DiscussMormonism.com

Judging from some of the comments that have been made on this board, there seems to be limited understanding about cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) in general, and the symbiotic relationship between thoughts and emotions. So, before jumping into a discussion on how CBT can help me and Loran and others in healthly dealing with possible struggles with people who are antagonistic against our faith, I thought it would be good to explain a little more about CBT.

Lets begin first by noting the symbionic relationship between: 1) emotions/moods, 2) physical condition/health, 3) environment, 4) thoughts (cognitions).

If one is sick, out of shape, suffering from bodily injury or aches and pains, hormonally/chemically imbalanced, hungry or sleep deprived, etc., then statistically there is a much greater likelyhood that one will be depressed, anxious, cranking, sad, etc. than if one is healthy, at the peak of physical conditioning, and hormonally/chemically balanced. Do you disagree that one's physical condition may affect one's emotions/moods?

If one lives in squalor, chaotic or abusive or unloving or unsupportive situations, areas that are cloudy and overcast much of the time, proximate to natural disasters, etc., then statistically there is a much greater likelyhood that one will be depressed, anxious, sad, etc. than if one lives in reasonably structured, relatively clean, loving and supportive, sunny and safe areas. Do you disagree that one's environment may affect one's emotions/moods?

If one is predominately negative in their thinking, pessemistic, unhopeful, insecure, narcissitic, delusional, distrusting, etc., then statistically there is a much greater likelyhood that one will be depressed, anxious, sad, etc. than if one is positive in their thinking, optimistic, hopeful, secure, has a healthy sense of self, a balanced perspective, trusting, etc. Do you disagree that one's thinking affects one's emotions/moods?

Similarly, one who is depressed, anxious, angry, hateful, and so forth, is statistically more likely to get sick, have more headaches, be out of shape, etc.. One will also be more likely to socially withdraw, dwell in darkened rooms, be hostile and abusive, etc.. And, one will be more likely to distrust, lack hope, lose their sense of self and security, etc. In other words, one's emotions/moods can affect one's physical condition, environment, and thinking.

Perhaps the best way to grasp this relationship is to look at an extreme case: like Jews that were prisoners in concentration camps during Nazi Germany. Their physical condition was generally poor to pathetic (near starving to death, sleep deprived, often beaten and scared, and desease-riden). Their environmental conditions were deplorable (cramped, terribly unhygenic, cold and miserable, abusive, etc.). Naturally, for the most part, their thinking was distrusting, unhopeful, pessimistic, self-degrading, etc., and their emotions were generally sad, depressed, anxious, angry, etc.

However, for those acquainted with Victor Frankl's book: "Man's Search for Meaning", and have familiarized themselves with how he CHOSE to think/cognicize during his imprisonment during the holocaust, will understand the power of thought in affecting one's emotions, and to a lesser degree one's physical condition and environment. He has said: "We who lived in concentration camps can remember the men who walked through the huts comforting others, giving away their last piece of bread. They may have been few in number, but they offer sufficient proof that everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms -- to choose one's attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one's own way." - Man's Search for Meaning (quoted at Wikipedia.

Your thoughts?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

wenglund wrote:Judging from some of the comments that have been made on this board, there seems to be limited understanding about cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) in general, and the symbionic relationship between thoughts and emotions. So, before jumping into a discussion on how CBT can help me and Loran and others in healthly dealing with possible struggles with people who are antagonistic against our faith, I thought it would be good to explain a little more about CBT.

Lets begin first by noting the symbionic relationship between: 1) emotions/moods, 2) physical condition/health, 3) environment, 4) thoughts (cognitions).

If one is sick, out of shape, suffering from bodily injury or aches and pains, hormonally/chemically imbalanced, hungry or sleep deprived, etc., then statistically there is a much greater likelyhood that one will be depressed, anxious, cranking, sad, etc. than if one is healthy, at the peak of physical conditioning, and hormonally/chemically balanced. Do you disagree that one's physical condition may affect one's emotions/moods?

Nope, I agree that physical condition may affect one's moods.

If one lives in squalor, chaotic or abusive or unloving or unsupportive situations, areas that are cloudy and overcast much of the time, proximate to natural disasters, etc., then statistically there is a much greater likelyhood that one will be depressed, anxious, sad, etc. than if one lives in reasonably structured, relatively clean, loving and supportive, sunny and safe areas. Do you disagree that one's environment may affect one's emotions/moods?

I agree with this, too.

If one is predominately negative in their thinking, pessemistic, unhopeful, insecure, narcissitic, delusional, distrusting, etc., then statistically there is a much greater likelyhood that one will be depressed, anxious, sad, etc. than if one is positive in their thinking, optimistic, hopeful, secure, has a healthy sense of self, a balanced perspective, trusting, etc. Do you disagree that one's thinking affects one's emotions/moods?

Agree with this one also.

Similarly, one who is depressed, anxious, angry, hateful, and so forth, is statistically more likely to get sick, have more headaches, be out of shape, etc.. One will also be more likely to socially withdraw, dwell in darkened rooms, be hostile and abusive, etc.. And, one will be more likely to distrust, lack hope, lose their sense of self and security, etc. In other words, one's emotions/moods can affect one's physical condition, environment, and thinking.

Perhaps the best way to grasp this relationship is to look at an extreme case: like Jews that were prisoners in concentration camps during Nazi Germany. Their physical condition was generally poor to pathetic (near starving to death, sleep deprived, often beaten and scared, and desease-riden). Their environmental conditions were deplorable (cramped, terribly unhygenic, cold and miserable, abusive, etc.). Naturally, for the most part, their thinking was distrusting, unhopeful, pessimistic, self-degrading, etc., and their emotions were generally sad, depressed, anxious, angry, etc.

Not really sure where you're going with this, and how it relates to the subject matter of your previous threads, but okay....

However, for those acquainted with Victor Frankl's book: "Man's Search for Meaning", and have familiarized themselves with how he CHOSE to think/cognicize during his imprisonment during the holocaust, will understand the power of thought in affecting one's emotions, and to a lesser degree one's physical condition and environment. He has said: "We who lived in concentration camps can remember the men who walked through the huts comforting others, giving away their last piece of bread. They may have been few in number, but they offer sufficient proof that everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms -- to choose one's attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one's own way." - Man's Search for Meaning (quoted at Wikipedia.

Your thoughts?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

My thoughts: I find it interesting that you see fit to compare disaffected exmos and critics of the Church with Nazi Holocaust victims. I suppose your assumption is something along the lines of, "Hey, if the Jews did it while in the concentration camps, you [exmos] can do it too!" However, I think the comparison is borderline offensive and unfortunate indeed. Do you really want to posit the Church as being akin to the Nazis? You say it's an "extreme case," but again, do you want to portray the Church as being, essentially, a watered-down version of Nazi Germany?

"We who lived in concentration camps can remember the men who walked through the huts comforting others, giving away their last piece of bread. They may have been few in number, but they offer sufficient proof that everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms -- to choose one's attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one's own way." - Man's Search for Meaning

This may sound strange, but this is kind of what I was trying to do with my blog. I saw what I had gone through and how I could have handled things better, so my blog was designed to help people in the same position I was (having figured out Mormonism but with a wife and children who still believe) to navigate these rough waters with less pain. I intentionally avoided talking about the church but rather dealt with how to positively resolve issues. It was helpful to me, and I actually had several people email me to tell me how much my blog had helped them.

Yes, it's a choice to let your situation determine your reaction, but what we do with our emotion is important, too. Of course, ultimately, my wife found my blog offensive, and I took it down. But I'm glad I was able to help a few people.

Mister Scratch wrote:My thoughts: I find it interesting that you see fit to compare disaffected exmos and critics of the Church with Nazi Holocaust victims. I suppose your assumption is something along the lines of, "Hey, if the Jews did it while in the concentration camps, you [exmos] can do it too!" However, I think the comparison is borderline offensive and unfortunate indeed. Do you really want to posit the Church as being akin to the Nazis? You say it's an "extreme case," but again, do you want to portray the Church as being, essentially, a watered-down version of Nazi Germany?

You are, as expected, incorrect in your perceptions. I was not comparing disaffected exmos and critics of the Church with Nazi Holocaust victims. In fact, I drew no comparisons whatsoever, at all. Rather, I used the holocaust to illustrate, as explicitly stated, THE SYMBIOTIC RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN: 1) EMOTIONS/MOODS, 2) PHYSICAL CONDITIONS/HEALTH, 3) ENVIRONMENTAL CONTITIONS, and 4) TOUGHTS/COGNISIONS.

Is that clear?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

wenglund wrote:

Mister Scratch wrote:My thoughts: I find it interesting that you see fit to compare disaffected exmos and critics of the Church with Nazi Holocaust victims. I suppose your assumption is something along the lines of, "Hey, if the Jews did it while in the concentration camps, you [exmos] can do it too!" However, I think the comparison is borderline offensive and unfortunate indeed. Do you really want to posit the Church as being akin to the Nazis? You say it's an "extreme case," but again, do you want to portray the Church as being, essentially, a watered-down version of Nazi Germany?

You are, as expected, incorrect in your perceptions. I was not comparing disaffected exmos and critics of the Church with Nazi Holocaust victims. In fact, I drew no comparisons whatsoever, at all. Rather, I used the holocaust to illustrate, as explicitly stated, THE SYMBIONIC RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN: 1) EMOTIONS/MOODS, 2) PHYSICAL CONDITIONS/HEALTH, 3) ENVIRONMENTAL CONTITIONS, and 4) TOUGHTS/COGNISIONS.

Is that clear?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Come on, Wade---who do you think you're kidding? Are you going to be so kind as to extend your explanations and metaphors for us, showing us just how you plan to use this stuff in order to prevent "cognitive distoritions" regarding your "most precious and dear" Church?

Wade, just a comment on your mention of Victor Frankl's book. Man's Search for Meaning. It helped bring religion and spirituality back into my life when I was being an atheist. I would recommend that book to all who are having their moments of doubt.

Mister Scratch wrote:

wenglund wrote:

Mister Scratch wrote:My thoughts: I find it interesting that you see fit to compare disaffected exmos and critics of the Church with Nazi Holocaust victims. I suppose your assumption is something along the lines of, "Hey, if the Jews did it while in the concentration camps, you [exmos] can do it too!" However, I think the comparison is borderline offensive and unfortunate indeed. Do you really want to posit the Church as being akin to the Nazis? You say it's an "extreme case," but again, do you want to portray the Church as being, essentially, a watered-down version of Nazi Germany?

You are, as expected, incorrect in your perceptions. I was not comparing disaffected exmos and critics of the Church with Nazi Holocaust victims. In fact, I drew no comparisons whatsoever, at all. Rather, I used the holocaust to illustrate, as explicitly stated, THE SYMBIONIC RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN: 1) EMOTIONS/MOODS, 2) PHYSICAL CONDITIONS/HEALTH, 3) ENVIRONMENTAL CONTITIONS, and 4) TOUGHTS/COGNISIONS.

Is that clear?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Come on, Wade---who do you think you're kidding? Are you going to be so kind as to extend your explanations and metaphors for us, showing us just how you plan to use this stuff in order to prevent "cognitive distoritions" regarding your "most precious and dear" Church?

Evidently, it wasn't clear (at least to your mind). But, I have no desire to counterproductively argue the point with you.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

If one accepts that there is a symbiotic relationship between emotions, thoughts, physical condition, and environments, then wouldn't it be reasonable for one to assume that one may, through personal choices, positively affect each of these thing?

In other words, we have some control over our environment and physical condition, and even more control over our emotions--much of this coming by way of how we think. Agreed?

This isn't to suggest that one should suspend reality and simply think positively as a way of improving one's quality of life. In fact, I don't believe that thinking positively is necessarily sufficient for improving the quality of one's life--though it may be a contributing factor. Sometimes, besides taking positive action, change of certain thoughts (particularly those of an "automatic" kind--to be explained later) is required for things to improve.

For example (Note to Scratch: this example is to illustrate the point in the previous paragraph, and not an attempt to draw a comparison to former members of the Church) I used to experience some level of "road rage"--though it was never externalized beyond a flurry of insults heard by myself and others in my car. However, it made driving a miserable experience and even ill-effected my life sufficiently that I determined to do something about it.

Well, I thought that I could overcome the "road rage" by listening to uplifting music while driving and by filling my mind with positive thoughts, and to some degree blissfully and mindlessly ignoring the vietnamese and elderly couples driving well under the speed limit in the passing lane, or the overly cautious types waiting endless to merge into traffic, or the selectively polite driver who impolitely slows down and back up more than 10 cars in an oft unnecessary effort to accomodate 1 car, and so on and so forth.

However, as you may guess, this had but a marginal affect. I still experienced "road rage".

I learned that for me to overcome my "road rage", it took more than just positive thinking and actions. It required that I be made aware of, and correct, what I later discovered were cognitive distortons that were unwittingly causing the "road rage".

Does this make sense so far?

If so, then I will proceed in the near future to post a description of how I used CBT to correct the cognitive distortions and thus drastically diminish my "road rage" (old habits die hard). In the process, I hope to give a sense for what CBT is and how it WORKS, and then relate those principles/practices to how Loran and I and others may better deal with the perceived challenges of antagonism towards our sacred and revered faith.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

wenglund wrote:If one accepts that there is a symbiotic relationship between emotions, thoughts, physical condition, and environments, then wouldn't it be reasonable for one to assume that one may, through personal choices, positively affect each of these thing?

In other words, we have some control over our environment and physical condition, and even more control over our emotions--much of this coming by way of how we think. Agreed?

This isn't to suggest that one should suspend reality and simply think positively as a way of improving one's quality of life. In fact, I don't believe that thinking positively is necessarily sufficient for improving the quality of one's life--though it may be a contributing factor. Sometimes, besides taking positive action, change of certain thoughts (particularly those of an "automatic" kind--to be explained later) is required for things to improve.

For example (Note to Scratch: this example is to illustrate the point in the previous paragraph, and not an attempt to draw a comparison to former members of the Church) I used to experience some level of "road rage"--though it was never externalized beyond a flurry of insults heard by myself and others in my car. However, it made driving a miserable experience and even ill-effected my life sufficiently that I determined to do something about it.

Well, I thought that I could overcome the "road rage" by listening to uplifting music while driving and by filling my mind with positive thoughts, and to some degree blissfully and mindlessly ignoring the vietnamese and elderly couples driving well under the speed limit in the passing lane, or the overly cautious types waiting endless to merge into traffic, or the selectively polite driver who impolitely slows down and back up more than 10 cars in an oft unnecessary effort to accomodate 1 car, and so on and so forth.

However, as you may guess, this had but a marginal affect. I still experienced "road rage".

I learned that for me to overcome my "road rage", it took more than just positive thinking and actions. It required that I be made aware of, and correct, what I later discovered were cognitive distortons that were unwittingly causing the "road rage".

Does this make sense so far?

If so, then I will proceed in the near future to post a description of how I used CBT to correct the cognitive distortions and thus drastically diminish my "road rage" (old habits die hard). In the process, I hope to give a sense for what CBT is and how it WORKS, and then relate those principles/practices to how Loran and I and others may better deal with the perceived challenges of antagonism towards our sacred and revered faith.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

CBT was quite helpful for me in overcoming some anxiety and depression I was dealing with. Frankly, until you came along, it never occurred to me that feeling hurt and angry about my church experience was anything more than a natural outcome of such an experience. I appreciate your bringing it up because on the one hand, I'm able to see that some of the mistakes I made in my exit were indeed a result of poor critical thinking. On the other hand, you've helped me see clearly that I never experienced any irrational rage or real anger, other than pretty moderate frustration at a bad situation.

In all, I'm not all that unhappy about the way I dealt with my exit from the church, but next time I have my worldview pulled out from under me, maybe I'll be a little better prepared.

wenglund wrote:If one accepts that there is a symbiotic relationship between emotions, thoughts, physical condition, and environments, then wouldn't it be reasonable for one to assume that one may, through personal choices, positively affect each of these thing?

In other words, we have some control over our environment and physical condition, and even more control over our emotions--much of this coming by way of how we think. Agreed?

Sure, agreed.

This isn't to suggest that one should suspend reality and simply think positively as a way of improving one's quality of life. In fact, I don't believe that thinking positively is necessarily sufficient for improving the quality of one's life--though it may be a contributing factor. Sometimes, besides taking positive action, change of certain thoughts (particularly those of an "automatic" kind--to be explained later) is required for things to improve.

For example (Note to Scratch: this example is to illustrate the point in the previous paragraph, and not an attempt to draw a comparison to former members of the Church) I used to experience some level of "road rage"--though it was never externalized beyond a flurry of insults heard by myself and others in my car. However, it made driving a miserable experience and even ill-effected my life sufficiently that I determined to do something about it.

Well, I thought that I could overcome the "road rage" by listening to uplifting music while driving and by filling my mind with positive thoughts, and to some degree blissfully and mindlessly ignoring the vietnamese and elderly couples driving well under the speed limit in the passing lane, or the overly cautious types waiting endless to merge into traffic, or the selectively polite driver who impolitely slows down and back up more than 10 cars in an oft unnecessary effort to accomodate 1 car, and so on and so forth.

However, as you may guess, this had but a marginal affect. I still experienced "road rage".

I learned that for me to overcome my "road rage", it took more than just positive thinking and actions. It required that I be made aware of, and correct, what I later discovered were cognitive distortons that were unwittingly causing the "road rage".

Does this make sense so far?

If so, then I will proceed in the near future to post a description of how I used CBT to correct the cognitive distortions and thus drastically diminish my "road rage" (old habits die hard). In the process, I hope to give a sense for what CBT is and how it WORKS, and then relate those principles/practices to how Loran and I and others may better deal with the perceived challenges of antagonism towards our sacred and revered faith.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Whoa, whoa.... Wait a second. Now, instead of holding up a mirror to the likes of myself, Runtu, and KG, now your turning your "CBT powers" on yourself? I.e., you are going to demonstrate---right here, on this public MB---how to make yourself feel "at peace" with criticism of the Church?

Well, then.

I have to say, Wade, I applaud your efforts. However, this does make me think of you as a bigger flip-flopper than John Kerry could ever have been conceived as being. Very weird indeed. A final question: Am I misreading you, or are you now saying that it is YOU who is suffering from cog-dis?