I am me – I need to live by my own authority

I am me. I am not you. I am comfortable (I think) with my beliefs,  with my likes and dislikes, with my judgements and opinions; I try to be as honest as I can; I try to be truthful; I try to be kind and compassionate and generally try to behave towards other people as I would like them to behave towards me. In other words I like to think of myself as an ordinary kind of bloke trying to live by my understanding and interpretation of events and circumstances. This means I am trying to live by my own authority.

And yet how many of us do things, have beliefs or have interpretations of events which we never worked out for ourselves – ones accepted by us because a politician, a priest, a rabbi or imam tells us, or we heard them on talk back radio, or saw them on TV or social media, or read about them somewhere - ones spoken or written about by someone we consider an ‘authority figure’? This means accepting, even if subconsciously, the decisions of someone else, who, we must think, also subconsciously, knows more, knows better. Otherwise why should we accept their opinion, their view of the world and how we should interpret it?

Why live according to someone else’s expectations? Why the necessity to conform? And conform to what? {There are of course laws in any country that have to be obeyed – criminal and civil laws. This is understandable and necessary for the orderly functioning of any society. This is not what I am talking about.}

To accept someone else’s decision is to accept their view of what they think our lives should be and how we should live it. In other words (whether we actually like it or not) we conform to someone else’s set of values, someone else’s views of life, not our own. We are not living by our own authority. 

Very few of the judgements we make on a daily basis, about what is “right” or “wrong” for us, are made by us, based on our true understanding of the situation as presented. It often seems that the more important the decision, the less likely we are to rely on our own thoughts and ideas, based on our own experiences. Advertisers tell us what we should buy – what we ‘deserve’; we are told what books to read, or music to listen to; we are told what fashion dictates we should wear and such like. Statisticians tell us that it is a statistical probability that, being a male in a certain age group and with certain racial physical characteristics and with certain religious beliefs, we will have certain likes and dislikes, be of a certain height, be overweight, even obese and have this or that medical problem and that when presented with an ethical dilemma we will answer in this or that way. But we are not a ‘probability’ – we are human beings.

One does not do something to be happy – one IS happy and does something to express it. One does not do something to be ethical – one IS ethical and does something to express those ethical ideals. We don’t need someone else to tell us – we act on our own authority.

Life is about choices and no one can make a choice for you, that suites you – be it as a voter, an employee or customer. It is your life and you need to live it your way, as you see fit to bring you peace of mind – your mind, not someone else’s. You need to live by your own authority – yours, not someone else’s.

So it should be with all activities. We are not pieces on an Economic Game Board to be moved at the whim of Big Business (Big Banks?). 

Commerce and industry must again revert to the position as the servant of humanity and never try to subvert this wherein humanity is considered the servant of commerce and industry. 

There is no need to change, just BE yourself. How can you reach fulfilment in your life if you live by someone else’s ideas; to someone else’s expectation? You must live by your own authority.  

But always remember that your freedom (to do what you want) stops when my freedom (to do what I want) begins!!

PTSD and those who suffer.

That people suffer the after effects of traumatic events is indisputable and very unfortunate for those experiencing the emotional and mental upheaval – whether or not they have had it diagnosed as Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Yet this condition – PTSD - was “created” by the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) only in their1980 third revision – DSM III. Prior to this date – while people certainly suffered – it was not categorized as Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.

Traumatic and highly stressful experiences rob us of our belief that we can keep ourselves safe in the world and we wait anxiously for the next traumatic event and react nervously to every unexpected sound –compounding our fearful expectations. Whatever our traumatic experience it is important to remember that such events, though terrible, evoke responses that are ordinary human responses to extraordinary circumstances. Everyone going through such an “out of normal” and fearful experience needs comfort and support, just as we all need comfort and support when, for instance, we are injured, lose a close friend or someone we love. But to categorize our ordinary reactions to this fear or grief as a “mental disorder” both diminishes and demeans our experience. We have had this experience, which is outside our normal expectations, and we react by trying to master our memory of the event and the emotions that are evoked. The mind will often attempt to ‘retreat’ from unpleasant life circumstances. It will do so in the only way it can, by going to a place of refuge and shutting off the ‘hurt’. This can manifest in many ways – as ‘depression’, as apparently delusional thoughts or neurotic behaviour. Such reactions far from being an “illness” are but a desperate attempt to preserve our concept of self, our identity, which is in danger of being overwhelmed.

Since humans first evolved millions of people would have experienced highly stressful or traumatic events. People in antiquity, as far as I understand history, would have suffered the after effects of the trauma experienced in battles and ever present likelihood of being captured and taken into slavery. Similarly in their daily experiences with the natural world of their times – wild animal, floods, earthquakes, droughts, starvation and such like would have tested the resilience of the strongest characters.  

With the winding down of the military activities in Afghanistan many military personnel are arriving home with emotional and psychological scars which need to be healed. Assistance is available for those who wish to take advantage of what is offered.

What happens, however, to those Iraqis, Afghans or Sri Lankans who were caught in the middle – between government military and the Taliban, supporters of Al-Qaeda or militants fighting for their cause? Those people who lost their livelihood, family members or were themselves severely injured by Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) or who suffered revenge attacks because they happen to support the “wrong” side – what support do they get? Do they cry? Do they dull the pain with opium? Do they get drunk?

As in most wars it is women and children who bear the brunt of trauma; in all countries it is women and children who endure the effects of violence and abuse of any kind. What support do they get from anyone – anyone at all? What is of great concern about any traumatic event is the long term health effects, even generational health effects it may have on people – possibly even those not yet born.  

Drugs, except in the very short term, generally don’t help and are not a “cure” for PTSD. In any event the side effects of antidepressants and antipsychotics are quite severe. Furthermore to suggest chemicals can address the distressing flash-backs, the recurring memories and recollections, the guilt, the “what if …” or the “if only…” is plain wrong. All chemicals do is to help dull the pain and put a brake on the expression of any emotional response – they have the effect of “dumbing down” the sufferer. This may be good – in the very short term – to give a person time to gain strength but let it be known that there is no known test for a “chemical imbalance” in the brain. Let it be known, also, that no one knows how to measure the “chemical balance” for any person’s brain or to determine what such a “balance” should be.

What is needed is counselling and as much love and emotional support that the PTSD sufferer can get – and time, and sleep, that “knits the ravelled sleeve of care” (Shakespeare – Macbeth).

Why is suicide considered a bad thing?

Amended September 11, 2018:

I know this is quite an old post but I strongly believe it is as relevant as ever. Some people do commit suicide and this has surely happened since humans first walked the earth.

This is not a treatise on the causes or possible reasons for suicide but the complexities behind the act have puzzled me for many years. In particularly our seeming abhorrence and our obvious dismay, regret and great sadness that anyone should even contemplate the need to end their life, by whatever means has taxed my understanding and the meaning of my life.

What follows below is my considered opinion:-

I ask the question – why is suicide considered such a bad thing? Now I am not advocating that anyone should commit suicide. I am just trying to pick apart the emotional clutter that accompanies this very personal and private act. The only answers I get are that it is a waste of a (usually) young person’s life; that they were loved; that they had unlimited potential, now never to be realised; that they had a future to live for – etc., etc.

This is partially correct but is not a real answer. The person concerned – the person now deceased – obviously had a different view of life. Their view, which I am not discussing (I have no idea what that was); I am discussing our view; that of the outsider; the ones left behind.

Why do we “outsiders” (I deliberately use this word because we are “outside’ that person’s inner world) consider suicide to be such a bad thing? Are we affronted because someone considers living – in their current situation – to be so bad, so threatening, so limiting as to be not worthwhile continuing? Are we discomforted because this rejection, this dismissal of all we has striven for (in “our” world), may reflect poorly on us, those left behind, regarding the way we have organised the world? Are we disturbed by the confronting prospect of having to admit that we make mistakes and that the way in which the economy, our legal, welfare and education systems are set up may actually cause distress, that we are not always fair or just in our dealings? Do we feel guilty that we have developed a financial system that promotes the massive imbalance between the very wealthy and the very poor and the disadvantaged?

We have to recognise that we are all, all, party to the ills of the world. We created them. If we look with even a modicum of insight we should see in ourselves the cause of these short comings and see ourselves reflected in the eyes of the distressed. And we should be dismayed.

Is this why we consider suicide a “bad thing” and are so shocked when it occurs?

It is needful to remember that we, each one of us, have our own experiences of life. These are our own. No one can see the world through our eyes with the same imagery and emotional response. No one can see the world through our eyes with our life experiences and our interpretations of those experiences – these are our own.

So I ask the question again – why is suicide considered such a bad thing? Obviously for the person concerned the prospect of death is more alluring than continuing living as currently experienced. What is “wrong” with that? It is their choice.

Then for some to say that only God can decide when or where a person dies is surely a gross over assumption - how do they know? What special insight do they possess? Is it not possible, because (I assume) God gave us free will that God may have already decided to allow a person who wants to die, to die?

Furthermore to declare (as some authority figures do) that most people who commit suicide suffer from a mental "illness" or disorder is surely wrong. It is also highly presumptuous on the part of the person making such a declaration – how do they ACTUALLY know! This is categorising a person, who now has no recourse or ability to refute the presumption. This is putting a label on someone. And then what about those “outsiders” left behind to live with the event – the family and friends? Are they to be made to suffer further pain with the stigma provided by so called experts who provide the “knowledge” that their son, daughter, friend, brother, sister “must have been mentally deranged” to have committed such an act. This implies that no “normal” person would ever do such a thing! What about self-sacrifice when there is loss of life? Isn’t this an act of suicide? But if it saves the life of others it is considered “noble”!! ("There is no greater love than this, that a man should lay down his life for his friends" - English King James Bible: John 15:13).

Research on completed suicides is notoriously difficult. It is always referring to an historic act – something that has already happened. Police, coronial, autopsy, psychiatric and psychological and counselling reports are analysed and carefully combed to try and establish some reason or motive for the suicide. This is fraught as it is impossible to know what was actually going through the person’s mind at the precise moment in time when they took their own life. At that moment they made a choice. Why? We can never know.

Shall we now look at what suicide actually is? Someone taking their own life – right? It seems that the “act” is only considered suicide if it results in the quick death of the person concerned. But what about those who commit suicide in the “long term”? Those who drink or drug themselves to death over a number of years, what about them? They may suffer from abuse, or from unbearable pressures associated with their domestic arrangements or at work. They may determine that the easiest and most “socially acceptable” way of easing this pressure or pain, is to get drunk or to get “stoned” on a regular basis. It may take some time but in possibly five or ten years they will be dead.   The emotional (and economic) “cost” of this (“long term suicide”) far exceeds that of any number of “quick” suicides.

To get back to the “mental illness or disorder” accusation. Disordered from what? What are these people supposed to be disordered from? From “normal”? As far as I can discover there is no accepted definition of “normal”. Possibly those considered “disordered” react to life’s trials and tribulations differently from those around them. Are they wrong? Or are we “outsiders” just being intolerant and lacking in understanding or compassion? Maybe these people are just eccentric – God knows there are enough odd ball people in the community!! Some behaviour may be considered mal-adaptive or possibly anti-social by “outsiders” but not by the people concerned – otherwise they wouldn’t act the way they do!

Similarly, why should anyone "live" according to another's expectations?  

There is an essay, “Suicide”, by the Scottish philosopher David Hume (1711 – 1776) wherein he wrote, “I believe that no man ever threw away Life while it was worth keeping.”

What follows below is a warning relating to anti-depressant drugs:-

USA Federal Drug Administration Product Information Warning

Patients with major depressive disorder, both adult and pediatric, may experience worsening of their

depression and/or the emergence of suicidal ideation and behavior (suicidality), whether or not they are taking antidepressant medications, and this risk may persist until significant remission occurs. Although there has been a long-standing concern that antidepressants may have a role in inducing worsening of depression and the emergence of suicidality in certain patients, a causal role for antidepressants in inducing such behaviors has not been established. Nevertheless, patients being treated with antidepressants should be observed closely for clinical worsening and suicidality, especially at the beginning of a course of drug therapy, or at the time of dose changes, either increases or decreases.

Consideration should be given to changing the therapeutic regimen, including possibly discontinuing the medication, in patients whose depression is persistently worse or whose emergent suicidality is severe, abrupt in onset, or was not part of the patient’s presenting symptoms.

From the above it is apparent that psycho-pharmceutical medications are not always the answer!

Finally I will repeat a quote, from the Indian sage Jiddu Krishnamurti (1895-1986), who said, "It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society"

There we have it - in a nutshell!

Father Time - On growing old (or older).

Some people have a fear about growing old. They try to ignore it or fight it with every means at their disposal. We can see this in the plethora of programmes on TV showing how people go about getting a personal ‘make-over’ and teams given seven days to get someone to look ten years younger, and such like. The only ones who really benefit from all this are the medicos, advertisers and the TV stations.

The trouble is this is a losing battle and a ‘fight’ that can never be won! We all grow old. This is just an inescapable fact of nature. Some, particularly women it seems to me, may find this difficult to accept but inevitably they will grow old – and, with time, they will show it. Why not just accept the inexorable passage of Time? It was not called Father Time for nothing. Time has to be respected, in fact respect is demanded on pain of death!

We all have a mental image of what we look like; possibly how we would like to appear, to both ourselves and others. We all try to look our best - for us. But it is how we feel that makes the difference, and is what really counts in the long run.

I have found that the older I become, my expectations alter accordingly. I know there are certain activities I am no longer capable of doing, at least not to the same level of enthusiasm and ability as before. I know that I no longer have that grace and fluidity of movement that is part of being young. My muscles, certainly, are not as strong as they used to be; my tendons have lost much of their elasticity and my joints have stiffened somewhat and now I have my recently replaced knee joint – made from titanium. But I certainly do not feel ‘old’ – whatever that is supposed to feel like. My mind is still quite active and I hope to keep it that way by studying (psychology in my case) and writing as much as I can.

Age also has the benefit of allowing hindsight – I have nearly eight decades of experience to draw upon. Age also mellows expectations; life no longer has that intensity and urgency of youth. In the great scheme of things, if something does not happen today, or tomorrow, does it really matter?

There is another benefit that comes with age; age, in most cases, brings with it some wisdom; some ability to see further into life’s situations and to accept them for what they are. One learns to understand that everything has its place in the creation and what is more important, everything comes to pass; even life itself.

Peace of mind comes with this acceptance.

To me a good life consists of living for each day, being content with my lot (whatever ‘hand of cards fate has dealt’ me), not trying to change the world to suite my reduced capabilities but to adapt to the situation or circumstance as it is presented.

Most important of all time must be spent in developing and maintaining good relationships with family and friends – what and where would we be without them! It goes without saying that part of building and maintaining relationships is helping others, as best one can, to understand what life means, particularly children, because they are the future.

It would be a pleasing and satisfying thought, for me, if my life’s work may have contributed, in some small way, to my leaving this world a better place than I found it when I was born – right in the early years of the Second World War! But I am not building up my hopes too high!!