On the Control People Have Over Their Behavior, Emotions, and Thoughts - Essay Example

On the Control People Have Over Their Behavior, Emotions, and Thoughts Table of Contents Introduction 3 Discussion 4 Conclusion 9 Works Cited 11 Introduction I want to use the three texts by Armstrong, Stout and Thurman to be able to find out just how much control people have over themselves. By themselves I mean the way they act, the way they think, and how they feel moment to moment. Are people in control, or are larger forces beyond the individual hold sway? What does it mean to be a human being possessing free will, if he is not in control over the very things that make him what he is? If he is in control, just how much control does he have over these aspects of himself? This paper takes the position that we do not know what we are doing in most situations. We are not in control (Armstrong 22-38; Thurman 460-473; Stout 381-398). It is interesting how the different authors portray man. In a way their portrayal also defines what it means for man to be free, and just how free he is in reality. Armstrong, for one, notes that man is not totally free to be anything, because he is hardwired to look for God. He is a religious being as much as he is descended from apes and has that particular anatomy. There in that vision of man there seems to be already a defining and a limiting of what man can be. He is not free to be anything he wants to be. He must by his very nature act, think and feel in accordance with his wiring. That wiring includes looking for God. Thurman also seems to think the same way, in a sense. He says that in essence the ego or the individual is not in control of himself, because the ego is always in flux. He is a bundle of passing thoughts, feelings, and actions. Stout seems to say the same thing, in the language of trauma and the human brain. She is saying that trauma, for instance, can affect the way people perceive the world. Trauma changes the way the brain is wired. It is so that people are not in control of the way they react to things that remind them of traumatic events (Armstrong 22-38; Thurman 460-473; Stout 381-398). Discussion Reading Stout, for instance, we come face to face with just how vulnerable man is to trauma. Trauma can reshape the brain itself. With the brain reshaped, a person’s thoughts and feelings are affected. Of course with the thoughts affected and changed in profound ways, actions are likewise reshaped and affected. We see that man can be so affected by trauma as to be unaware that he is acting out of reason, for instance. It can be also that man can be unaware that he is acting out of a reaction to a past traumatic event. How much control does man have in this instance? Obviously man is not much in control. To be aware means to know that one’s actions are coming from a deep-rooted fear. People who experienced trauma sometimes do not know that. They are unconscious of the effect that fear and memory have on their feelings, thoughts and actions: “ … nor do we comprehend how swampy and vitality-sucking some of our memories really are…in the course of a lifetime such “protective” mental reactions acquire tremendous habit strength” (Stout 384).Stout’s point is that there is much in man that he is not even aware of. Those things that he is not aware of largely control him. Those things affect how he feels and how he thinks. Those things affect how he reacts to the world and to his life as that life unfolds. So to the question of whether man knows what he is doing in most situations, it seems the answer from Stout is no. I agree. An ordinary man cannot know what all of his hidden fears are. Sometimes even when he thinks he knows he does not really know why he acts the way he does. Sometimes I feel sad for no reason at all, after hearing an old song, for instance. It may be that deep in my memory there is something about the song that I associate with something sad or unpleasant. It may be even something that I was afraid of at some point that I associate with the song. It may be something traumatic that I cannot fully understand. Armstrong has a similar observation in this regard. “As meaning-seeking creatures, men and women fall very easily into despair. They have created religions…to help them find value in their lives, despite all the dispiriting evidence to the contrary” (Armstrong 25). What Armstrong is saying is that man is often troubled by things that are beyond him. There are things within him and outside him that are beyond his control and understanding. He is buffeted by strong feelings and bewildering thoughts. He feels overwhelmed, but is not aware of why this is so. Stout tells us that some people are so traumatized that they lose all sense of control over how much they can be close to people even: “…the traumatized person is unable to feel completely connected to another person, even a friend, even a spouse” (Stout 397). There are so many things within human beings that can cause them to lose control and become unaware of the pain and suffering inside them (Armstrong 22-38; Thurman 460-473; Stout 381-398). Man can be aware of what he is doing in most situations, but in reality he is not aware, and sleeps through life. This can be one conclusion from reading Thurman for example. Thurman says, in a way, that man only thinks that he is aware, when in fact he is not. Ordinary man lives on the level of thoughts and the ego. This ego is just a jumble of thoughts and feelings. This ego is not in control of those, but only imagines that he is. His thoughts come to him from his memories. From his memories he projects himself and thinks further. His persistent thinking is the fog that prevents him from being aware that there is someone else beyond his thoughts. So in effect he lives unaware. He is unaware of himself. He is unaware for instance that he is not his thoughts, that he is not who he thinks he is. As Thurman says, “Your solid self-sense is only an illusion” (Thurman 467). He is saying that the ego that thinks itself in control of his own life is just an illusion. It is not really there. In fact there is no one there. This can be disconcerting to know. One can say that life just happens. Thoughts, feelings and the actions of people are things that just happen as part of life. The ego is not the one in control of all of this. Yet the fact that people live on the level of ego means that people don’t see this. They are asleep and not aware at all. To be in conscious control, according to Thurman, is to be aware of the ego, of thoughts and feelings. Only then can one act with conscious intention. Armstrong hints at the same thing in her essay. There she says that man has some inkling that he is not really who he thinks he is, that he is false in a way. To be true he must be able to escape that false self. “We make a point of seeking out these experiences that touch us deeply within and lift us momentarily beyond ourselves. At such times, we feel that we inhabit our humanity more fully…” (Armstrong 27). Armstrong here seems to point to an idea similar to the idea of Thurman regarding waking up from the false self. Finding that he is not his thoughts or his feelings, he recognizes that he is the one that is aware, outside of everything. “But the awareness that looks at them, that contemplates and investigates them, that is my ‘self’” (Thurman 472). Here we come to a map pointing the way to more control. People can be aware of their thoughts and their feelings, from the point of view of the aware self. This aware self is outside the thoughts and feelings. In a way this self is in conscious “control” (Armstrong 22-38; Thurman 460-473; Stout 381-398). The three authors in their own ways tell us just how much conscious control we can have over what we think, feel and do. In Thurman the key seems to be getting to know that self that lies beyond the thoughts. This is home, it seems for our true selves. From here we can observe and then we can get to know more about what we think and feel. Thurman is saying that the Buddha is in complete control. To be in conscious control of the things that happen to us, our thoughts and feelings, means to be aware of them as they happen. Yet this also seems to say that we must become Buddhas. Of course this is a very difficult task, even for those who have been practicing Buddhism their whole lives. Thurman seems to say that we are in control to the level that we are like Buddha: “…people must discover their real nature for themselves” (Thurman 466). In Stout the key it seems is an understanding of just how trauma affects judgment and normal thinking. A large part of this is the ability to be aware of ones thoughts and feelings, and to be present to them in spite of the negative conditioning of the brain, that associates some memories with pain and suffering. “All the brains authoritative warnings against staying present for the memories and the painful emotions, all the faulty fuses, have to be deliberately ignored” (Stout 384). Armstrong seems to say the same thing, only in terms of man being religious. Religion can be seen in this light as man attempting to have conscious control over his life, his feelings and his thoughts. There are things that are overwhelming to man, but just the same he tries to make sense of those things inside him and outside him, through religion. The elders of old religions for instance had some answers that they tried to impart to the entire clan, and to new adults being initiated into the life of the clan. This initiation is the way that the clan enables its new adults to have some control over their lives. In Stout the key is understanding the inner lives of people, how they think and feel, for instance. Also, part of the key is in understanding how people come to feel, think and act like they do. Stout seems to say that people can have control over their lives if they understand why they think and feel the way they do. To do that they must look to the past. One can argue that this is the same as saying that one must better understand oneself. In this sense Thurman and Armstrong are one with Stout (Armstrong 22-38; Thurman 460-473; Stout 381-398). Conclusion It is clear from Stout that man is largely often unaware of what he is doing and thinking. He is a conditioned creature. He acts from memory and the emotions tied to those memories. Where those memories are traumatic the feelings of pain and suffering surface again when present events resemble old traumatic events. Man acts out in ways that he is not conscious of. These are things that are hidden from normal consciousness. An ordinary man can go through life not knowing that there are these things operating within him. Stout makes it clear that man can be maimed by his traumas, and therefore can be in a kind of prison. This is the opposite of being in control. Rather his feelings and actions control him. Armstrong and Thurman say the same thing, in different ways. Man in Thurman’s view is often found living from the level of his ego, which is a kind of living in sleep. Man is not aware that he is not this tiny ego. So he acts also largely without awareness of his thoughts and feelings. He thinks he is all that, when he is not. Armstrong on the other hand says the same thing, that there is something higher in man that is truer. Man tries to reach that truer self via religion (Armstrong 22-38; Thurman 460-473; Stout 381-398). Works Cited Armstrong, Karen. “Homo religiosus” Stout, Martha. “When I Woke Up Tuesday Morning, It Was Friday”. Thurman, Robert. “Wisdom”. Read More