Just a thought: I wonder how much of passion - something that could be considered a positive attribute in some situations but a negative attribute in others, depending on the institution, culture, and society - is connected to (1) impulsivity and (2) obsession? For example, in the context of curiosity, learning, and tenacious work ethic to see a project get done from beginning to end could be deemed as positive. However, in the context of things like the law or empirical research or even an overzealous student (like me) who hasnt tamed her childhood desires for belongingness and approval, passion could be seen as a negative. When certain needs arent met (according to Maslows Hierarchy), a person might become passionate in the negative sense of constantly trying to achieve such goals (i.e., belonging, self actualization, love, security) through various means. Thus, passion can become an obsession, which gets at the impulsive nature in which a person is constantly thinking or obsessing about one or more goals. The impulsivity could turn into something like workaholism, constant questioning people in positions of power for more information and knowledge and wisdom to garner not only approval but also a higher social status and a need to affect positive change. This can be seen by some people in society as a positive, but for those constantly nagged by such an impulsive, obssessive-compulsive workaholic student/academic/overachiever, it can definitely tax resources - kind of like a parasite. BALANCE is key for everything, and maturity strays away from the primitive nature of immaturity by understanding that balance. CONTROL is also an issue in such a case, probably because a person had not much control growing up and/or built up schemata associated with the positive reinforcements of others who had exhibited such control, in which their impulsive behavioral pattern became that of passion and obsession. This type of control does little to foster respect of self or others because workaholism, like any other addiction, can wear on the psyche and the body for both the self and the people the person come in contact with. This gets at perfectionism, people who ignore their significant others because their work is more important, restless leg syndrome, psychosomatic disorders, a setup for failure and depression, anxiety, etc. The problem with attempting to upwardly mobilize when living on the margins is the need to control via passion toward something. Passion seems to increase in such a case, but then it topples over into obsession at some point. It gets worse if most of the bottom basic needs of Maslows Hierarchy arent met, so the self-actualization part becomes seemingly impossible to reach. Perhaps people perceive this as a sort of conspiracy theory that those on the top who have all their needs met make sure that those on the lower ends of the margin cant compete with them by stripping them of basic human needs and making the higher needs harder to achieve. When they learn this type of control, they can either then learn helplessness (being the perpetual victim) or can find passion toward upwardly mobilizing in some way. And if they cant upwardly mobilize in legal ways, I can see why some people not only learn helplessness but also passion toward counterculture or maybe even the black market or maybe even the impulsive nature of violent criminals, whose goals are to seek revenge on the members of society they believe are responsible for their own perils. Systemic issues do affect individuals psychological processes, which can then be detrimental to their physiological health. When this occurs, they are likely to react, as if to maintain psychological homeostasis and sociological homeostasis of the people they most likely associate with - if any. This is what I believe are the origins/etiologies of certain crimes and non-crime tragedies, such as suicide. So whos responsible? The individual, society, or both? Id say both. I believe when it comes to free-will versus determinism, were on a continuum and lie somewhere in the middle. But when stressors happen, we can stray from one part of the spectrum to the other. Psychological homeostasis isnt like physiological homeostasis because of that reason - the ability to make choices and display behaviors based on our cognitions and emotions (or even lack thereof). This is just a hypothesis. Kind of like thinking out loud and wondering if.
Posted on: Sun, 07 Dec 2014 08:24:13 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015