While it is possible, for example, to receive affection
without displaying it, even in strange cases like this,
both parties are trying to satisfy some need or desire in
this interaction.
Sometimes the relationships in question are with "the
environment" (e.g. leisure time spent alone in a natural
setting). At the same time, this notion of "environment"
really should comprehend one's total life situation.
(E.g. if one is followed everywhere by someone banging
pots and pans, it may be hard to enjoy the sort of leisure
I mentioned.)
I think the typical model is that we have "input needs"
(food, water, etc.) and "output needs" (human waste,
etc.). I don't think it is correct to treat affection as
an "input need", since it is so clearly about
relationships with other people.
However, I think we have another need, which for the
moment I will call "intimacy", which is practically as
different from affection as affection is from our need for
sustenance.
Like affection, intimacy has to do with relationships with
other people, however it would be more likely to be
mistaken for an "output need", the need to express the
truth of one's being. This truth may have very little to
do with affection for others.
At the same time, intimacy pairs nicely with affection --
to be treated with respect and generosity while you pour
out the contents of your soul is a very good thing. And
of course physical intimacy and mutual affection can make
for enjoyable times. Still, the term as I'm using it
covers more than just "bedroom matters". In as sense, I'd
say that our need for intimacy may be why we have
established a need for affection -- intimacy gives
affection something to be affectionate for.
At the same time, I think they are separate needs. In
much the same way as one can see one-sided affection, one
can also see one-sided intimacy in the unilateral sharing
of personal details with an uncaring or unfeeling
audience. Which brings me to my next topic...
2. The fact that "emotion" is not recognized as a need by
Max-Neef (the theorist whose list of needs I'm riffing on
here; see http://www.rainforestinfo.org.au/background/maxneef.htm)
seems like a big deal.
Maybe he is assuming that we "automatically" have
emotions. If this is the case, maybe he does not
recognize any "automatic" features of human existence as
needs because they cannot be "supplied" from without.
But I don't think we "automatically" have emotions any
more than we "automatically" have an identity. Just as
one's identity can be disrupted through traumatic events,
both local and total "emotional numbing" can take place
under circumstances of prolonged stress.
In a sense, "emotion" is the "master need" that shows us
our other needs. Without sufficient emotion, we are not
in tune with ourselves, and can, at best, mechanically try
to satisfy the needs we think we have.
Perhaps this is why Max-Neef leaves it out of his list: it
isn't completely clear unless you think about it how
"emotion" relates to "the environment". But it's actually
simple: it relates to that part of the environment that is
oneself.
3. In somewhat the same way in which "intimacy" and
"affection" can be linked and related, emotion and another
need I will call "overcoming" can pair nicely. One
overcomes one's "negative" emotions not merely by
replacing them with positive ones, but by "working them
out".
In addition, one can experience a sort of self-overcoming
(that is different from but perhaps contributing to
"growth") whenever one makes a change in one's life
situation (which we need to do quite frequently).
This is not the same as a protection-from, but the
resolution-of.
The relationship of "overcoming" to "intimacy" warrants
some comment. One overcomes blocks and stagnation in
favor of change. Sometimes one can do this through
intimacy; sometimes the blocks are precisely blocks
against intimacy.
For me personally, "overcoming" seems to be a necessary
response to feeling hyper-responsible or guilty -- the
somewhat neurotic feeling that I can "never do enough".
All too often, that sort of feeling goes beyond being
"motivating" and is just depressing.
I also want to point out that "overcoming" is related to
"understanding" but is not the same.
I do not overcome a "guilt feeling" by rationally
understanding that I am not responsible (I already know
that), nor merely by "paying attention to the present
moment on purpose and without judgment" (although that
could help). Rather, I overcome such feelings by
participating in the flow of my life, seeing that as
things around me change, my internal state changes as
well. As time goes by I seem to be getting better at
hopping onto this flow and experiencing this change.
0 comments:
Post a Comment