Conversation

there can genuinely be a cost to using self-help / mind-hacking / therapeutic / transformative techniques that are okay but not that good; they can sorta help you while also causing subtle forms of damage you have to deal with using better techniques
3
5
97
the techniques you might call ā€œhacky,ā€ in the sense of being kludgy / inelegant / unprincipled, operate by ā€œadding spaghetti codeā€ to the bodymind. uses the term ā€œlayeringā€ here which i really like and have gotten a lot out of; UtEB uses the term ā€œcounteractiveā€
1
1
37
eg let’s say you’re trying to stop being so angry at your partner. a ā€œcounteractiveā€ or ā€œlayeringā€ approach to this is to try to install a new habit of noticing when you’re getting angry and doing something else, e.g. going for a walk, or ā€œcommunication skillsā€-type stuff
1
3
34
Replying to
techniques like IFS are in principle capable of addressing the underlying source of the anger; once you do that you don’t need to counteract it anymore, it just effortlessly happens less if at all. you’ve ā€œdelayeredā€ instead of ā€œlayeringā€
3
2
40
what kind of damage can you do to yourself the counteractive / layering way? let’s say you also have a strong inner critic, for example. when you notice yourself failing to properly counteract your anger, that can become another thing for your inner critic to latch onto
2
1
27
ā€œjeez look at you, can’t do anything right, can’t even stop yourself from being angry the way the therapist told you toā€ part of the damage here is the idea that these techniques are supposed to solve your problem; easy to conclude that if they don’t then it’s your fault
3
1
33
failed attempts at self-transformation can also produce resistance to future attempts at self-transformation, as various parts of the bodymind conclude that it’s unsafe and will not actually help them get their needs met. not a great place to be in! better to use good tech!
1
1
41