Please Log in to Vote.

3 out of 3 members found this useful.

Denialism. . .

Posted January 29th, 2010 by Charles Bowling in notes from a sign reader

Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

Hi All,

Amazon's buy-with-one-click procedure when combined with the Amazon Kindle turns out to be an exquisite form of electronic temptation. On TV recently, i was witness to an interview of Michael Specter, author of his recently published book titled, Denialism. A few keystrokes and minutes later, the text showed up on my Kindle.

Its main thesis explores various cultural scenarios where an unwillingness to face unpleasant realities is carried to an extreme that denies their very existence. The author's approach is detailed and technical as he examines the anxiety over such things as agricultural biotechnology, the opposition to vaccinations, and the growing power of the alternative health movement.

For example, he points out that while the expanding organic food movement may be wise and viable in first world countries, this is not the case in the Third World, where there is simply not enough arable land to support it's ever burgeoning population. And where in the hands of the denialism any suggestion of a scientific approach to increasing the food supply by biotechnology is met with extreme and virulent opposition. In another example he details the opposition to vaccinations; which when caught up in a denialism that flies in the face of some very good evidence, and causing a great deal of harm. He is thorough (if a bit tedious) in parsing these examples.

The text is heavily weighted to upper right phenomenon, almost to the exclusion of upper left; where for example, in discussing Vioxx, only a brief mention in passing was made of the (UL) placebo effect. However, the text does contain valuable information and links to locations where actual data is available, for those who can occupy an eye other than the jaundiced one of denialism.

It holds virtually no exploration of why it is that denialism exists either as an individual or social phenomena. And i couldn't help but observe that the author may have been indulging in a form of denialism of his own. For example, would the text have been markedly altered if he understood the something of quadrant absolutism? And what of the unfoldment of individuals known as developmentalism, where according to integral theory an attribute of first tier turns out to be a form of denialism, in that whatever form of truth arrived at comes at the expense of truths revealed elsewhere.

To me the question then arose, how best to explain this phenomenon. "Why denial?" Because it's a pattern that is deeply ingrained into the psyche as a result of repeated efforts to deal with the question of the One and the Many, of the essentially futile but necessary attempts we make to establish ourselves as separate from the universe. This is hard work and requires constant attention in order to maintain this fiction -this attempt to paper over the gap in our psyche. And unless and until we are ready to accept what appears to be a loss, we are very likely to continue our indulgence with denial.

Simply put, at its root is not a fear of the unknown; but a loss of the known.

Warmly,

Charles

41N54'51" 88W18'31"

Please Login to Add Comments
show all sub-comments
Report Abuse

Please Log in to Vote.

2 out of 2 members found this useful.

accepting denial

Posted January 29th, 2010 by Kerry Dugan

Charles,

Yesterday in a conversation with an acquaintance I mentioned the denial of denial.

She spoke in terms of pretending. I began to apply the Stages of Grief (as observed by Elizabeth Kubler-Ross: Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression [acceptance with emotional attachment], and Acceptance) noting that denial is often pathologized, and that there’s likely more to it than it’s famous downsides.

I’ve begun to notice value in honoring it’s presence and functions. Denying denial appears to compound it’s power, exaggerating it’s force in intentions and behaviors. Denial may well have proper occasions without being inherently problematic. Denial out of place, carried out of context and prolonged, projected, over-reaching it’s usefulness to personal or collective equilibriums, that’s where, imo, it’s bad rep belongs.

Thank you for recognizing denial’s relation to loss, to impermanence. That seems key.

The Stages of Grief give me pause when considering various perspectives on climate change for instance. The spectrum of responses to the issue appear to fit with dynamics of the grief cycle. Acceptance being the most empowered phase, or the only position from which efficacy gains positive traction. While each stage of that (almost never linear) cycle may be the vehicle for expression of another stage (anger voicing denial, bargaining speaking for anger, depression expressing bargaining…) acceptance may transcend/include the rest.

I don’t know a single soul who leaped straight to acceptance. But I can guess and gauge roughly where a person is expressing along the grief stage model in regards to a meta-issue like climate change. It looks like those of us who seem to have difficulty accepting, fully processing, a grief stage also appear to have that same stage shape our arguments and assertions.

So I’m seeing a developmentally progressive pull to accept denial (and anger, and bargaining…) tugging with a regressive pull to deny acceptance.

There’s the saying, ‘what we resist persists’.

I’d say we’ve got to let it be before we can let it go.

Please Log in to Vote.

1 out of 1 members found this useful.

The tug of a 'native persective'. . .

Posted January 30th, 2010 by Charles Bowling in response to accepting denial

Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE

Hi Kerry,

Thanks for your insightful contribution; we seem to be in general agreement on the subject of denial and denialism. And as your post infers much of denial is an internal process; yet some ineluctable part of me is drawn to overview, to the external aspect of this process -especially as it encompasses developmentalism.

And while i have no argument with the stages of grief (including denialism), i can't help but wonder if they are mainly a first tier phenomenon. I also have no argument with the idea that stages cannot be skipped; but they can be transcended. This means that at second tier the apparent refuge or appeal of denialism at first tier, tends to appear as a curiosity or an invitation to plumb its depths, and perhaps rob denialism of its capacity to act as a black hole in the psyches of both individuals and collectives.

Warmly,

Charles

41N54'51" 88W18'31"

Please Log in to Vote.

1 out of 1 members found this useful.

the death of denial

Posted January 30th, 2010 by Kerry Dugan in response to The tug of a 'native persective'. . .

Charles,

General agreement aside for a moment… here’s what I’m thinking.

Annie had a point. Taken further, the only denial(s) we’re aware of are those we ourselves have outgrown, made object, or those we recognize in others at stages we’re privy to.

Denial as a zone1 inflection, I think, remains a blind spot, a black hole or gap for any current enactment.

In the march of ever subtler nuance and sophistication is there a point at which we outgrow the production of shadow? Safely said, no. Just as with shadow, a denial that’s in awareness is no longer a pure active denial but has already begun to be other than denial.

Put another way, when, in the kingdom of our soul, we declare that “Denial is dead.” (Long live Denial ; ) the emperor is then clothed in skin, or sinew, or bone or marrow, or koshas…

I’m simply suspicious of the notion that we can be rid if it altogether. We may not acknowledge it in it’s resurrected form. But is it gone? Or present in new ways yet unseen.

~ my 2 cents,

Please Log in to Vote.

2 out of 2 members found this useful.

On the 'death of denial'. . .

Posted January 31st, 2010 by Charles Bowling in response to the death of denial

Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE

Hi Kerry,

The idea of a 'death of denial' has never occurred to me.

Rather my intent was to look at the phenomenon of denial through a developmental lens; and in doing so, it did occur to me that there are valid distinctions between first tier and second tier, and that denial (at least in its absolutist form) is much more of a first tier phenomenon than second.

Awareness at second-tier is a much more inclusive process than in first; in it the Witness is more or less available at will. I think this is in part what Aurobindo meant when he suggested that consciousness is like a searchlight, in that part of our unfoldment includes a shining of light into the dark corners of the psyche, the very function of which is to expose the Emperor in us of possible nakedness.

So my intent is not to shut the door on denial, but to expose it as a phenomenon, and perhaps loosen its grip on us and our actions.

Nonetheless i welcome your cautionary note, as from my view a healthy skepticism about our own development is part of an unfolding wisdom.

Warmly,

Charles

41N54'51" 88W18'31"

Please Login to Add Comments
Report Abuse

Please Log in to Vote.

1 out of 1 members found this useful.

[Comment Deleted]

Posted January 29th, 2010 by admin

This comment has been deleted by the author.

1 Comment

Please Log in to Vote.

1 out of 1 members found this useful.

one hand washes the other. . .

Posted January 29th, 2010 by Charles Bowling in response to [Comment Deleted]

Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

Happy Friday Anne,

I like your reply. . . especially your observation...

>I think by making it an “ism” i.e. “denialism” we now shift the focus from subject to object.<

. . . as it suggests a way out of being captured in one state of denial or another.

And as to your curiosity, my tendency is to be attracted by paradox, a phenomenon which if unraveled, deconstructed, or sliced through to its core is likely to reveal something valuable, something truthful.

Before 1994 and the publication of SES, i was attracted to the integral impulse by reading Sri Aurobindo's, Integral Yoga; the 'hook' that grabbed my attention was its advocacy of the 'use everything' principle. This involved yet another paradox, namely that my faults and shortcomings held utility, held value -even though they might be hidden.

This in turn morphed into one of the central aims of my life, not to have a subconscious, but to be willing to let the chips fall where they may. It turned out to be a wise decision, without which i would not -for example- be having this excellent conversation with you. A side effect has been that my life is both freer and fuller than whatever i could've imagined in the callow days of my youth.

Warmly,

Charles

41N54'51" 88W18'31"

;

Please Login to Add Comments
Report Abuse

User login

Quick Links

The Archives

Please Log in to Vote.

Denialism. . .

Please Log in to Vote.

accepting denial

Please Log in to Vote.

The tug of a 'native persective'. . .

Please Log in to Vote.

the death of denial

Please Log in to Vote.

On the 'death of denial'. . .

Please Log in to Vote.

[Comment Deleted]

Please Log in to Vote.

one hand washes the other. . .