I’m no expert but I think our perception of ourselves and our environment is based on a mix of other’s opinions, expectations, epigenetics, neurology, experiences, and how we frame those experiences.
Character one: opinions are fact, expectations are rules, traumatic ancestral line with some overcoming, dysregulated nervous disposition, mix of good and bad experiences, mostly focuses on the bad.
Character two: opinions are suggestions, expectations are only rules when necessary, some trauma in ancestral line with overcoming, regulated disposition, mix of good and bad experiences, grateful for the good and learns from the bad.
The former character may be hypervigilant and survives by making narrow judgements, separatist claims, and a need to be in control at all times. (Feeling out of control can lead to itchiness, a false sense of influencing something). Any chronic pain might be hard to shift because their intero/exteroception reflects their perception of a hostile environment. The latter may take things as they come, waits for confirmation, sees connections, and accepts whats outside of their control. For them, chronic pains could be easier to heal if they hold good self esteem and don’t rely on temporary fixes. Of course these are two extremes, most of us are a mix of both depending on nature, nurture and situation, forever gauging what’s best to apply.
In the last blog we explored the power of curiosity and I think this is relevant when attempting to engage in neuroplasticity. What if everything you thought was true about a person or situation wasn’t so straight forward? Are we able to live with the possibility that some things aren’t always graspable, but more so elusive concepts? I wont inject toxic positivity here and say to only see the bright side of everything, but I believe it’s way more beneficial to collaborate with the reticular activating system to see more possibilities at least.