This is the second part of an essay series that began with “Everything that turned out well in my life followed the same design process.” It can be read on its own.
I think both the most insightful and difficult problem Maslow came across was the Jonah Complex, i.e. the fact that barely anyone seems to actually try to self-actualise. That fear of your own power to fully control your life.
This is interesting. It strikes me that the kind of in-touch-with-reality perception you’re aiming for is a kind of Aristotelian mean, because somewhere past the point where you see enough details to keep you from living too much in your head, you get into territory where you’re sorting through an incapacitating number of details all the time. ADHD and autism tend in that direction. With autism it’s common to have a sensitive sensory system and a tendency to notice details first and see what they add up to, rather than starting with the big picture and seeing what it predicts. See for example (and citations) https://autisticphd.com/theblog/what-is-bottom-up-thinking-in-autism/, which made my head explode when I read it because I never realized that outlining before researching actually works for how some people think, rather than being a style of speculative brainstorming that teachers like.
Also, we notice and track more unconsciously than we’ve consciously and rationally put together, so another angle on the problem of perceptiveness is about tapping into that unconscious layer and bringing it into fuller consciousness. Strange to say, but in my experience, divergent details don’t have to be certifiably real to pull you back into the flow of your own life and out of intellectualized introspection. They just need to jog you out of the lens you’re stuck in, and then other things you’d semi-noticed but screened out start to rush in. Which is part of why Tarot cards are awesome.
That was a fun essay to read! The Danish conversation was particularly interesting to me as a Swedish speaker... It reminds me of a brilliant book called "Sea of Poppies" by Amitav Ghosh, which takes the reader on a journey like this, of not quite fully understanding, but sort of getting the gist! A great essay which breaks it down is "Sea of Poppies and the Possibilities of Mistranslation" by Aruna D'Souza.
Imo, most of my most egregious misperceptions comes from some emotion within, so being aware of your own biases may be more important than training your sensitivity/external perception.
Because we can't directly perceive, we need a lens to look through the world. Each lens obscures and shapes the world in different ways, and the best way to account for that is to see the world through different lenses. That's why identity is so dangerous - it's locking in a specific lens.
Sadly this is why kids who grow up in a chaotic/unstable home can be very sensitive/perceptive. They are thrown into the deep-end of the pool and they had to learn to survive by being sharply attuned.
Yes. Early trauma, and trauma more generally, can transform your default to a heavily negative leaning one. So you have these incredibly sensitive and perceptive people (myself included) who can often become locked in a prediction mindset of negativity, often without any idea of this tendency.
Hello Henrik! Thank you for writing this piece—I am really loving this series so far. I resonated with the idea that you can gain a lot of insight about the world by acknowledging the details that don’t make sense to you. This seems like one of the benefits of cultivating a reverence for honesty.
Clowning practices are often all about this-- approaching everyday objects as if you don't know what they are. Bringing that mode into everyday life is very rewarding.
I think both the most insightful and difficult problem Maslow came across was the Jonah Complex, i.e. the fact that barely anyone seems to actually try to self-actualise. That fear of your own power to fully control your life.
Perceptiveness vs Intellectualised Introspection -- a super useful distinction for me in my current reality. Thanks Henrik!
This is interesting. It strikes me that the kind of in-touch-with-reality perception you’re aiming for is a kind of Aristotelian mean, because somewhere past the point where you see enough details to keep you from living too much in your head, you get into territory where you’re sorting through an incapacitating number of details all the time. ADHD and autism tend in that direction. With autism it’s common to have a sensitive sensory system and a tendency to notice details first and see what they add up to, rather than starting with the big picture and seeing what it predicts. See for example (and citations) https://autisticphd.com/theblog/what-is-bottom-up-thinking-in-autism/, which made my head explode when I read it because I never realized that outlining before researching actually works for how some people think, rather than being a style of speculative brainstorming that teachers like.
Also, we notice and track more unconsciously than we’ve consciously and rationally put together, so another angle on the problem of perceptiveness is about tapping into that unconscious layer and bringing it into fuller consciousness. Strange to say, but in my experience, divergent details don’t have to be certifiably real to pull you back into the flow of your own life and out of intellectualized introspection. They just need to jog you out of the lens you’re stuck in, and then other things you’d semi-noticed but screened out start to rush in. Which is part of why Tarot cards are awesome.
That was a fun essay to read! The Danish conversation was particularly interesting to me as a Swedish speaker... It reminds me of a brilliant book called "Sea of Poppies" by Amitav Ghosh, which takes the reader on a journey like this, of not quite fully understanding, but sort of getting the gist! A great essay which breaks it down is "Sea of Poppies and the Possibilities of Mistranslation" by Aruna D'Souza.
Cool! Leaving the Atocha Station by Ben Lerner has some really nice descriptions of this feeling when the narrator is learning Spanish.
Nice, will check it out.
Great piece Henrik!
Imo, most of my most egregious misperceptions comes from some emotion within, so being aware of your own biases may be more important than training your sensitivity/external perception.
Because we can't directly perceive, we need a lens to look through the world. Each lens obscures and shapes the world in different ways, and the best way to account for that is to see the world through different lenses. That's why identity is so dangerous - it's locking in a specific lens.
Sadly this is why kids who grow up in a chaotic/unstable home can be very sensitive/perceptive. They are thrown into the deep-end of the pool and they had to learn to survive by being sharply attuned.
Yes. Early trauma, and trauma more generally, can transform your default to a heavily negative leaning one. So you have these incredibly sensitive and perceptive people (myself included) who can often become locked in a prediction mindset of negativity, often without any idea of this tendency.
same, friend. <3
All the problems in your life stem from not loving yourself enough.
——Metamorphosis (written by Franz Kafka)
At a more emotional than perceptual level, but also a good essay.
https://www.lionsroar.com/four-points-for-letting-go-bardo/
I am applying this way of thinking as a parent.
Tell me more!
Hello Henrik! Thank you for writing this piece—I am really loving this series so far. I resonated with the idea that you can gain a lot of insight about the world by acknowledging the details that don’t make sense to you. This seems like one of the benefits of cultivating a reverence for honesty.
Clowning practices are often all about this-- approaching everyday objects as if you don't know what they are. Bringing that mode into everyday life is very rewarding.
Thanks for this essay!
That was a good read, thanks.
I like the way you write. Direct and to the point.
Clear and concise.
Well-designed.