Reply to comment

I apologize if this is either irrelevant or redundant; I haven’t yet read others’ posts…

Walt Whitman wrote, in stanza 51 of the poem Song of Myself:

Do I contradict myself?
Very well then I contradict myself,
(I am large, I contain multitudes.)
http://www.princeton.edu/~batke/logr/log_026.html


This notion of “containing multitudes” is one, for me, that gives texture and meaning to experience, to life, to interactions. I think that multiple “realities” are necessary in order to truly conceptualize the breadth of human experience, both to reconcile conflict within oneself and to understand similarities and differences in perceptions amongst people. In my thinking, “reality” is not a singular, knowable, “thing,” but rather a collection of unknowable things. The level of uncertainty about what is “real” is made less daunting and lonely based upon an understanding that while there is little that can be “known” there is much knowledge that can be shared. Even if we map out the entire brain and understand what each and every “box” within it does and from which boxes behaviors originate, randomness always exists and behaviors that defy “laws” persist. As such, our best guess must be one that is inclusive, not exclusive and one that enables a maximum number of people to thrive. Furthermore, more stories need to be included in the story of "truth," and/or our culturally accepted, perhaps implictly and not explicitly known, version of "truth" or "reality" needs to be extended, so more "truths" are incorporated. If we are all our own storytellers, perhaps with multiple versions of a story, sometimes which are conflicting, why are we not better at listening to our own stories or communicating them to others? On the flip side, perhaps, given the variation in individual stories, we are excellent at it and should congratulate ourselves for reconciling so many differing stories with as much harmony as we do.

Arthur Kleinman, a psychiatrist and anthropologist writes of “illness as narrative” and speaks to his observation that in certain cultures, particularly Chinese and East Asian, mental “illness” more often manifests as physical illness. And, thus, illness, both mental and physical, can be viewed as a story that the body, the mind of the sick person is telling. It is the physical manifestation, perhaps, of the unconscious. Here is an interview with Kleinman from 2006: http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2006/07/23/qa_with_arthur_kleinman/?page=2

Are we making ourselves more "sick" in some ways becaue of the types of stories our culture tells about illness? Maybe not "more" sick, but sick in different ways?

Jung talks about a “collective unconscious” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_unconscious
Which he held to be “objective.” Whether or not it is “objective,” is there some shared experience that is a “human” experience? I mean not to set humans apart from other organisms particularly, but for the purpose of extending the notion of our individual stories into some sort of tapestry of stories that may, in fact, be interwoven. Perhaps this is something to celebrate and not to fear. Perhaps, from an extension of shared experience or shared knowledge can come a shared understanding, rather than alienation from "self" and others.

Finally, when we dream, does our unconscious seeps into our conscious? http://www.ondreaming.com/
This site has a gallery of drawings, paintings, etc. based upon dreams people had that they submitted, along with accompanying interpretations of the dreams. I found some of them very interesting and wanted to share it, for those interested. If, according to the schematic Professor Grobstein showed us in class, the unconscious is far bigger than the “I-Function” in size, yes, but also in its boundaries, what is the interplay between the conscious and “tacit knowledge?” How and when is information exchanged and is a disconnect between the two manifest as “illness?”