Krupat Reading Report

by Rachelle S.
Psychology 222
Dr. Leon James
May 5, 1983

INTRODUCTION

This is a final exam project intended for the Community-Classroom's General Curriculum. With the learning atmosphere of the classroom considered to be a community within itself, we become aware of how others affect us and how we affect others, especially when we share our ideas in dyadic groups. I hope that what I experience and learn through this project will help future generations of Community-Classrooms learn more about the threefold self, the self- witnessing method and the positive and negative bias in science.

Although you may already know what the threefold self and the self-witnessing method is, I would like to briefly go over how they can be used together as tools in discovering new things about yourself. Many of us only examine our automatic selves and are not aware or avoid being aware of why we do the things we do. By knowing why we do the things we do is helpful in that it leads to an increased self-awareness. As you know from the diagram of the threefold self, it can be divided into nine boxes, forming a grid called the ennead matrix. Essentially, it is sectioned off to form three columns and three rows. Starting from the bottom row, it is labeled the automatic self, low level or level I. The next row above is labeled the reflective self, mid level or level II. The last row is labeled the spiritual self, high level or level III. The columns, starting from the left are labeled the affective self or A level. The next column is labeled the cognitive self or B level. The final column is labeled the sensorimotor self or C level. Therefore each box has a label corresponding to where each column and row intersect on the matrix, i.e.) Low-A, High-C, Mid-B, etc. and each box is associated with and symbolizes a part of our minds, i.e.) Cognitive-Automatic, Affective-Reflective, Sensorimotor-Spiritual.

The threefold self is like an essential tool in the process of self-witnessing, as I mentioned before. There is a sequence to follow as you self-witness. As you receive input from the external environment, it enters the automatic self at the Low-C level, whether it be in the form of a thought, feeling, behavior or reaction that you experience as a response to a stimulus or stimuli. As you start to analyze this input, it internalizes through the threefold self and continues through the Low-B level, then to the Low-A level. After this the input becomes even more internalized as it enters the reflective-self at the Mid-C level and proceeds deeper into the Mid-B and the Mid-A levels. This input finally enters the spiritual-self through the High-C level and internalizes further into the High-B level and finally it enters the most internalized state of the High-A level.

The process of self-witnessing is done on an individual level. In other words, it depends on how much in depth you would like to learn more about yourself and on what you are trying to self-witness. Therefore, I will attempt to explain the concept of the threefold self and self-witnessing in the context of a pleasurable experience. First of all, throughout this process the individual engages in internal dialoguing (talking to themselves). It begins with a self-verbalization of a reaction to a stimuli entering through the automatic self or low level. Specifically, it enters through the Low-C level. This reaction is then transferred into the Low-B level. This is the station in your mind that is comprised of your memory, habits and reflexes. In other words, you realize that the stimuli you received was pleasurable because of your automatic reflexes and your memory of what is pleasurable to you. Then a transfer occurs to the Low-A level. At this level you find out what your drives and impulses are that make this stimuli pleasurable. You ask yourself, what do I get out of this pleasurable stimuli and how is it rewarding to me? At this point, the pleasurable experience enters a whole new part of the self, called the reflective self. This is where our thoughts enter through the Mid-C level. This is where you examine your reactions of the previous level of the automatic self. In other words, what are your reasonings for what your automatic self said about the pleasurable experience. Then, as you go to the Mid-B level, you try to justify these reasonings that you have just made in the Mid-C level. You evaluate these reasonings in terms of whether they are correct or implausible. Then you move on to the Mid-A level. This is the part of your mind where you try to find what motivations, biases and preferences you have that caused you to justify these reasonings in the way you did. You ask yourself, what goals am I trying to achieve through reasoning in this manner? Another jump is made to the third and final part of the threefold self, called the spiritual self. This is the part of the self that examines the assumptions that were made about this pleasurable experience. You enter through the High-C level. It is the state of mind in which you identify these assumptions. For example, you may ask yourself, what assumptions did I make about this reaction that caused it to be pleasurable for me? After you identify these assumptions, you enter the High-B level, where you determine what principles of truth or falsehood exist behind these assumptions. Also, what are the different perspectives and views that are taken on these assumptions. Finally, you reach the High-A level when you start to examine how you feel about these assumptions. In doing so you search deep into yourself for your loves, affections, attractions and resistances that either support or condemn these assumptions. At this stage, one will realize the harmony that exists between these principles and their own values. This is the level where one achieves total self knowledge concerning the original pleasure experience.

This process of self-witnessing is a good method of finding out more about yourself and why you do the things you do. It allows you to go beyond the surface and internalize beyond the automatic self. This process can be used to improve yourself and get rid of your weaknesses in the sense that you are able to get to the root of the problem. As Dr. James stressed, self-witnessing can be used to overcome intimidation. Through self-witnessing you can find out the real reason why you feel intimidated. By knowing this you may come to realize that there is no rational reason to feel intimidated, and that it coincides with your own ideas and values. In doing so you may be able to overcome this feeling. I have used this method in my daily round, and it has helped me in seeking out my identity. It has helped me to evaluate my feelings and overcome the intimidation that I feel when engaging in a conversation with someone or a group of people, and has given me a better self-concept. Ultimately, the reason why self- witnessing is useful, is that it is a way of gaining knowledge about yourself so that you can selectively manage and modify your behavior in the way you desire. Without the utilization of the self-witnessing method, many people find themselves ruled by their environment.

I feel that the positive and negative bias in science are two very interesting concepts that we unconsciously employ in our daily lives.

The positive bias in science deals with the assumptions we make about things in our lives. There are some things that we simply assume to be true or assume exists. After we make this assumption, we then try to confirm and verify it or may not even attempt to confirm it. However, being that it is an assumption, it cannot be proven beyond a doubt. The positive bias involves the process of self- witnessing, because in the process you are assuming things about yourself, and cannot prove to someone your own conceptualizations. Your own thought processes cannot be observed by another. An example of someone with a positive bias is someone who has a belief or faith, for a faith cannot be proven, and the individual is said to assume that something exists.

Emmanuel Swedenborg exhibited the positive bias through his belief in the spiritual world. He believed that everything in the natural world corresponded to something in the spiritual world. It is something that can only be experienced by the individual and not by others. In other words, his conceptualizations cannot be observed by a third party.

The positive bias takes place in the spiritual and reflective self of the threefold self, for it involves spiritual psychobiology and rational psychobiology. It is belief in the spiritual world and the reflective world.

The negative bias in science means practicing the null hypothesis. In other words, we do not believe that something exists or is true unless it can be proven beyond a doubt. We assume that something does not exist unless it can be observed by a third party. The negative bias involves the experimental method, because it involves having only to prove something once and ensuring that the same thing will happen again. In other words, it has to be proven by numbers, and the size of error should be measured. If you are able to prove that something holds up, then the null hypothesis is rejected.

The negative bias takes place in the automatic and reflective selves of the threefold self. It involves corporeal or tangible psychobiology and rational psychobiology. It is a belief in the natural world and the reflective world.

Passages

Passage #1	Passage #2
Passage #3	Passage #4

RESULTS OF READING TEXTBOOKS

The first two passages I have chosen to compare deals with the causes of aggression. In this sense, they are similar. Also, they are similar in that they are both hypotheses on the causes of aggression in human beings. However, they differ in terms of what each hypothesis entails. One hypothesis suggests that aggression is always a result of frustration and that frustration never fails to lead to some form of aggression. The other hypothesis takes on somewhat contradictory view, in that it states that human aggression is influenced by more than just one factor, and that it may result from unpleasant environmental conditions and from the internal state and individual differences of the person.

These views also differ in that one allows for more flexibility than the other. In other words, one hypothesis uses the term, "always" while the other hypothesis seems to be more open minded one. I feel that to say that something will always happen is a rather outdated attitude, in the sense that nowadays there is more of an awareness among people that there is a lot of change going on in our world today, and things are not as predictable as before. Before there used to be slower changes occurring and then it seemed as though the term "always" was more valid than it is today. On the other hand, the other hypothesis is less restricted, because it recognizes more than one factor that may lead to aggression, including the acknowledgment of individual differences. I feel that the recognizing of individual differences is more characteristic of the world today than in the previous years.

Through comparing these two passages dealing with the topic of aggression and its causes, I have come to the realization that aggression is a difficult topic to define in itself, much less to be able to pinpoint all the factors that lead to it. I agree a lot with the passage taken from Psychology is Social, as one might have guessed from diagram of the ennead matrix. This is because I feel that this passage agrees with my conceptualization concerning the factors that trigger aggression in humans. It is more open to suggestions, whereas the other hypothesis seems so restricted to frustration as a factor that always triggers aggression.

I feel that through comparing these two passages after self-witnessing them, that I am able to feel more confident about my choice of the hypothesis I prefer, because I have taken the time to internalize my thoughts and get to the core of what I really feel about what both of the passages are trying to say In other words, self-witnessing these two passages has lead me to think more about what each passage is trying to say. In other words, self-witnessing these two passages has lead me to think more about what my actual views are concerning what factors promote aggressive behavior in human beings. I have learned that I am slowly becoming a more open-minded person, because I now realize that there are so many options on the subject of many things.

These passages tell me something about the authors also. The passage taken from Human Social Behavior tells me that the authors of the book have considered the question of what factors offset aggression. However, this conceptualization is more in terms of what has been found through one particular study, and does not go into depth in considering their own views on this topic area. On the other hand, Mr. Robert Baron, who's words I quoted from Psychology is Social, seems to take a more broader view of the topic area, in that he suggests that there are various factors that cause aggression, and shows that he acknowledges what goes on within the individual as well as the external factors. It may also be taken into consideration that the authors were each from a different time and space. One quote was taken from literature copyrighted in 1971 and the other one copyrighted in 1982. Ways of thinking have changed a great deal over this eleven year period and we are still continuing to change.

The next two passages that I have chosen to compare and contrast deals with the effects that observing aggressive models has on the observer's behavior Both passages state different opinions on this topic area. One of the passages suggests that if the aggressive act is seen as "unwarranted or .orally wrong", then the observer will either show a weaker intensity of aggression, or exhibit no aggression at all. The other passage opposes the first, in that it states that as a child matures, he is better able to understand the motives and consequences of aggressive acts, yet it does not prevent the individual from engaging in aggressive behavior.

These two passages differ in that one of them refers to children and he other one refers to people as a whole. The quote taken from Human Social Behavior-is less specific in terms of who the observer of the aggressive model is. However, it may be assuming that it is someone who is old enough to know what is morally wrong. The other passage clearly refers to a child as he grows older, and this ability to understand aggressive motives and consequences is therefore associated with a developmental stage in a person's life. Also, the passage taken from Human Social Behavior seems to explain why the individual would be more likely to not display overt hostility, which the other passage taken from Psychology is Social does not give any explanation as to why this increased understanding of the motive and consequences of aggression would not lessen the likelihood of the individual displaying aggressive behavior.

These two passages have lead me to ask the question, who is to say what effect aggressive models have on the individual, because every individual is unique and has a different personality from the next. Therefore, when I found that the two passages contradicted each other, I used the self-witnessing method to help me to figure out what my innermost feelings were concerning both views. Throughout the process, I not only realized what my spiritual self felt about them, but I also realized that neither one is correct for everyone all the time. For example, sometimes you may behave aggressively after viewing an aggressive model and sometimes you may not. here are too many factors involved that affect us in different ways to be able to say that someone will act a certain way

I learned that I do have a critical mind after all. I use to be one who is easily swayed by what I hear and read. However, it is through self-witnessing these two passages that I realize that I am capable of being critical. Of course I do not want to be overly critical, in the sense of constantly making judgments, but I want to be critical in the sense of deciphering right from wrong and true from false. Also, I want to be critical in the sense of learning and growing and becoming my own person. I feel that self-witnessing has a lot to do with developing confidence and self-esteem. This is how I have utilized it in dealing with these two passages.

I feel that the authors of Human Social Behavior feel that people are basically good, and that they do not want to inflict any harm on others. The passage I quoted from this text stated that if man knows that something is bad or wrong, he will not involve himself in that type of behavior. This leaves me with the assumption that these two authors believe that man is basically good, and that people have a tendency toward pro-social behavior. On the other hand, the person who's passage I quoted from Psychology is Social seems to assume that man is basically evil, because he seems to feel that even though we know that the motive and consequences of aggression are bad, we will engage in this type of behavior. This passage suggests that people behave in an anti-social manner, or that their tendency is to behave anti-socially.

CONCLUSION

I feel that self-witnessing is a very good method for studying. When you internalize things that you read or hear, you are better able to remember these things. This is because as you explore your innermost thoughts about something, you are better able to understand it and remember it. Self-witnessing opens the closed doors of your mind. It helps me to overcome my biases when hearing or reading things. I feel that I have opened myself up to new ideas this semester, through self-witnessing. Now days, when I hear or read something that is interesting to me or that I disagree with, I cannot help but wonder why I feel this way about it. This is when I find myself automatically self-witnessing. This process is similar to the internalization and externalization of the three- fold self that I just explained concerning the few passages that I chose to react to.

I also feel that the ennead matrix can be particularly useful to people who have speech classes, communications classes, and classes dealing with group leadership or the process of human interaction. For those who would like to be able to overcome intimidation when having to either work in groups or do speeches, self-witnessing can help you get over this fear. You become more aware of your feelings and learn how to gain control of your behaviors, instead of letting them control you.

The method of self-witnessing through the ennead matrix has been helpful to me this semester in class I am taking called the Process of Human Interaction. In this class, we practice coming into grips with our strengths and weaknesses. We concentrate on getting rid of conceptual blocks and biases in our lives. We also try to improve our helping relationships and in general, strive to develop skills in order to achieve and maintain effective human interaction. By incorporating self-witnessing in my daily rounds, I have been able to attain some of these skills, and thus develop more self-confidence. This in turn has caused me to gain a more positive self-concept. I plan to enter a helping field in the future, therefore, I am striving to improve my helping skills. Self- witnessing has played an essential part in my attempt to achieve these skills.

Prior to learning about the effective tool of self-witnessing, I use to only internalize my feelings and behaviors on the automatic level. Now, after learning of the ennead matrix and the self-witnessing method, I find myself internalizing deeper into my innermost thoughts, where I am able to reason out why I feel and behave in certain ways.

I feel that utilizing the ennead matrix in helping relationships would be a good idea. When someone has a problem, you can help them to recognize the heart of the problem through encouraging them to utilize the self-witnessing method. A helper can encourage the helpee to examine his feelings and come to terms with the issue or issues revolving around the problem, instead of centering on solving the problem right away. In other words, realizing what contributes o the problems and hopefully finding out how to resolve it through their own self-witnessing. The person may also find out how to objectively deal with the problem.

This report has helped to clarify the steps involved in self-witnessing. Sometimes when I self-witness I find that my thoughts go through my mind very quickly and that the internalization and externalization of my behaviors occurs without me thinking about whether what I am saying to myself is coming from my automatic self, reflective self or spiritual self. This report has helped me to visualize what actually goes on in my mind. The report has helped me to slow down the process, and even writing down or recording your thoughts will help to gain a better understanding of yourself. By putting my thoughts into words, it forces me to come to terms with my feelings.

My advice to future generations would be to realize the value that the ennead matrix has in helping you to gain more control of your behaviors and so that you can learn to become the person you want to be. Through self-witnessing you are able to gain more freedom and you feel less restricted in your thinking. As you internalize, it is also a process of growth, in that it helps you to seek out your own values and ideas, and not adhere to borrowed ones. Self-witnessing has helped me to row and I am sure it will continue to do so.

back to my homepage Dr. James' Homepage My other page Comments