own considerable ambivalence? Do the author’s real-life equivocations echo in the indecisiveness of her fictional characters and her inconclusive plot arcs? In her diaries, Woolf regularly described a recurrent “madness,” referring to the disruptive mood swings that plagued her career and ultimately led to her suicide. As a doctor who has studied neurological disorders for 35 years, I recognize such periodic and cyclical fluctuations as manic–depressive illness, or bipolar affective disorder.
Woolf could not piece herself together when unpredictable mental illness fragmented her world. “Virginia could be a very enchanting person,” said Vogue editor Madge Garland, “but there were times when I felt that she was more nearly enchanted.” When depressed, Woolf took to bed and withdrew, viewing the world as meaningless and without hope. On the upswing to mania she wrote at breakneck speed, the words seeming to compose themselves.
Because the distorted thinking of bipolar individuals persists even when they are neutrally poised between mania and depression, Woolf read meaning and portent into events that were likely coincidental. This tendency may be one reason Woolf’s novels are strewn with odd, minute details that lure readers to hunt for significance in them.
Critics and therapists often presume psychodynamic explanations of causation despite lack of evidence in Woolf’s writing. The thinking goes that because the young Virginia was sexually abused, she portrayed the sexes as incommensurable, misogynistic in the way Richard Dalloway is in The Voyage Out or Mr. Tansley is in Lighthouse. The modern habit is to think about mental forces in terms of cause and effect.
What if instead one took a biological perspective and asked how the distorted perceptions and self-absorption typical of bipolar individuals might have colored the thinking of one of the 20th century’s most celebrated authors? Such a mind makes it hard to see objectively, let alone distinguish facts from its projections. Though Woolf confused subject and object most often during manic upswings, she also did so to varying degrees all the time.
From my perspective as a neurologist who studies minds and as a creative writer who imagines characters’ inner lives, Virginia Woolf’s mind is a marvel to behold. No two books are alike. “Not this, not that,” she seems to be saying as she rejects convention and hones her technique in a lifelong experiment to portray consciousness and the character of thought. Her ideas about the unreliability of language were prescient given what science now knows: that the very structure of human brains allows language to introspect only a fraction of consciousness."
Read all of this insightful article here.
Monday, February 15, 2010
Reasons to be Cheerful by Jurrian Kamp
I was having dinner with a friend when she told me she was taking antidepressants. That surprised me, because my friend had never seemed to be lacking in self-esteem or social support. In fact, she had always seemed rather cheerful and I was quite sure it wasn't the mediocre ravioli that lifted her out of existential crisis. My friend is among the millions of people around the world who take anti-depressants, a number that in the U.S. alone has doubled within the past 15 years and is expected to continue to rise.
In a recent contribution to The Huffington Post, physician Andrew Weil hinted at the correlation between the forces of capitalism and the "fact" that depression is now widespread. Among other factors, Weil blames the TV commercials which spread the message that "all sadness is depression, depression is a chemical imbalance in the brain, this pill will make you happy, your doctor will get it for you." Weil suggested that because of overdiagnosis many people who are occasionally -- and quite normally -- a bit sad or insecure are labeled as depressed and in need of a pill to quickly solve their problems.
When I told my friend about Weil's ideas to alleviate depression -- lifestyle changes including less caffeine, more excercise and a diet high in fruits and vegetables, supplemented with omega-3 fatty acids -- she didn't seem particularly convinced. In fact, she seemed almost depressed. Apparently, taking responsibility for your own health can be a tough pill to swallow. But I think the fact that we can do so much to improve our mental and physical health is a reason to be cheerful.
Ed. Note - clinical depression IS a chemical imbalance in the brain and medication can and often does bring much needed relief... HOWEVER - I personally do think that many people seek an easy answer to the ups and downs of life - something these drugs were not intended for - and needlessly put themselves at risk for side effects. Read more of Dr. Weil's ideas on depression here.
In a recent contribution to The Huffington Post, physician Andrew Weil hinted at the correlation between the forces of capitalism and the "fact" that depression is now widespread. Among other factors, Weil blames the TV commercials which spread the message that "all sadness is depression, depression is a chemical imbalance in the brain, this pill will make you happy, your doctor will get it for you." Weil suggested that because of overdiagnosis many people who are occasionally -- and quite normally -- a bit sad or insecure are labeled as depressed and in need of a pill to quickly solve their problems.
When I told my friend about Weil's ideas to alleviate depression -- lifestyle changes including less caffeine, more excercise and a diet high in fruits and vegetables, supplemented with omega-3 fatty acids -- she didn't seem particularly convinced. In fact, she seemed almost depressed. Apparently, taking responsibility for your own health can be a tough pill to swallow. But I think the fact that we can do so much to improve our mental and physical health is a reason to be cheerful.
Ed. Note - clinical depression IS a chemical imbalance in the brain and medication can and often does bring much needed relief... HOWEVER - I personally do think that many people seek an easy answer to the ups and downs of life - something these drugs were not intended for - and needlessly put themselves at risk for side effects. Read more of Dr. Weil's ideas on depression here.
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Are you an orchid or a dandelion?
Most of us have genes that make us as hardy as dandelions: able to take root and survive almost anywhere. A few of us, however, are more like the orchid: fragile and fickle, but capable of blooming spectacularly if given greenhouse care. So holds a provocative new theory of genetics, which asserts that the very genes that give us the most trouble as a species, causing behaviors that are self-destructive and antisocial, also underlie humankind’s phenomenal adaptability and evolutionary success. With a bad environment and poor parenting, orchid children can end up depressed, drug-addicted, or in jail—but with the right environment and good parenting, they can grow up to be society’s most creative, successful, and happy people.
Read the amazing article in the Atlantic: The Science of Success... here.
Read the amazing article in the Atlantic: The Science of Success... here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)