In the chapter Affection Russell describes three types of people based on their reactions to a lack of being loved. Though I would not say my life has been utterly devoid of love, certainly it has neither been utterly filled with it, and I have found myself falling prey to each of these reactions at one point or another.
Discussion Question - Should we define ourselves by which reactions we take or are they just individual effects of individual circumstances that come and go as do their inciting situations?
Factual Question - Is it affection given or affection received that Russel thinks brings a greater sense of security?
I woudn't say we should define ourselves by these reactions because rarely in psychology can reaction be exclusive to any one model. I think if we were to try to categorize ourselves at all it would be based on the way we perceive our lives in general, rather than our reactions in specific circumstances.
ReplyDeleteFor instance, he mentions two different ways in which a person may perceive the world.
- One may see the world in relation to the self as having a direct impact on the self, and can therefore be inclined to think mostly about what the world is doing to the self.
- The other may see the world as a wholly separate entity, being completely indifferent to the self, and therefore this one has altogether very little regard to the self.
Although both can be experienced in a person's life, one perspective may be more prevalent than the other altogether. Russell seems to emphasize these perspectives as the most important theme throughout the entire book, influencing all the reactions he talks about.-The most positive being the one most perceptive of external life rather than internal.