By Katia Del Rivero
On February we began talking about uncertainty, as a constant in life. And how making decisions and generating alternatives strengthens our aptness towards life.
We talk about there being no good or bad decisions, only decisions. And how the best thing we can do with them, is turning them into something good, even if that means changing the choices that didn’t turn out as we expected.
In our last reflexion, we talked about how we make choices and the two systems in our brain. The one placed in our reptilian brain and chooses upon survival (determining what’s safe and what’s risky), whom Maja Storch calls “worm.” And the one that takes care of our social survival, who we call “judge” based on his orientation to make choices between right and wrong.
We also talked about how to make “something good about our choices” both parties must agree, otherwise, sooner or later one will claim the other.
And that’s what we will be talking about today, how to make these two processes in our brain to agree.
The Imprisonment of “the Worm”
One of the forms, sadly the most common, is when “the judge” controls the worm. So it is imprisoned and won’t talk. Its needs have no value when making a decision.
When we decide in this way, we live for the “outside.” It is to say, we live according to what we’ve learned is right or wrong.
They usually go over their own needs and desires. They can live like this for a long long time and will most likely, according to some researches, show stress, unsatisfaction, depression, and disconnection with life symptoms.
The best way to face this scenario is making our “judge” into savant and friends with the “worm.”
The “judge” evaluates, the savant explores; “the judge” judges, the savant analyses, “the judge” states, the savant invites to reflexion.
On the other hand, “judge” or savant, the more references they have, the more alternatives they will be able to find. It is to say, the more open he is, and the less he thinks there’s only one way to live, the wiser he’ll be, and the less judge he’ll be. Mark Twain used to say, “travel is the cure against prejudice, intolerance, and mind narrowness.” The reason is quite simple, our construction reference frame of social reality widens.
The Worm’s Debauchery?
People are very afraid that “the worm” will become libertine if we leave it free if it takes control.
The funny thing is, I have noticed that this is unlikely. Let’s remember that “the worm” chooses in order to take care of us and our survival.
What might happen is that if it was imprisoned for a long time, once it’s out it will “jump of happiness”, and for people who are very self-controlled this could be scary.
The only thing “the worm” wants is to live in peace. So it will react to those things that cause it pain, fear, risk and will react to things that cause it happiness, peace, safety.
Listening to “the worm” makes us wise. Listening to “the worm” allows us to connect with our deepest needs, with what we need to feel safe in the world.
And when we feel safe in the world our savant has a greater chance to analyze, make reflexion, and consider alternatives in a wider and calmer way.
All Needs Have the Same Value
One of the fundamental keys of the Blumenstein Theory© to live in peace is for all the needs that are present in a co-construction process must have the same value. This works in the same ways for ourselves and our inner construction processes.
If we run over our “worm” with our “judge,” sooner or later we’ll feel uncomfortable with ourselves. If we run over our “judge” with our “worm,” we might end up placing ourselves at risk.
So the important thing is not to run over any of the needs, we must listen to them, give them the same weight and value, consider both when making a choice that will allow us to be safe, to feel comfortable and do what’s adequate for the specific context where we are placed.
A good place to start reconciling is asking ourselves “What result would make me feel more satisfied?” in this way, we take our mind to imagine the future and think what choice in the present would draw me to this satisfactory future. We evaluate choices as “good” or “bad” according to the result or consequences coming from them, whether we feel comfortable or uncomfortable in the social frame or inner enjoyment.
Learning to do so is a test and error exercise, Michael used to say, is a process of discovery and accompaniment for ourselves. Treat ourselves kindly during the learning process is the key and exploring and asking ourselves what would make us feel satisfied, is the guide to follow.