Myths of Life – Identifying and Removing the Myth of Limitation

A friend of mine recently introduced her new boyfriend to her family.  The meeting went well and upon leaving her mother said ‘I am so glad to see you happy now – you deserve someone nice’.  Her reply was ‘But I am happy already – how come you are saying ‘it’s nice to see me happy now”.  Didn’t you experience me as happy before?’  The mother admonished her daughter for being too sensitive, saying ‘you know what I mean – I just want you to be happy’.

This conversation highlights some very powerful myths about romantic love.  Presumably (if I dare do this in a discussion on myths), some deeply held beliefs exist in the mother’s statement e.g. it is preferable to be in a committed relationship, a woman (or person) is better off not being single, it is good to ‘end up’ with someone after being alone etc.  These are all deeply held social and cultural myths of a preferable state of being.  It objectifies individuals (in this case my friend)  and potentially influences partners ‘in – relationship’ to relate  through a stereotypical lens of their perceptions of what  a ‘committed relationship is’.   It ignores our phenomenal state of being and co-construction with the ‘other’.

Does depression actually exist or is it the label we collectively give to certain behaviours, reported feelings and beliefs? That might seem obvious; how else can we define something so it is recognisable and subject to scrutiny and investigation?  It’s the same with all labels.  However, there is something more powerful when we label mental health conditions. Labels hold a lot of power in terms of how people react to them whether as sufferer, professional or anyone coming into contact with them.  Mental health labels are politically loaded; a medical, pharmaceutical, psychological and ideological machinery exists within which causes and solutions are dictated.

The problem with labelling is that little attempt is made to see the problem in any other way than within the framework of ‘depression’ with all its associations.  So instead of assuming normed behaviours and experiences of depression, let’s look more closely at what depression might really be communicating.  The word ‘de-pressed’ means to ‘hold down’.  If asked, many depressed people say they feel as if a cloud is over them, they have little energy to do anything and, depending on the severity of their experience, they report very little interest in anything.  This of course spirals as the person lives within their world of depression – in effect, they become what they think about.

If we take away the labels and examine the experience as we would any other, another picture emerges.  When a client tells me they are depressed, I ask ‘What is your depression about?’ Through removing the label and examining the experience without judgement, assumptions or direction, the answers are as unique as the person. In encouraging a client to reveal the nature of ‘their’ depression, they are often surprised at what it reveals about themselves.  Often depression is an indicator of a person not following their own wishes or dreams; ones which they might have squashed, ignored or too fearful to examine.  Contrary to having no interest in life, the depressed person has denied or is unable to access those interests, those bigger dreams and the anxiety associated with living them.

Are you denying your freedom when you succumb to group pressures in making decisions for yourself?

Example
Imagine an person who takes a job in an organisation because they believe this will further their career growth. It soon becomes apparent that they are expected to work long hours on a regular basis. On occasions when they leave before the expected late hour, they may feel enormous anxiety – either as a result of others’ disapproval, verbal remarks or internal discomfort.
They find themselves in a dilemma. They could work less hours and learn to live with others’ criticisms. Alternatively, They could conform to the group pressures to work longer hours but feel resentful. In order to accommodate the resultant anxiety, they are most likely to deny they have any choice, instead pointing to the organisational culture or power of the management. However, the resultant cost of denying they have choice is to act, what existential theorists call, Inauthentically – denying our true freedom to act.

The person in the example is subject to the Group Myth – the unquestioned assumption that happiness or ease arises out of conforming to a known or fictitious group of which we are or believe ourselves to be a member. Often the pressure appears to come a presumed collective belief of social norms or mores. On the face of it, the above example leaves the individual without little choice – to not conform means his job prospects could be in jeopardy. However, this and related examples, indicate how the anxiety of non-conforming often results in us denying we have any choice at all when in fact we always have a choice – even if only attitudinally.

Martin Heidegger, the existential philosopher calls this faceless group to which we attribute many of these pressures as the ‘They Self’ which influence our own choices of how to be. The They-Self are not a group of people but a presumed set of values and social conventions which presumably everyone agrees with. He says that we can either collude with the demands of the They-Self i.e. the world of others and our perception of their expectations and social conventions, or heed what he calls the Call of Conscience and become aware of our choice of how to be against the backcloth of our temporal existence.

Self-Reflection Exercise

Think of examples from your own life where you have become subject to the pressures of the They-Self. Write down as much information as possible and try to get in touch with how you deal with your anxiety that arises, either as a result of you colluding with the They-Self or trying to break free of it.