Embedded Files
Research Background:
I've been intensely studying psychology and neuroscience over the last year and have decided to bring that passion into my work. When I started reading about Turrell's background in perceptual psychology, naturally I saw a connection. Perceptual psychology led me to gestalt theory, which gave poetic form to my own thoughts about less philosophical concepts in neuroscience and developmental psychology. I would like to use this class to write a paper reexamining our cultural concept of evil and mental illness through research in neuroscience (mainly deep learning, habit formation, and the developing brain), attachment theory, and gestalt theory. Gestalt theory suggests that human behavior is neither good nor bad and cannot be separated from its environment/context. Toxic behaviors were once useful survival tactics that are simply not relevant in the current context, but they are are deeply ingrained, learned habits in response to previous surroundings. In this sense, most mental illness can be thought of as maladapted survival tactics. This idea fits beautifully with data from neuroscience that explains how our brains develop in response to our early environment and how we learn habits. Attachment theory further emphasizes the impact of our early environment on our brain's development, specifically the development of our emotional selves and our ability to attach to ourselves, others, and our surroundings for the rest of our lives. To me, this relates closely to Turrell's work: he attempts to make one fully aware of one's existence in one's current surroundings. It could be argued that all human evils arise from a lack of awareness and connection between an individual and their current environment (including other humans). Attachment theory and neuroscience prove the gestalt concept of figure/ground relationship.
Research Questions:
How does the Gestalt concept of figure-ground relationship relate to modern attachment theory?
How do early environments effect the development of the brain/how do infants adapt to their surroundings?
Can attachment theory explain connection or disconnection from the present self and environment?
Does deep learning, synaptic pruning, and habit formation explain implicit, toxic mentalities?
How can demonized mental illnesses and negative traits be explained as out-of-place survival tactics?
Reference list:
A Century of Gestalt Psychology in Visual Perception 1. Perceptual Grouping and Figure-Ground Organization
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3482144/
Contemporary Gestalt Therapy: Field Theory
Attachment Theory and Gestalt Psychology
http://www.academia.edu/32926225/ATTACHMENT_THEORY_AND_GESTALT_PSYCHOLOGY
The Effects of Early Relational Trauma on Right Brain Development, Affect Regulation, and Infant Mental Health
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.130.917&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Modern Attachment Theory
http://trieft.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Modern_Attachment_Theory_Schore.pdf
Research Summary
How can evil be eliminated if it cannot be understood? Reexamining the genesis of mental illness through the lens of early childhood development, this research depicts a hopeful future in which a lack of empathy (the root of “evil”) can be both understood and repaired. Rather than viewing morality through a religious perspective, this work attempts to understand human behavior from a scientific viewpoint, proposing a new philosophy of good and evil.
This project combine's over a year's worth of research into three zines: The Figure and The Ground, Empathy, and Good and Evil, pairing the dense topics with carefully crafted iconography. Split into two portions, the visual side of the publications speaks to the right brain's implicit view of the world and the textual side speaks to the left brain's explicit perspective.
The Figure and The Ground
Gestalt, meaning “an organized whole that is perceived as more than the sum of its parts”*, is a philosophical approach to psychology. A primary concept of gestalt is field theory, which is described by the formula: B = f(p,e). Behavior (B) is a function of the person (p) and their environment (e). This relationship is described as between the figure (the self) and the ground (the
environment).
Habit formation can also be seen as a figure-ground relationship: environmental input grows the brain, and environmental imperatives dictate how that input is efficiently consolidated into subconscious patterns or habits. This is what we call learning.
Attachment Theory in a contemporary context works closely with developmental psychology to explain the long term effects of the relationship between an infant and the primary caregiver. There are four attachment styles, with only one of them producing a secure dynamic between the figure and the ground. Even the most well intentioned caregivers can misunderstand the infant, making the environment seem unpredictable and unsafe.
Empathy
Dr. Allan Schore researches the effect of right brain to right brain connection between the infant and primary caregiver upon the development of the infant’s affective brain. Proving aspects of Bowlby’s attachment theory using neuroscience and biology, Schore proposes that the initial attachment relationship wires the right brain hemisphere (Judith R. and Dr. Allan N. Schore, Modern Attachment Theory: The Central Role of Affect Regulation in Development and Treatment, 2008). Dan Brown, PhD and David Elliott, PhD list their five criteria for a secure attachment (Attachment Disturbances in Adults: Treatment for Comprehensive Repair, 2016):
-Sense of felt safety (reliable protection from danger)
-Sense of being seen and known (realizable attunement)
-Experience of felt security (timely soothing and reassurance)
-Sense of being valued (delight in child)
-Sense of support for unfolding one’s unique self (unconditional support of exploration)
From an interview with Dr. Alln Schore:
“Do you believe the brain can heal itself?”
“I believe it can heal itself optimally when in interaction with another brain. In other words, the self can heal itself when it is in open interaction with another self. Again, it’s not another self who just intellectually understands. It’s another self who can resonate with the feelings, who gives you the sense that this other person understands what I am feeling from the inside out...we are always co-regulating our internal body states through our relationships.” (Interview with WHEN, 2017)
Good and Evil
Good and Evil are often portrayed as mystical outside forces, and at opposite ends of the spectrum of morality. But what if Evil is not Good’s opposite but rather anything less than Good? And what if neither is an uncontrollable, spiritual force but an allegory for our own mental balance?
If the most “evil” of our society, criminal psychopaths, have observable lack within their brains as evidenced on an fMRI scan (Kiehl*), how can there be such a thing as the “evil genius”? Evil could be seen as a brain that is missing neural connections and subsequently a mind that is missing vital resources. How could Evil ever be more powerful than Good, or even Good’s equal, when it is a narrowed perspective, a lessening of information, a decreased capability? For every time that “evil” has beat “good” in human history, perhaps it was because we didn’t fully grasp the origins or definition of our opponent. Evil is not an unknowable spiritual drive that inhabits and gives dark power to some of us; Evil is the neglect of an infant whose mind wasn’t able to develop fully, Evil is the lack of love given to a child who thus never gained the skill of loving, Evil is any inharmonious relationship between a developing person and their environment that deprives of complete mental growth. Evil is a cause and effect relationship, and is always from a place of lack and imbalance. There are not some of us born Good and some of us born Evil; we all enter this world with the capacity to gain a fully developed, balanced mind. Our enemy has never been each other; our enemy is the pain and neglect that keeps a child from growing into a mentally healthy adult.
“Evil” is not having full use of the mind to see the world in a holistic way; “good” is always more powerful than “evil” because it is a more complete perspective. Evil is imbalance; Good is balance. Evil is lack and is not the fault of the person lacking, but is a direct result of an inharmonious relationship between the developing human and their environment. From Lewin’s field theory, B=f(p,e): behavior (b) is the function (f) of the person (p) and their environment (e) (Burns, Cook). Evil is lack, but Good possesses all that evil is lacking and has the power to heal. Just as our brains are initially wired through our attachment relationship (Schore), they can be rewired through later relationships. Balanced beings have the capacity to impart balance.
Final Project
Poster summarizing work:
Final PowerPoint presentation:
final_presentation.pptGoogle Sites
Report abuse