"If you think you are enlightened, go spend a week with your family." - Ram Dass A common occurrence when individuals engage in "the work," such as transformative projects within psychotherapeutic or meditative contexts, is that even after undergoing significant personal changes, they still get emotionally triggered when visiting their parents. When these triggering moments happen, an internal dialogue often emerges: "Shit, I've put in all this effort, and yet these people still trigger me."
Thank you so much for these insights and a new pathway to consider. So much recognition of the specialness of wanting to be seen by others, while also recognising the deep healing of being seen by others. As someone who flows (when with family) between resigning myself to not being seen and hiking up the walls pre-family time/text exchange/call, holding off from exchange until I feel 'clear' enough to engage as I think a more adult me would engage, cutting off/massively reducing time with family (and I need to add that I did need to fully break contact with one parent), and accepting that I won't get what I need from my family and shifting my attention to differing levels of friendship intimacy, it was fascinating and exciting to read your suggestions for alternative pathways forwards.
I'm noticing, though, a reoccurring block with the third pathway of family intraprenuership, that of shifting family norms and rituals by taking ownership of or shifting the family nexus. I keep coming back to the questions: wouldn't a family need to have some willingness to change at a fundamental level? When I examine it, I see families as systems where people are playing roles they might think they don't want to play but are actually continually recreating because it gives them something important. Wouldn't it therefore be unkind/potentially dangerous to be intentionally shifting a family system when the other members aren't aware that their roles, both individually and within the system, might be changing, since that might create stress/changes that they aren't equipped to notice, process, or request? Curious for your thoughts, or any experience with this.
To speak generally, change (for the good) can happen intentionally or unintentionally through some unplanned event. For it to happen intentionally within a family system, at least one person needs to be an initiator and take the lead. Of course, like in any noble venture, there are hazards in doing so, aka, changing too fast or in a way can lead to more harm than good. So, without sufficient wisdom, it might be foolish to attempt such intrapreneurship.
Thank you so much for taking the time to reply and offering your thoughts. I notice still a caution to shift a family system without having an understanding of how the roles in that system sustain each individual, or without prior agreement from each member. I also notice that what arises in me as the less foolish (I very much appreciate this compass of yours) route is to focus on how I might be within the family system and the individual relationships between me and each family member, and look to bring compassion and kindness and self-awareness into how I am being in all of these, and leave the system to itself.
Dec 24, 2023·edited Dec 24, 2023Liked by Peter N Limberg
I had a recent philosophical guidance session with a person going through a similar knot. We ended up considering another approach - using the triggers as a source for inner exploration. When you get triggered at a family gathering, consider why, and how you relate to yourself in the moment you get triggered!
I think Peter's ideas related to persona-heavy relating and a sense of specialness are probably part of the annoyance for many people! I also think there are multiple other factors that might contribute to everyone's experiences.
I've noticed an unskillful pattern in my own life, where I've used judgement of my past self as a way to bolster personal development. One problem is that judgement spills over, causing resentment of people that are like I used to be - a dynamic I recognize in recently deconverted atheists who develop a strong aversion to religious people. Another consequence of past-self judgement is an instinctual blindness to the way old patterns resurface in new forms - by judging my past self, I cause myself to avert my gaze when stumbling upon lingering traces of who I was (and still am).
This unskillful past-self judgement is noticeable in contexts where I go into behavior patterns that are tied to my old self. In some such situations, I go into self-judgement.
Sitting at the Christmas table can be a reality-check indeed - I'm curious about the multitude of different patterns that can be revealed in such situations. Do you get scared? Angry? Shy?
Your reaction potentially hold information - especially if it's something you'd rather not think about.
Thanks, Jonathan. Firstly, as a meta note, it might be a less foolish idea to have philosophical counsellors/coaches/guides like ourselves meet regularly to sense map the collective x-knots we see active (aka "the vocation gap" and whatever this familial unseen/trigger knot should be called), using our philosophy practices partly as anthropological research. Secondly, having a understanding of theoretical understanding of what the x-knot is and experimenting toward best praxis are both important. However, for practical philosophy to be practical it must move toward practice eventually, aka the trigger-to-inner-exploration pipeline practice you are gesturing at.
If we source our theoretical model building from sessions, then we are starting in practice. If we use our understanding to inform our guidance we also end up in practice.
So hopefully, we'll avoid drifting off into theory space :)
Both of my parents are long dead but I see how these dynamics play out with my kids and siblings.
One edit needed? Should the sentence “Not being seen by a co-worker or a stranger at a party differs from being seen by one's parents” say “*not* being seen by one’s parents”
Former friend of mine air-nurses his dead mother's nipple (seriously, like an air suckle). He does this a few times every minute. Can't stop. His mother died before he could work out his pathological relationship with her (devouring/devoured). Family sessions are indeed the real test.
Well yes, maybe realize how ‘far’ from democracy we truly are.
As usual, the truth hurts when visited, colonials run away (energy blind)
Children are sold (to another’s care)
Parents are sold (to another’s care)
But from this we can assess, care comes before value and the best care can only be that of closeness.
Look up to a whale?
It swims with its family an entire lifetime.
Friendship is ‘familiar’, family of.
Patriarchy is a force of correction (domesticide).
A human being is essentially caring, not told, bossed, strangled, checked on, monitored, advised, conditioned and neutered.
Self help was the first crack, therapy is to see colour again, presence is to let go of pre-concepts, judgement and the witch hunt of blame semantics, the short cut of violence, the mechanistic clock of obedience and the absence of wonder away from the emptiness of measure.
Care before value, we can no longer afford ‘value before care’, tokenism.
Happy year end spiral from a fossilized footprint age, added to 2024 and its imagined zero point celebration while walking among fat lipped feathery dinosaurs.
So much to unpack in this for me. First, who or what is doing the seeing? To be seen like Moses being seen from the presence in the burning bush requires "shedding" his shoes or skin as David Whyte writes poetically in "Fire in the Earth. Is there "seeing" beyond the conditioning of self? If so, is all the conversation about models, constructs, needing to be seen all kind of nonsense in the way of "seeing" as "observer and observed" as one?
Thank you so much for these insights and a new pathway to consider. So much recognition of the specialness of wanting to be seen by others, while also recognising the deep healing of being seen by others. As someone who flows (when with family) between resigning myself to not being seen and hiking up the walls pre-family time/text exchange/call, holding off from exchange until I feel 'clear' enough to engage as I think a more adult me would engage, cutting off/massively reducing time with family (and I need to add that I did need to fully break contact with one parent), and accepting that I won't get what I need from my family and shifting my attention to differing levels of friendship intimacy, it was fascinating and exciting to read your suggestions for alternative pathways forwards.
I'm noticing, though, a reoccurring block with the third pathway of family intraprenuership, that of shifting family norms and rituals by taking ownership of or shifting the family nexus. I keep coming back to the questions: wouldn't a family need to have some willingness to change at a fundamental level? When I examine it, I see families as systems where people are playing roles they might think they don't want to play but are actually continually recreating because it gives them something important. Wouldn't it therefore be unkind/potentially dangerous to be intentionally shifting a family system when the other members aren't aware that their roles, both individually and within the system, might be changing, since that might create stress/changes that they aren't equipped to notice, process, or request? Curious for your thoughts, or any experience with this.
To speak generally, change (for the good) can happen intentionally or unintentionally through some unplanned event. For it to happen intentionally within a family system, at least one person needs to be an initiator and take the lead. Of course, like in any noble venture, there are hazards in doing so, aka, changing too fast or in a way can lead to more harm than good. So, without sufficient wisdom, it might be foolish to attempt such intrapreneurship.
Thank you so much for taking the time to reply and offering your thoughts. I notice still a caution to shift a family system without having an understanding of how the roles in that system sustain each individual, or without prior agreement from each member. I also notice that what arises in me as the less foolish (I very much appreciate this compass of yours) route is to focus on how I might be within the family system and the individual relationships between me and each family member, and look to bring compassion and kindness and self-awareness into how I am being in all of these, and leave the system to itself.
I had a recent philosophical guidance session with a person going through a similar knot. We ended up considering another approach - using the triggers as a source for inner exploration. When you get triggered at a family gathering, consider why, and how you relate to yourself in the moment you get triggered!
I think Peter's ideas related to persona-heavy relating and a sense of specialness are probably part of the annoyance for many people! I also think there are multiple other factors that might contribute to everyone's experiences.
I've noticed an unskillful pattern in my own life, where I've used judgement of my past self as a way to bolster personal development. One problem is that judgement spills over, causing resentment of people that are like I used to be - a dynamic I recognize in recently deconverted atheists who develop a strong aversion to religious people. Another consequence of past-self judgement is an instinctual blindness to the way old patterns resurface in new forms - by judging my past self, I cause myself to avert my gaze when stumbling upon lingering traces of who I was (and still am).
This unskillful past-self judgement is noticeable in contexts where I go into behavior patterns that are tied to my old self. In some such situations, I go into self-judgement.
Sitting at the Christmas table can be a reality-check indeed - I'm curious about the multitude of different patterns that can be revealed in such situations. Do you get scared? Angry? Shy?
Your reaction potentially hold information - especially if it's something you'd rather not think about.
Thanks, Jonathan. Firstly, as a meta note, it might be a less foolish idea to have philosophical counsellors/coaches/guides like ourselves meet regularly to sense map the collective x-knots we see active (aka "the vocation gap" and whatever this familial unseen/trigger knot should be called), using our philosophy practices partly as anthropological research. Secondly, having a understanding of theoretical understanding of what the x-knot is and experimenting toward best praxis are both important. However, for practical philosophy to be practical it must move toward practice eventually, aka the trigger-to-inner-exploration pipeline practice you are gesturing at.
If we source our theoretical model building from sessions, then we are starting in practice. If we use our understanding to inform our guidance we also end up in practice.
So hopefully, we'll avoid drifting off into theory space :)
I found this valuable, thanks.
Both of my parents are long dead but I see how these dynamics play out with my kids and siblings.
One edit needed? Should the sentence “Not being seen by a co-worker or a stranger at a party differs from being seen by one's parents” say “*not* being seen by one’s parents”
Yes, made the edit. Thanks.
So happy you shared this as I was thinking of writing something on this exact topic myself, but you did such a better job!
Former friend of mine air-nurses his dead mother's nipple (seriously, like an air suckle). He does this a few times every minute. Can't stop. His mother died before he could work out his pathological relationship with her (devouring/devoured). Family sessions are indeed the real test.
Well yes, maybe realize how ‘far’ from democracy we truly are.
As usual, the truth hurts when visited, colonials run away (energy blind)
Children are sold (to another’s care)
Parents are sold (to another’s care)
But from this we can assess, care comes before value and the best care can only be that of closeness.
Look up to a whale?
It swims with its family an entire lifetime.
Friendship is ‘familiar’, family of.
Patriarchy is a force of correction (domesticide).
A human being is essentially caring, not told, bossed, strangled, checked on, monitored, advised, conditioned and neutered.
Self help was the first crack, therapy is to see colour again, presence is to let go of pre-concepts, judgement and the witch hunt of blame semantics, the short cut of violence, the mechanistic clock of obedience and the absence of wonder away from the emptiness of measure.
Care before value, we can no longer afford ‘value before care’, tokenism.
Happy year end spiral from a fossilized footprint age, added to 2024 and its imagined zero point celebration while walking among fat lipped feathery dinosaurs.
Everyone's family is annoying, just ask Al Bundy haha!
So much to unpack in this for me. First, who or what is doing the seeing? To be seen like Moses being seen from the presence in the burning bush requires "shedding" his shoes or skin as David Whyte writes poetically in "Fire in the Earth. Is there "seeing" beyond the conditioning of self? If so, is all the conversation about models, constructs, needing to be seen all kind of nonsense in the way of "seeing" as "observer and observed" as one?