WHO IS ACTUALLY RUNNING YOUR LIFE?

This is not an article about the other people in your life who are sabotaging your efforts to be successful, happy and endlessly brilliant. Its about YOU. Yes, I know, its a bit psychological - groan, groan.

There's an elephant in the room that we like to ignore.

Question: What do a Californian tennis coach, the Buddha, and St.Paul have in common ?

Answer: They have all in their own way said " LOOK !" and pointed at this elephant –

THE DIVIDED SELF

The coach changed his way of coaching when he discovered that the cognitive,analytical, judgemental (conscious) part of his clients got in the way of the natural,

‘unconscious’part of them that learns fast and intuitively in the way that children do.

He called the first, conscious part 'SELF ONE' and the unconscious part 'SELF TWO'.

The coach's name was Timothy Gallwey, author of 'The Inner Game of Tennis'.

Gallwey observed that our conscious self unwittingly sabotages our unconscious self. The remedy was to find ways of helping 'SELF ONE' to shut up and just notice

how ' SELF TWO' was getting on, without offering advice or abuse. (I'm fascinated on the golf course to hear my fellow golfers rubbishing themselves. I do too.)

The important difference is between just noticing and judging. Self One is designed by nature to evaluate and control and typically uses language to give expression to these functions. Self Two learns naturally using sensory

feed- back without the additional help of verbal feedback which is often clumsy, judgmental and emotive., thus hindering the natural learning process.

Words are always a poor substitute for sensory awareness in the learning process which majors on visual modelling. Think how young children learn from watching, listening and copying their elders. They practise making incremental improvements until they are satisfied they have a match..

More recent psychology (see Daniel Kahneman’s Thinking Fast & Slow-) has switched the numbers, referring to the 'older', unconscious, automatic part as system 1 and the 'newer' conscious, analytical, controlling part, system 2 .... the

evolutionary perspective.Humans were brilliant learners before language provided additional tools with which to think. Kahnemann does not use the terms ‘conscious

‘ and ‘ unconscious’ but the terms Slow And Fast. His SLOW is the rational, deliberative, reflective, part. His FAST is closer to the intuitive, gut, unconsidered, thought we can all use. Kahnemann’ precision reminds us that we can use these

terms 'conscious and unconscious’ rather loosely even as I have done here.

‘

But the sabotage seems to work both ways. There seem to be some things that we spend our lives intending to do. We are determined to quit smoking, to quit bingeing, to lose weight, to start exercising, to change our ways.(Think of your New

Year resolutions) Five years later we are still addressing the same list. It seems a part of us is reluctant to change, the unconscious attraction of the status quo. It’s been called ‘the cautious paralysis of intention’. Just keep intending to do something. This way you can (unconsciously) keep putting it off because you know (consciously) that you intend to do it.

Why is that unconscious part of me so reluctant to change? Because change is risky and may be seen as a threat, and its job is to ensure my SURVIVAL. All my survival/defence mechanisms are unconscious. When in doubt, don’t rock the boat. We can’t

just will change. We have to create seductive pictures of the benefits of change.

Then we substitute desire for fear. And both our conscious and our unconscious selves are free to go for it, together. This is what being congruent is, being integrated.

Ideally, the agreement to change has to be negotiated between the parts of me that seek my good, my wellbeing, both to survive AND to thrive. What is the common goal of these two parts. Are each of them able to see the others point of view ? Is my life just about survival ? Or does my life have a purpose beyond mere survival? What does thrive mean? Grow ? To what end ? What is the nature of a life well lived ? What gives meaning to our lives ?

Saint Paul says ' The good that I would, I do not ' ( Romans 7.19 ) and elsewhere

'the spirit indeed is willing but the flesh is weak' The Buddha called the unconscious

part of me 'the wild elephant' that goes its own way and which I (the rider) must spend my life taming. But first I must understand it.

How does the thinking part of me that I call “I” relate to this other part of me that I know is part of me but that I often call “you” ?...... I assume that I am not the only person in the world that talks to himself. This other part of you and me is an ‘older’,

instinctive part that is dedicated to keeping us safe. It includes the bit that runs your systems while you sleep, but alerts you at the first noise.

In my case, I’ve discovered that it always knows where I left my spectacles when I was busy attending to something else. This happens roughly twice a day. I now trust it to SHOW me where my specs are. It has to show me because it can’t tell me. It

can’t tell me because it doesn’t have language. It shows me by walking my body to where my specs are so that I can see them. Then I say “Oh! there they are.” I used

to say “Silly me!!” Now I say “Thank you” or “You are brilliant”. I feel more together as a result. We feel more together as a result

I, the thinking me, needed to find a way of healing this division. I wanted to stop believing it was some negative, baser, untrustworthy part of myself which needed to be tamed and disciplined.

My religious upbringing taught me not to trust this simpler me '(Paul's 'the flesh'). In effect I was being told “Don’t trust yourself” My life experience says otherwise.

These two parts of me need to get to know each other, to trust each other, to cherish each other. They may have different natures but they are both parts of me and I want them to be able to pull together for my sake.Following Gallwey's advice, my inner coach 'Self One' has begun to just notice

what ‘Self Two’ is doing without criticism or resentment. It mouths off occasionally at something I’ve done but is learning to be less critical.. Even more important, I needed a better, more personal metaphor for 'Self Two' than the Buddha's wild

elephant or St Paul's 'the flesh'.

I wondered about this for a while and then it struck me that 'Self Two' was like my English bull terrier, headstrong, apparently thick but actually wily, totally loyal and protective, intuitive and loving. This is the part that nudges me without words unfailingly in the direction of my specs. Another thing.You can't force a bull terrier to do anything, it has to be cajoled. That definitely is 'Self Two'

One of the age- old ways of stilling the chattering of 'Self One' is meditation. All the great religions of the world have a tradition of meditation, part of an ancient wisdom easily forgotten. It is the experience of most people that they feel more together after

a short session of silent meditation. When the voice of 'Self One' is stilled, the intuitive murmurings of 'Self Two' can 'speak to' us without language. My bull terrier used to poke me in the leg with his nose.

CJR/edJan2017

Further thoughts- 14/11/22

What is the role of meta-cognition which presumably is a function of the prefrontal cortex? The process of being aware of self, what I’m thinking , feeling, emoting, doing is what has come to be called ‘ meta -cognition. When we look at something from “above” it’s called going meta.

Examples are ‘fly on the wall’ or ‘going to the balcony’ or ‘position three, four or five’. Another version is ‘helicoptering ‘These are all physical metaphors for what a mental process is. Its essence is captured in the definition of mindfulness: To pay attention, on purpose, in the present

moment, non-judgmentally.

Chris