Which cognitive distortions do you struggle with?

[_Amore]

Me too.
It's a tough one because it's supported by so many herd mentalities...
Ie:"Good guy vs. bad guy" superficiality is about all America's lit (movies) have time for.

Little by little, I'm letting go of previous unrealistic expectations of perfection and dysfunctional shame. But it's an ongoing process. First, I was angry at realizing so much wasn't how I'd thought - pissed at myself and others for being imperfect. Now, realizing (emotionally not just intellectually) that it's to be expected that all human beings have some greed, pride, general weakness. "In each of us is a bit of all of us."

Ephesians 2:8-9 KJV - For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: ... Not of works, lest any man should boast.

No one can keep the commandments!- This is true, for we are carnally minded, “Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.” Romans 8:7. When we really love God, we try to obey Him because we love Him, “If you love me, keep my commandments.” John 15:14.

“For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” Romans 8:3, 4. Flesh is weak; people are weak. Man cannot keep God's law. That is why God sent His Only Begotten Son in human flesh to overcame sin for us and died for our sins to empower us to live in the grace of God in Christ Jesus.

Hi Little Nipper,
Although I see how the idea of Jesus as Savior can be inspiring and lead to good, I've found in my experience, that more often the belief in a God who demands human sacrifice/scapegoating is not healthy.

Still, I do like how that scripture acknowledges the need for humbly realizing we have human/carnal inclinations.

[_Amore]

Only by Mormons!

Still, you have been influenced enough by Mormonism to be considered Mormon to some - and that is what "brings us together today."
Have you ever wondered how different your life would be if you had no connection with Mormonism?
I imagine you'd have very different friends - even now.

I don't think that applies in any consistent way. I have found religious folks tend to be less open minded because at their core they think they are right and that people not sharing their beliefs are, in some way, on the wrong path. The judgemental bias is built in, not matter how well they manage to suppress it.

I've found that to be true in philosophical schools, in Atheism and Liberalism - pretty much any group thought.

[_Amore]

...(snip)...

11. *Emotional Reasoning – thinking feelings are facts (when they aren’t)
Rethink: What I feel is based on my thoughts. I know when & how to rearrange my thinking. Although, I accept what I feel for the emotion it is, but I realize it’snot fact & only one interpretation out of many possible interpretations.
(“Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free.”)

...(snip)...

This is an interesting point and one that I believe many others struggle with on this board.
I would like to notice one aspect.
I realize that I can change my thinking and that often my emotions and thoughts are seemingly intertwined.
But
While I am capable of thinking about "different things" at will....I have not mastered the ability to feel emotions at will.
in other words
I can act angry whenever I command it...regardless of how i feel...like a broadway actor, it is sometimes easy to "behave" an emotion.
yet i can never replicate the true emotion, within me, of anger on command
nor can bring forth the sensation of being "tickled"
My mind and thoughts seem powerless to draw forth emotion...sure i can remember the death of my mother and "make myself" sad or even tearful...but that is a faded facsimile of the actual emotion felt when she did die.

and unlike those who rely on a few beers and a subscription to cinemax, I cannot simulate the joy of love.

So, while i admit that most every person here has somewhat mastered the ability to think of this or think of that....who has accomplished the ability to master their emotion? (please, do not confuse the ability to suppress or ignore an emotion/feeling with the ability to generate an emotion/feeling).

Interesting perspective.
I can see some validity in it...
As a friend explained, emotion is like lighting a rocket - once lit, there's nothing you can do, except maybe try to guide it's course and forsee it being lit next time... but it is in the process of going off.

Still, I think you don't give enough credit for the power of thoughts in influencing emotions.
A lot of the joy or pain is a result of what we tell ourselves about certain things/events.
And this is a good thing - don't you think - to have some control over emotions?

I'm so sorry about your Mom passing.
I imagine it left a significant sense of loss in your life.
You mentioned that when you think of her death, you still feel sad, but nothing compared to how you felt when she died.
I think the grieving process involves time, which involves thinking (& subsequent feelings) of various things, which are integrated with previous thoughts/feelings (including grief).
Maybe in this, there is a sense that although it initially may have felt so heart-breaking and like it was really breaking a part of you that would never be the same; yet, with time etc., there is a sense that you will be ok, and maybe even see some possibly deeper meaning and purpose for the loss... then again there can be very different interpretations added.

What you mentioned about confusing suppressing emotion with generating an emotion makes me wonder how often they are confused. For this reason, besides metaphysics (placebo effects), I see a great need to bring the subconscious to conscious awareness as much as healthy... to dig deeper when there's pain, instead of pop a pill or look for another distraction or avoidance.

[_Amore]

It is interesting how so many people claim that life is merely subjective....yet....they insist that reality is not always how one thinks it is. This is the dissonance of almost every atheist I have ever met or had the good humor to read.

Yeah, Atheists can be pretty funny - the irony.
Yet, in a way, we're all fools - subjectively fooling ourselves.
Some just realize it's not just for "the bad guy over there" but personally too.

That being said,
Is not the "good vs. bad" exactly the notion being expressed by "In each of us is a bit of all of us." ? This seems to not be superficial at all but the most founded truth one can realize, correct?

thanks for the great thread topic

Thanks, too, Subgenius - I like reading your perspectives.

I'm trying to understand what you mean by that quote about humanity in all expressing polarized thinking.
Maybe the "bit in all of us" implies a standard of good or bad - but not necessarily.
It could be neutral. In fact, I do see some validity to relative morality - circumstances are unique and in some cases killing is ok - but generally it is immoral.
The main point with that quote is that if I get so pissed off at someone for something, I need to realize that the same potential is within all human beings, including me.
IE: It breaks my heart and angers me to hear about parents being abusive or neglectful to their kids... but if I'm honest, I'd have to realize that there are times when I've FELT like giving my kids a good whippin' like I used to get - and there are times when I haven't been as attentive as I could've been. After reading various parenting books, I realize how common it is for parents to get close to "losing it." We're human beings.

(Quote paraphrasing from memory:)
"If God were in your shoes he'd be doing exactly as you are."

[_subgenius]

Interesting perspective.
I can see some validity in it...
As a friend explained, emotion is like lighting a rocket - once lit, there's nothing you can do, except maybe try to guide it's course and forsee it being lit next time... but it is in the process of going off.

Still, I think you don't give enough credit for the power of thoughts in influencing emotions.
A lot of the joy or pain is a result of what we tell ourselves about certain things/events.
And this is a good thing - don't you think - to have some control over emotions?

I am not disputing or even commenting on our ability to prevent or direct a physical manifestation of our emotions.
I am talking about the creation of emotion.
That feeling one has when they are startled or surprised can not be summoned by the mind at will. You cannot sit on your couch and suddenly decide to spike your adrenalin level and thrust your consciousness into a brief state of panic. You cannot summon the sensation and manifestation of goosebumps just by willing them into being. ..you can tickle yourself with a feather. ..but you can't just think them into being.
I notice this only because it speaks to a level of existence that is beyond the power of a conscious mind.
So this brings into question the motivation and purpose that person has in "wanting" to control Feelings....do we control feelings or are we just trying to accomplish damage control at a faster and faster pace?
Regardless, it is apparent that feelings are the instigator, the Genesis, the control.

[_The Erotic Apologist]

That feeling one has when they are startled or surprised can not be summoned by the mind at will. You cannot sit on your couch and suddenly decide to spike your adrenalin level and thrust your consciousness into a brief state of panic. You cannot summon the sensation and manifestation of goosebumps just by willing them into being. ..you can tickle yourself with a feather. ..but you can't just think them into being.

Yes you can. This is precisely what the Stanislavski Method does, to name just one example. There's also the the auditing process in Scientology, which is also designed to (among other things) induce strong emotional reactions.

[_Amore]

Subgenius,
Ok, we are primarily emotional beings - true.
For survival, "fight or flee" reactions are more immediate and thus successful than analyzing the situation.
So, it's true that when something surprises us - it will stimulate an automatic e-motion to get us in motion.

Yet, in today's relatively peaceful societies, isn't the flight or flee response less actual and more perceived (cognitively interpreted)?
Ideally, we utilize both emotion and intellect to have mental health.

As babies, (maybe for survival reasons), our brains are more active in the emotional center of the brain. This is why we sometimes have exaggerated emotional reactions without understanding why. As babies, we only had emotional awareness and little cognitive/language awareness to make sense of things.

You ask a good question about controling feelings.
Because of family and other group beliefs, keeping reins on feelings can be deeply ingrained and maybe why many seek for excuses to release them - by partying, or other diversions.
If you have any other thoughts on that, I'd like to know.

Anyway, I think it's so much in each of our personal interest to bring what's subconscious to conscious awareness.
Another, more personal approach to this is discovering which coping methods we adopted as children, which are now counterproductive...

Schemas/Life Traps
http://www.schematherapy.com/id73.htm

[_subgenius]

That feeling one has when they are startled or surprised can not be summoned by the mind at will. You cannot sit on your couch and suddenly decide to spike your adrenalin level and thrust your consciousness into a brief state of panic. You cannot summon the sensation and manifestation of goosebumps just by willing them into being. ..you can tickle yourself with a feather. ..but you can't just think them into being.

Yes you can. This is precisely what the Stanislavski Method does, to name just one example. There's also the the auditing process in Scientology, which is also designed to (among other things) induce strong emotional reactions.

A new, lower, level of ridiculous responses. A method acting technique does not nor has it ever summoned goosebumps.
But
while I appreciate your attempt of having "memories" be the same as "the will" and the recollection of a memory will certainly not induce a "startle".

[_subgenius]

Subgenius,
Ok, we are primarily emotional beings - true.
For survival, "fight or flee" reactions are more immediate and thus successful than analyzing the situation.
So, it's true that when something surprises us - it will stimulate an automatic e-motion to get us in motion.

Yet, in today's relatively peaceful societies, isn't the flight or flee response less actual and more perceived (cognitively interpreted)?
Ideally, we utilize both emotion and intellect to have mental health.

As babies, (maybe for survival reasons), our brains are more active in the emotional center of the brain. This is why we sometimes have exaggerated emotional reactions without understanding why. As babies, we only had emotional awareness and little cognitive/language awareness to make sense of things.

You ask a good question about controling feelings.
Because of family and other group beliefs, keeping reins on feelings can be deeply ingrained and maybe why many seek for excuses to release them - by partying, or other diversions.
If you have any other thoughts on that, I'd like to know.

Anyway, I think it's so much in each of our personal interest to bring what's subconscious to conscious awareness.
Another, more personal approach to this is discovering which coping methods we adopted as children, which are now counterproductive...

Schemas/Life Traps
http://www.schematherapy.com/id73.htm

Interesting post and a few points to ponder.
But I would like to notice one in particular-

"we utilize both emotion and intellect "

I am curious how many people age with your conclusion here?
The reason I wonder is because you are seemingly introducing a third party. ..something outside of -with the power over - both emotion and intellect.

I believe there are convincing arguments and evidence that conclude with one's intellect being able to control emotion and with one's emotion being able to control intellect.
Is this some sort of improvisational partnership? Or is there an obvious third party pulling switches and turning knobs?

[_The Erotic Apologist]

A new, lower, level of ridiculous responses.

You're already giving up? That was fast.

A method acting technique does not nor has it ever summoned goosebumps.

Nope--most actors, even amateur actors find it very easy to induce goosebumps in themselves. This is very basic stuff, the sort of thing that's covered in a 100-level acting course.

http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2014/sep/ ... 014/?print

But
while I appreciate your attempt of having "memories" be the same as "the will" and the recollection of a memory will certainly not induce a "startle".

You should probably go see a neurologist. Schizophasia (i.e. word salad) is often a precursor to other, more serious disorders.

...the recollection of a memory will certainly not induce a "startle".

It most certainly will. It's called PTSD.