Things I Would Change

The Psychologist thought that she was making progress with Bill. She’d teased out at some length the tatters of his childhood, his Army life, his ‘tours’ of Vietnam – (“Wonderful euphemism that!” she’d thought), his ensuing retiring from, then re-enlisting in the Army, his subsequent career changes, his many sexual liaisons, his alcoholism, his mental health roller-coaster rides. Now at last she was hopeful of starting (“Tentatively,” she reminded herself) some behavioural change in his chaotic existence.

“It’s not that he’s unintelligent,” she reassured herself, “quite the opposite. In fact he’s adept at manipulating people and situations to his advantage, almost a Machiavelli. He’s led an almost feral existence. Pity is, he’s never applied these insights to his own situations and personality.”

“Well, Bill,” she said, “we’ve covered a lot of ground and I should imagine you’ve gained a lot of insight about yourself and your behavioural patterns. What are some things you can suggest you might change about your life, given these hind-sights?”

“Things I would change?” queried Bill. He laughed. There was a brief pause.

She would not interrupt: it was his place to make the suggestions and to take responsibility for them, hers merely to act the sounding board and facilitator.

She was not prepared, however, for the segue and its vehemence, though (she told herself later), she should have expected something of the kind.

“I’d change nothing! No use talking about any changes! Can I change my parents, my family, my upbringing? Of course not! You psychologists talk about the importance of what you call “Nature and Nurture” yet you don’t seem able to agree amongst yourselves which is the more important, but you do agree they are both very important, perhaps the most important determinants of human behaviour.”

“You sound as if you’re proposing that we humans are pre-programmed to act or rather, react, in certain ways without any real choice as to our actions; that we have no real freedom of action. But aren’t you really being defensive and trying to avoid taking responsibility for your actions, your situation and your personal relationships?”

“Aren’t we all pre-programmed to a great extent? How do migrating birds know on that first migration their destination? Don’t we, and all animals, have instinctive knowledge, what you call ‘Nature’, complemented by learned knowledge which you call ‘Nurture’?”

“Yes, but in any situation, we have freedom to make choices, to choose between alternatives.”

“On, come on now. Wasn’t there some Russian guy who demonstrated that choices are what he called “conditioned responses? Don’t ‘Nature’ and ‘Nurture’ condition our responses? When they don’t, if they don’t, then aren’t our responses programmed by the need to satisfy our so-called ‘basic needs’.”

“All of that,” she interposed “is a rather primitive view of human learning and of behaviourist theory. And that behaviour was propositioned on Pavlov’s dog, and on Skinner’s pigeons and mice ‘responses’. It ignores even the simplistic research on chimpanzee’s behaviour when faced with more complex problems— to say nothing of the far more complex behaviours of human beings—and it completely ignores human imagination and creativity. Just consider what we are doing now: both of us are arguing, one trying to persuade the other, that choice can be exercised so change can be effected; the other, to convince himself there is no choice, and therefore no need to change. ”

“Sounds to me as if you’re touting what the old Jesuits would have called the Doctrine of Free Will. I’d point out that, though they were great advocates of Free Will, they were also, somewhat paradoxically, advocates of the dictum: ‘Give me a child until he is seven, and I will give you the man.”

“Those same Jesuits— as you might say rather paradoxically— took exception to the Calvinist concept of Predestination, which virtually denied, or at least, seriously undermined the concept of human free will— man’s ability to determine his actions, to be responsible for his own destiny.”

“You know, Shrink— you’ll pardon me if I call you that, but I can hardly call you Psycho, can I? At least I can have a good chat with you and no feelings hurt.”

“I suspect you of being quite disingenuous about yourself and your whole situation. In fact, I’d go so far as to say you’re clutching at straws to convince yourself, what you already intellectually know, that the time has come for behavioural change; that there has to be something beyond what you yourself called mere ‘satisfaction of basic needs’”, she paused to let her words sink in.

“Well, we may not have achieved much today but I’d like you before our next meeting – Wednesday week that is –to have a good, honest think about what we’ve discussed today.”

“What! Homework is it, teacher? Never did any when I was at school!”

“The more’s the pity! Perhaps we’d have made more progress today, if you had ! As for that parting shot about homework, I wonder whether not doing homework was by free choice or by conditioned response. And I’d also like you to consider whether your giving up alcohol has been by conscious choice. It can hardly have been a conditioned response!”

“Sarcasm will get you nowhere, Shrink! Nothing like the fear of death as conditioning reflex and the preservation of one’s life as a basic need!”

“Bill, you’re incorrigible! Next Wednesday then, and I look forward to what you might dredge up in the interim. You’re predictable perhaps, but at least you’re never boring! And don’t be using that as an excuse or challenge.”

“You know me, Shrink. Can’t resist any challenge from a pretty woman! And even if I could, I wouldn’t change that!”

She waited for him to open the door before saying: “Ah, then you see, there’s something that sounds remarkably like a conscious, free decision!”