My values are: if you are in an abusive relationship, find a safe way to leave (taking who and what you need with you) as quickly as possible.

Thanks for your comment, I hope this helps (at least to give you some starting points for thought).

Disentangling these different parts, as you do, is another example of your uncommon wisdom. The two basic directions are pretty sharply defined in my experience. I’m mostly intuitive in my responses and experience my worst moments when I censor out the spontaneity of the action that should follow the intuitive perception. Censoring the expression of most spontaneous feeling is one of the most ingrained and disastrous traits that followed me out of childhood. So I’m well acquainted with that form of censoring. As you say, there is the other side – censoring my actions is what saves me from the pull of addictive drives and passions. It saves me from violating the boundaries others have set – something I used to do so readily.

Your summary of these tendencies is just perfect: “For attitude R there is the sense that our good experiences are achieved through relaxation (’go with the flow’); for attitude S our good experiences are hard won achievements.”

I lean far too heavily toward censoring the spontaneous flow, and my third voice, aware of the problems of clamping down on feelings, has the weakest connection to willing and changing behavior. It’s usually the wise observer that stands by powerless to intervene.

At least that’s the way it used to be. As my problems with depression have receded, there’s been a much greater balance among the three.

Thank you for this great post, Evan. I’ll be stumbling this one.

John

I also really like the idea of responding with the whole rather than a part of me. That feels congruent for me.

I appreciate what you have said here about not censoring my feelings . . . that is the biggest lesson you have taught me through the comments you have left on my blog. Giving myself permission to really feel whatever I’m feeling has been a huge component of my healing — thank you for your part in that!

- Marie

My own view is that choice is a positive part of our experience – that it is a function of wholeness. Some regard choice as a problem – it implies a lack of unity for them. My view is that wholeness can be the wholeness of an organism ie. that the parts of the whole can be in harmony and so no threat to the organism’s wholeness.

Thanks for your comment.

The most immediately striking thing for me personally in this article was the notion of acting/responding with more than one ‘part’ of you. You experienced no regret when you utilized multiple parts.

Now that you’ve stated it so succintly, it makes perfect sense to me. However, I don’t think I ever really thought in terms of using or not using whatever parts of me I had available, before or after I did something, especially the not best result. Maybe it intertwines with the idea of growth and wholeness?

It seems a good framing tool prior to action, especially if used purposefully as you seem to be suggesting. And I’m wondering why no one ever told me! But I guess you just did. TY.