26th October 2015
This is one of three
- primitive ways of thinking and solving dilemmas that are basically "unbalanced" by the higher (but fragile) function of Mentalization.
The person in Psychic Equivalence assumes that mental events (thoughts, beliefs or wishes), while recognised as internal, have the same status as physical reality. In other words the person is "Living in the cognition" rather than the cognition living in their mind. Another way of describing this state of mind, then, is INSIDE-OUT THINKING.
To give an example of this; if I think "the world is rubbish" then I can either mentalize about that (reflecting, perhaps, that "it is curious that such a thought has come into my mind today, but perhaps understandable as I smoked and drank too much last night and am hung over now, with lots of work piling up in front of me") or I can assume that "I am living in a rubbish world."
Anger is a good example of this state of mind:
When a person is functioning in Psychic Equivalence there is little point in directly challenging their utterances, as this is more likely to escalate things and leave them with an experience of you as someone who very clearly does NOT mentalize their dilemma clearly. A client who enters the room shouting about a traffic warden who has persecuted him does not want, and is not able, to hear reasonable justifications of the traffic warden's job. A more effective reply might be first to acknowledge the mental state that they are sharing with you:
This is not un-connected to the instruction to Express Empathy found in Motivational Work.
The person in Psychic Equivalence assumes that mental events (thoughts, beliefs or wishes), while recognised as internal, have the same status as physical reality. In other words the person is "Living in the cognition" rather than the cognition living in their mind. Another way of describing this state of mind, then, is INSIDE-OUT THINKING.
To give an example of this; if I think "the world is rubbish" then I can either mentalize about that (reflecting, perhaps, that "it is curious that such a thought has come into my mind today, but perhaps understandable as I smoked and drank too much last night and am hung over now, with lots of work piling up in front of me") or I can assume that "I am living in a rubbish world."
Anger is a good example of this state of mind:
When a person is functioning in Psychic Equivalence there is little point in directly challenging their utterances, as this is more likely to escalate things and leave them with an experience of you as someone who very clearly does NOT mentalize their dilemma clearly. A client who enters the room shouting about a traffic warden who has persecuted him does not want, and is not able, to hear reasonable justifications of the traffic warden's job. A more effective reply might be first to acknowledge the mental state that they are sharing with you:
"That sounds absolutely infuriating - horrible! I can understand why you're so annoyed and upset by the way the warden seemed to put the ticket on your car... if you were only just on the edge of the no-parking zone, and the warden seemed to you to be pleased to be doing this, that would be even more annoying than just getting a ticket."Only after the client exeriences you as having some empathy with his here-and-now dilemma, may he be able to start to think (Mentalize) about the experience in a different way.
"What on earth do you think was going on in that wardens mind that might have made it look as though he was pleased to be doing that?... I suppose there are a number of ways of thinking about that...
This is not un-connected to the instruction to Express Empathy found in Motivational Work.