Pleneurethics Paper Example: Watkins 12/2004

Comparing Pleneurethics’ Intellectosis to Psychology’s Cognitive Distortions

Deepak Chopra and Richard Bangs Collier: Strange Bedfellows

Collier’s Outspoken Views on Psychology

Intellectosis and Twisted Thinking

How Intellectosis and Twisted Thinking Affect Society

Intellectosis and Family Values

Where Do We Go From Here?

Comparing Pleneurethics’ Intellectosis to Psychology’s Cognitive Distortions

Deepak Chopra and Richard Bangs Collier: Strange Bedfellows

Seven years ago I attended a lecture by established author and spiritualist Deepak Chopra. Upon leaving, I knew that I had just heard one of the finest speakers alive. He had shared complex thoughts extemporaneously with perfect precision, never even uttering the word ‘uh’ once during a presentation that lasted close to two hours! I thought that was quite a feat, given that English was probably not his first language, and I left Seattle Center knowing that he was, like former U.S. President Ronald Reagan, a great communicator.

But more importantly, Chopra made the point that the human being, in his estimation, had maximized his physical evolution, and that it was unreasonable to think that man would become much more different physically than he is today. He wasn’t saying that we were through evolving, but he was saying that many recent physical changes like increased height and chronic back aches indicated that deleterious physical evolutionary changes were becoming the norm.

By contrast however, Chopra established that the mental capacity of the brain was almost entirely underutilized. Moreover, he said that the part of consciousness that was most ripe for development was the space in between thoughts! That space, as tiny as it might seem, is actually almost infinite in its possibilities. For I believe that space in between our thoughts is the breeding ground for Collier’s intellectosis. That is, according to Collier, caused by “structural disorders of the intellect producing acute but true illness of the mental acuity.” (Pleneurethics: 184)

With that in mind, I find it hopeful to imagine that future folks can develop cognitively to overcome or even eradicate many mechanisms of intellectosis, as Collier describes them. With

this paper, I explore Collier’s views on them and offer personal and social insights.

After exploring the details of intellectosis, I offer a comparison and contrast of so-called distorted thinking patterns from the view of psychology’s cognitive behavior model. I explore the ideas of Dr. David D. Burns, author of “Feeling Good: The New Mood Therapy.” I choose this source because his ideas are very accessible, and use language that is both explicit and understandable.

Collier’s Outspoken Views on Psychology

Though the main thrust of Pleneurethics correlates to Psychology’s Biological model, Collier’s intellectosis can be compared to distortions described in Psychology’s Cognitive model. In other words, the biological model focuses on the roles that genetics and anatomy and physiology play in determining personality and behavior. While the cognitive model focuses on the similar roles of beliefs and thoughts.

In general, Collier’s view of Psychology can best be described as disdainful and derisive, based on the following. “Present-day psychotherapeutic apologists lay it down that the infant’s mouth, anus, and reproductive system account for the preponderance of forces which form the child’s psyche (Vol II 2^nd: 261).”

Collier makes his outspoken contempt for Psychology even more evident. “It appears that the philosophical principles of psychiatry and psychotherapy attract those adults who need to have an academic and socially acceptable reason for discussing anuses, penises, and vaginas. Pleneurethics stand in opposition to all this preoccupation with anal tissues and phallic symbols (Vol II 2^nd: 261).”

Intellectosis and Twisted Thinking

The “...persistent desire to appear superior to everyone around them” (Collier’s 1^st adverse intellectural mechanism) relates to the cognitive distortion of magnification. Specifically, magnifying one’s own importance. The cause of such thinking in pleneurethical terms might be traced to trauma in one’s bioductory system. As Collier points out in his February 29, 1972 speech, research is still needed to prove bioductory causes of intellectosis.

Some think that such magnification stems from a lack of self esteem, and from overcompensation by magnifying one’s worth. In either case, the distortion stems from concern about how one is perceived by others.

The cure might be to change the internal message from “I need to appear superior to feel better about myself” to “I have little control over what others think, and my efforts are more productive when I focus on perfecting my own existence.”

Why do people get extremely nervous before a performance or a speech? Is it a concern that one isn’t prepared or talented? Most times, people are asked to perform because others enjoy their performance! So the worry and nervousness usually is a magnification of the importance of the event beyond what’s reasonable.

Is the cause of the anxiety a physical trauma to the bioductory system? Again, more research is necessary to substantiate Collier’s claims. But my own experience is that careful preparation including exercise and nutrition usually contribute to a positive outcome. Whether one calls that pleneurethical living or just plain common sense makes little difference to the positive outcome.

Similarly, Collier’s 6^th adverse intellectual mechanism (Pleneurethics, 185 -186) focuses on acceptance from others at the expense of acceptance of self. The ‘tendency to say only that which you believe the other person wishes to hear” is a source for more negative outcomes than positive ones.

Is it beneficial to answer someone’s question “How did I do” by telling them what you believe they want to hear? Would it not be more constructive and honest to respond with a question of how they thought they did? Encouraging excellence is a far cry from lavishing praise to endear oneself.

How Intellectosis and Twisted Thinking Affect Society

Perhaps the sociocultural influences on both mechanism #1 and #6 bear examination. Let’s face it; we are in a competitive society. Winning competitions are rewarded with higher salaries, more prestigious material goods, and higher social standings. Family pride and dependent care are often the motivators.

The cognitive model suggests that the cure for the cognitive distortion of magnification involves ‘the healthy pursuit of excellence.’ (Burns, 176) “You don’t have to earn love and friendship by impressing people with your intelligence or your success.”

For me, as it probably is for most who are interested in Pleneurethics, it is difficult to imagine not thinking about such things as intellectosis or distorted thinking. Those interested in either think to try to comprehend why. Why are things the way they are? Why does it feel good when I do that? Why do I feel guilty when that happens?

Collier’s stated goal of Pleneurethics is ‘ to aid the brain in its chore of processing stress and shock whether it be of mental, mechanical or chemical genesis.” Burns’ implied goals are included in the title of his book, that is, ‘feeling good.’

Whether stated with simplicity or with complexity, feeling good seems like a universal goal. I’ve known few people who I thought truly wanted to be miserable, even though their actions or behaviors or decisions seemed to virtually assure that outcome.

How many people do we know that say “I want to be on a television talk show someday, so that everyone can laugh at me and the plight that I’m in.” And yet life’s challenges are tough and overwhelming, and we all know some who may qualify as ‘contestants’ for such a display of grief. (How would Mr. Collier or Mr. Chopra react to the Jerry Springer Show?)

One philosopher, Noam Chomsky, maintains that people make intellectual choices based on convenience rather than need. His “Manufacturing Consent” displays Americans being able to recite sports statistics by their favorite players, but unable to provide the name of their Congressional representative or senator.

Given that television, radio, and printed news contains special daily coverage of professional sports teams, such intelligence is not that surprising. The point is that sports competition is woven into the sociocultural cloth. So much so, that we remember sports figures as much for their failures as their victories or triumphs.

As a kid, I was the typical Texas boy interested in baseball and football and running around in the humid heat looking for a swimming hole to jump in. But as an adult, having seen sports stars traded to richer teams or heartbreaking officiating mistakes, I tend to agree with Chomsky’s assertion that our intellectual powers are mostly wasted on sports trivia.

One could even go as far as saying that one’s habits of media immersion contribute to intellectosis. I reckon that any news media executive, confronted with such a challenge, would reply that their customers are free to change the channel any time they wish. C-SPAN is just as accessible to a cable television viewer as WWE wrestling. And perhaps since professional wrestlers like Jesse the Body Ventura have become Governor Ventura, there isn’t that much difference between the two!

Next consider three related adverse intellectual mechanisms. Number 9 (Collier, 187) entails the ‘persistent and stubborn resistance to modify one’s views.” Mechanism # 2 defines extremism as “ ignoring many pertinent factors in order to preserve a biased perception about an issue” and mechanism # 22 describes the “premature closing of one’s mind to serious consideration of any additional evidence.”

These three examples of intellectosis seem closely related to Burn’s twisted thinking forms of : 1) all or nothing thinking, 2) overgeneralizing, 3) mental filtering, 5) jumping to conclusions, and 9) labeling. (See Tables 1 & 2)

Recent political events illuminate the interplay between politics and intellectosis. President Reagan was widely held to be a man of conservative political principals. For some, “conservative” politicians often have core beliefs that equate into policies that are inflexible. For example, a card-carrying member of the ACLU, or the American Civil Liberties Union, is often derided by conservative politicians.

And one wonders, what part of civil liberties are they opposed to? Isn’t civil liberty at the core of American heritage and culture? Don’t my neighbors have a right to listen to hip hop music even though I find it repulsive? Isn’t the concept of a secret ballot based on the idea that we are free to express our political vote any way we choose?

Intellectosis and Family Values

Closer to home, my family and I are busy making preparations for my father to live in an assisted-living facility. Though he is 88 years old, his assistance is in no small part due to his inflexible thinking that he should not use a cane or other walking-aid device. So now, after several falls and cracked vertebrae, he is bed-bound.

His rigid, inflexible thinking may have contributed to his being a steady father and provider, but it also contributed to his failing health and loss of freedom. Now, he is faced with the future of needing help to manage something as basic as washing himself.

How does one maintain intellectual vitality and the ‘‘the healthy pursuit of excellence?” How does one have a flexible mind even as the joints stiffen? The disengagement theory (Berger, 680) holds that “aging makes a person’s social sphere increasingly narrow.” Berger goes on to list such activities as volunteering, continuing education, and mentoring as ways to cope with the naturally-shrinking social convoy.

Again, it would be interesting to conduct Pleneurethics experiments with folks like my dad to assess the physical neural effects of falls and cracked vertebra to the bioductory system and associated mentosis. As it is now, he deals with pain and its pharmaceutical management, with the cost to his liver and cognitive acuity.

There is no question that pain in, what Collier refers to as, the bioductory system has a fast track transmission to the pain centers in the brain. Even as efficient as the human body is, much energy must be consumed as neurons fire and pain transmissions are sent or blocked. Human behavior is almost always affected by pain, and the results seldom seem to be positive or beneficial.

Think of how many children have been spanked or hit because the parent lost their temper too quickly and overreacted. Think of how many bosses yelled and cursed at an employee who’s actions probably had little to do with the yelling or cursing. And think of all the guilty energy consumed by those who lost their temper, and who then felt remorse for their behavior after regaining emotional homeostasis.

I believe these illustrations demonstrate the benefit to becoming aware of human inclinations toward intellectosis or distorted thinking. Perhaps the bigger question becomes how to impress others that undertaking some self evaluation is worthwhile. Any one can sit in the special Collier room at the Tacoma Community College library and espouse lofty ideals. But how to make a change?

Where Do We Go From Here?

The fact that there is a Pleneurethics Society with bright active members instills hope. There may never be a day that ten minutes of the nightly news is dedicated to principles of better living or to eliminating twisted thinking patterns. But little by little, with each of us doing one small act or saying one important thing, long-lasting positive change is possible. I have a feeling that Mr. Collier would whole-heartedly agree!

Resources:

Berger, Kathleen Stassen. The Developing Person Through the Life Span 5^th Ed. New York: Worth, 2001

Burns, David D. The Feeling Good Handbook. New York: Morrow, 1989.

Collier, Richard Bangs. Pleneurethics: The Basic Principles. Ed. by John Terrey. Tacoma, WA: The Pleneurethics Society, 1999.

Collier, Richard Bangs. Pleneurethics: A New Concept in Healing. Vol. II 2^nd Edition. Ed. by John Terrey. Tacoma, WA: The Pleneurethics Society, 1966.

Collier, Richard Bangs. Pleneurethics: A Philosophical System Uniting Body, Brain, Mind. d. by John Terrey. Tacoma, WA: The Pleneurethics Society. 1990

Table 1: Collier’s Mechanisms of Intellectosis (Pleneurethics: 184 - 191)

1	Many people waste time and energy to appear superior to everyone around them. (Going nowhere in a hurry)
2	Coping with a complicated situation by ignoring many pertinent facts (oversimplifying)
3	Desiring to speak but refusing to listen (narcissism)
4	Evading the heavy responsibilities of personal success or failure by placing it elsewhere (the buck stops there)
5	The end always justifies the means (superiority and arrogance)
6	Earning false friendship or loyalty by telling people only what they want to hear (Kissing up, or brown-nosing)
7	Evading problems and hoping for better times (wishful thinking)
8	Forcing one’s views on others (my way or the highway)
9	Refusing to modify one’s views (obstinance)
10	Hiding imagined inadequacies with a facade of aloofness
11	Testing others to determine their worth (personal boot camp)
12	Presuming that another person shares your intellect and personality
13	Preaching abstinence after becoming impotent (sexual narcissism)
14	Specious deportment, or habitually acting as if one were someone else (dissociation)
15	Sudden shock of realization, and impending action without forethought (shooting from the hip)
16	Donning the cloak of humility to inspire the respect and endorsement of others
17	Ignoring others good points and concentrating only on their flaws (filtering)
18	Abdicating responsibility for one’s own happiness
19	Desiring to return to childhood and youth. (Denial ain’t just a river in Egypt.)
20	Being non-committal. (A tree with no roots can’t stand)
21	Exaggerating the difficulty and importance of one’s own work
22	Prematurely closing one’s mind to serious consideration of any additional evidence.
23	Losing one’s temper to achieve an adrenalin rush and a sense of power
24	Resorting to subtlety to exhibit superiority.
25	Failing to assume full responsibility for one’s own acts and omissions.

Table 2: Burn’s Cognitive Distortions: (Burns, 1989: 77)

1	All or nothing thinking	Perceiving absolute, black-and-white categories
2	Overgeneralization	Perceiving a (-) event as a never-ending defeat pattern
3	Mental Filter	Dwelling on negatives and ignoring the positives
4	Discounting the (+)	Insisting one’s accomplishments or positive qualities don’t count
5	Jumping to conclusions	a) mind reading: assuming people are reacting negatively to you when there’s no evidence for that assumption b) fortune-telling: arbitrarily predicting bad outcomes
6	Magnification and Minimization	Blowing things out of proportion, or shrinking their importance inappropriately
7	Emotional reasoning	“I feel like an idiot, so I must really be one.”
8	“Should statements”	Criticizing yourself or others with “shoulds’ or ‘shouldn’ts’
9	Labeling	You identify with your shortcoming or other’s failures. Eg. “I’m a jerk” or “you’re a loser.”
10	Personalization and blame	you accept inappropriate portions of blame, or assign the same to others, discounting your own contributions.