Meaning 3 (#10)
In “Meaning” and “Meaning 2”, I gave examples of personal meaning construction. But what is universal in that personal? The psychologist part of myself likes to have a conceptual system in which there are some general principles about meaning and motivation. When a theoretical system is used flexibly in therapy, it may offer an excellent compass to guide our attention towards specific dimensions of a person’s experience, behavior and narrative. It is also an interesting tool to help clarify her experience and choose engaging life paths.
About four years ago, I was a participant in a workshop given by Paul Gilbert in Washington, DC. His conceptual framework includes the description of three basic “affective-regulation systems” (see Paul Gilbert, 2010, Compassion Focused Therapy. Routledge). These systems have been shaped up by evolution. They are pre-programed schemas (genotype) awaiting environmental contexts to express and adjust themselves (phenotype). They have a strong motivational dimension; we experience them as pushes to do something, like getting closer or away, explore, attack or play.
Paul Gilbert’s well-documented theoretical system was meaningful to me – it permitted organization of information into a coherent narrative and it oriented interventions (so, a functional conceptual system to me).
The tree affective-regulation systems as labeled by Gilbert:
1) “The threat and self-protection system”
2) “The incentive and resource-seeking system”
3) “The soothing, contentment and the safeness system”
My presentation of theses systems is freely inspired from Gilbert’s theory – the way I integrated them to my vision of the psychological world.
Threat and self-protection system
Its link to survival is direct. If there is an actual threat to our life or integrity, our perception and reaction have to be extremely fast. In its more primitive forms, the responses are fight, flight or freeze. Fear and anger are two primary emotions associated with this system.
Every time I refer to this self-protection system, I have this compelling souvenir that pops up: while trekking in Nepal with my older daughter in November 2001, I came face to face with an Indian cobra (around two meters long from my daughter and the guide evaluations) – I fled without any conscious awareness of my immediate decision and ended up falling into a ravine, miraculously saved by a tree that stopped my fall further down. The comment of the guide “you’ve been two times lucky” was a significant stimulation that helped to bring back my reflective consciousness. For a short period of time, I had been functioning on automatic pilot; the threat and self-protection system can operate on its own.
This little story illustrates why this system has to have a priority on other systems. Staying alive comes first. There are very few exceptions to this pre-programed rule when we are facing objective danger; perception, evaluation, and action have to be executed fast. Panksepp[1] calls this automatic processing “intention-in-action”; in my encounter with the snake, I didn’t experience a sensation of choice, I simply acted. But my decision to pursue the trekking after the incident, was an “intention-to-act” (volitional behavior) and needed the intervention of the frontal regions of my cortex (tertiary processing in Panksepp’s terminology).
A face-to-face encounter with an Indian cobra is for most of us a rare occurrence, and many of us don’t face survival issue on a daily basis (still, many do; for example, civil war in Syria is an instance of this). How then understand that so many people appear regularly in the threat and self-protection system in the absence of immediate objective danger? The culprit may be language (important to recall that many advantages come with it also). Language permits derived relations that extend the range of threatening scenarios (fortunately it may also be the case with positive scenarios) – for example, ghosts stories that terrify a child that never met any real ghost in his life. Also, language makes travelling into time possible: I may ruminate about difficult past events and anticipate future obstacles to my projects.
Moreover language enables story telling about oneself; as a consequence of that construction, menace to one’s self-image may become more threatening than a physical assault!
So combining the primacy of survival issues and the expansion of concerns due to language, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that many of us spend a lot of time in the threat and self-protection system. Most often than not, people seeking psychotherapy do so because of their lasting stay into this system.
The soothing, contentment and the safeness system
This is the system that is triggered when we feel content. In that situation, we aren’t feeling threatened or aren’t longing to achieve something.
In human beings, soothing, contentment and safeness are strongly linked to affection and kindness. The quality of connection to others is an important antidote to the threat system. When a young child is scared, or sad, he’ll look for his mom, her dad, or for another relevant parental figure. And adulthood doesn’t immunize us against that strong yearning for others when we feel unsafe (numerous talks, phone calls, texts, emails, etc.).
Generally, being connected to others has shown to be a very significant protective factor against psychological and physical problems. On the physiological level, this would be done through “the endorphin-oxytocin system for affiliation”.
Moreover, connection with warmth offers more than a regulation of negative affects (threat system). It would have an organizing impact on the brain and would be “associated with specific social (safeness-conferring) signals”[2]. This brings up the issue of the quality of the connection. Being connected is the first issue; being in a connection offering quality is the second one.
If affection and kindness from others are excellent antidotes to threat and offer an opportunity for a nourishing connection (contentment), then developing self-compassion is a wonderful gift we could offer to ourselves. Reading this idea in Gilbert’s book was comforting something I had been thinking for years. With self-compassion, a part of yourself is caring for you as a person. It means that whatever happens with others, you’ll have a way to get support and warmth on your own; in situation of rupture, for example, you may take care of yourself until you get connected again. For me, this would be a definition of affective autonomy: the importance of being connected with significant others remain, but you are not at somebody else’s mercy (for example being subjugated to one for fear of abandonment). Connections with significant others remain essential, but not at any cost. This could be called a healthy adult position. How many people do you know fit that definition?
The incentive and resource-seeking system
This is the – go and get – system: “positive feelings that guide, motivate and encourage us to seek out resources…” for survival and prosperity[3].
Go and get: seeking, exploring, achieving, mastering…
Hunter-gatherers needed to go out, to search for animals and plants. While doing so, they needed to learn animals’ habits and plants’ specificities…
I like to present this system as Exploration and Mastering – it stirs up interest, excitation, even passion.
A few weeks ago I was amazed to watch my granddaughter who relentlessly stuck and unstuck self-adhesive materials in a book for nearly an hour. Her attention and interest for the task was absolute. So was mine, watching her (curiosity)!
Other examples: the excitation of playing a game, the competition at work, repairing something that is broken, preparing an exam, going to the market in order to prepare a meal with good friends, etc.
I have found useful to present my personal simplified integration of these three systems to my clients in psychotherapy. It gives clues on how meaning is fleshed out in human beings.
First human mission: to survive! We remain rooted in our biological substance and many thinkers remind us that the primary function of the brain is to insure survival, not happiness. Happiness has to be conquered; it doesn’t come with the box!
This gives a strong rational to the observation that most often the threat system calls for priority on other motivational systems.
And, with human beings, the threat system has expanded with the acquisition of language and its derived relations. We can remember old threats and anticipate future ones; when this gets edgy, we may label it as anxiety disorder, mood disorder, personality disorder, etc.
When the threat system is triggered, avoidance (get away) or fight (control) tendencies usually come with it.
The two other regulating systems offer greater potential for approach tendencies, which is usually a more pleasant experience than avoiding something.
Being connected with significant others, especially if it opens a window to warmth, is a potent motivational system. It is often heard from neuropsychotherapists that connection with others is what we are wired for. Attachment theory has brought up sufficient convincing data on this matter, but simple observation of our life is already a significant source of information: we are longing to be part of couples, families (children), friends, groups, small and large communities, etc. For many, significant relationships constitute the foundation of their life meaning.
Exploration, achievement, and mastering have also strong motivational potentials. A child that learns to walk is a remarkable manifestation of that regulating system. She gets up, she falls, she gets up again, makes a step or two, falls again… until she masters walking. The push to walk is intrinsic.
This regulating system takes many forms, from playing scrabble with friends to winning an Olympic medal, from home construction to getting a Ph.D. In its purest expression, the reinforcement comes from doing the activity itself.
I understand that the pleasure I get from learning in psychology has to do with that regulating system. The reinforcement I experience seems to expand with learning… I will never totally master the subject!
However, these two regulating systems that are associated with approach, can be rerouted by the threat system. I may cling to somebody in order to avoid my fear of being alone or I may perform in school in order to counteract my conviction to be uninteresting. In those contexts a regulating system is used to avoid another system.
I often say to my clients that even though it is impossible to never fall in the threat motivational system, the less time you spend there, the best it is for you. Otherwise, the more time you spend in the connection and the exploration/mastering systems, the greater your odds to be happy.
pcousineau
[1] Panksepp, J., & Biven, L. (2012) The Archaeology of Mind: Neuroevolutionary origins of human emotions. New York: W.W. Norton & Co.
[2]Paul Gilbert, 2010, Compassion Focused Therapy. Routledge
[3] Paul Gilbert, 2010, Compassion Focused Therapy. Routledge
pcousineau 