This will be another post in the subcategory of the “problem of distancing from nature,” introduced in a previous post. Here we’ll explore distancing not in the physical sense but in the emotional-experiential sense.
There’s a common technique in Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT—and all its spawned variants) that works to create distance from personally identifying with a specific experience (typically one that is not desirable).
It goes something like this:
Client: “I’m an asshole.”
Therapist: “Why do you say that?
”
Client: “Because on the way here I almost punched a homeless dude who approached me in the lobby.”
Therapist: “What happened?
”
Client: “He came right up to me and tugged on my coat asking for money. I ripped my arm away, called him a worthless piece of shit, and told him to go fuck himself. See, I’m an asshole!”
Therapist: “So what you did, your behavior, was asshole-ish?
”
Client: “Yeah, sure. Is that even a word?”
Therapist: “Yes, it is. The point is that you’re generalizing yourself and identifying as an asshole, when in fact there was a specific behavior you did that was asshole-ish. That doesn’t necessarily define who you are. In other words, you are not an asshole; in that instance, you acted like an asshole.
”
Client: “Oh, cool, I feel better.”
This exemplifies the intellectual causal chain. The same works for emotional experiences. Instead of someone being angry, they are experiencing anger. This separates the person from the experience. The above technique can be helpful when the problem is an overgeneralization, but I want to focus on specifying; closing the distance to such a point the situation becomes a sole focal point unto itself.
It would do us well to have the ability to rejoin experience in an embodied sense when the problem is a distancing from reality, not an overgeneralization distortion of reality.
I think we’re often way too quick to jump to causal connections that distance us from reality. In our constant search for making sense of the world, we continually assume causality. This is fine when we assume that that car won’t swerve into my lane because most cars don’t or won’t. But what about when I’m stressed because work sucks, my kids are sick, and that damn pain in my shoulder is back?
We don’t know these are the causes—we believe they are.
We may be right about the sources of our stress. But it could also be that you have some undiscovered disease lurking in your genes. Or perhaps something triggered the realization of your impending death, and an existential angst has beset you such that your mind desperately wants to create an ignorance, and this is, in fact, why you feel stress.
The point is that your assumed causality may be incorrect and may not be actual reality.
So what is the actual reality then? With regard to reasons why—who the hell knows! This is the problem with going back to childhood to understand why you have disgust over girls who bite their fingernails. An elaborate story can be concocted about your mom and trauma and a vivid memory of nail-biting, but is it true?
But consider, the reality of your experience is known by you. You are the one experiencing the stress; you, and you alone, know what that is. This is a crucial point.
Similar to the example of hitting a ball, experiential knowledge offers subjective, undeniable experience. This is different from the intellectual knowledge of cause and effect. Our experience is what it is (and with that a well-deserved pat on my back for finally working into this trendy tautology phrase in to my writing – with actual meaning).
The point is this in itself can be relieving, without the clunky application of CBT work that involves identifying cognitive distortions, assessing their validity, and then implementing less inciting thinking.
Instead, we simply be.
When appropriate, there is benefit in stopping with that which is experientially known without implying a chain of causal connections around it. Why distance yourself from reality? Perhaps it makes you feel better to rationalize this unpleasant experience.
Ok, cool. Now what? Are you going to, right now, quit your job, get a new one, drive to the emergency room for surgery to alleviate the shoulder pain, and magically make your kids well? Of course, you can “game-plan” for each of these “stressors” and then figure out your next “actionable steps.” Right, you can continue to move through life at an ever-increasing speed in order to… get to the next unpleasantness and then, again, pivot so as to move quickly to the next… Sounds awesome.
While rinsing and repeating this causal assessment and associated problem-solving model, perhaps consider the skill you are practicing is that of not paying attention to what is real. This is a problem if it’s predominantly what we do thus losing the ability to do something else.
My suggestion? Instead of the statement: “I’m stressed BECAUSE” we can change the statement to “This experience is THAT I’m stressed.”
And then proceed to sit with that, stay there. Allow yourself to experience the experience, because that is what is known by you to be real!
If you want a starting point, consider that each experience has three aspects:
The Intellectual: What do I think about this?
The Emotional: What do I feel about this?
The Behavioral: What am I doing about this?
If you spend time with each, it’s hard not to actually experience the experience and realize the difference from when we automatically apply causality to and from experiences. The former is real; the latter may or may not be.
Another concern I have with this causal linking is that by linking the past to the present (cause → effect), there seems a natural tendency to also tie in the future. We all use prior experience to build expectations for how things will probably be in the future. And this is needed, of course. We have to assume the flooring will support us as it did yesterday when we stepped out of bed. But this can lead to problems when either the evidence is not accurate (underdetermination of data) or the effect is harmful to us in some way (anger response preventing our goal attainment).
By focusing on the “That” presentness of the situation, we are left with an open future—a recognition that the present will be past and the future yet determined (and further, influenceable).
Of course, there’s benefit to problem-solving in life. But perhaps there’s also benefit to pausing, going slow, and acknowledging what you are actually experiencing, de-linked from the past or future. In a world filled with so many means of distancing us from nature, and hence what is real (virtual reality, noise-canceling headphones, HVAC systems, technical cooling and warming garments), we might do well with some actual reality and potentiality.
In the words of Dr. Emmett Brown: “Your future hasn’t been written yet. No one’s has. Your future is whatever you make it. So make it a good one.”