Dual Identities, Dual messages From Youtube; Contextual Expansion; Dual Identities, Dual Messages

 I am a huge fan of interdisciplinary studies. I find solving problems by using research and methods from a number of different domains to be of the utmost in beneficial and developmental understanding. It accesses regions of interrelating that encourage greater capacities of relationship and correspondence. This brief introduction associates modern social and cultural research, human development models, modern grief research, and modern psychological research. The keywords in this presentation are; dual identities, double messages, dual messages, double  standards, dual process, dual standards and the like. These kinds of communications, views, methods and outcomes have found their way into areas such as judicial topics to personal relationships to personal identity to navigating grief to intercultural relations and even consumer rights.
      I would like to start with a study from China titled “Dual Identity and Prejudice: The Moderating Role of Group Boundary Permeability.” Front Psychol. 2017; 8: 195. I chose this to begin as recognizing effects of change are so much more easily and readily seen in large networks than smaller more individual networks. For example, the effects of a small temperature change is so much more obvious on a planetary scale than a small changes effect on an individual human.
 This study describes current research into how to promote the inclusion, welfare and security of incoming migrant groups into China. The study also includes outcomes for gender differences of rural to urban migrants. The study addresses old segregation policies in China from the Cultural Revolution of the late 1940’s and Early 50’s known as the Hokou system. The recent study measures outcomes of a simple information based, educational message that encourages minority groups to identify with their own groups unique heritage and culture while simultaneously emphasizing a superordinate in-group identity, such as Chinese. Research has also demonstrated that inducing a dual identity can promote the majority group members’ positive attitudes and action toward minority members. The results also include effects on group permeability which improve possibilities for upward social mobility for disadvantaged groups, which present threats to the in-group identity of the dominant group. When the boundary is not permeable racism and prejudice are promoted. This demonstrates inducing a dual identity can act in several ways to promote the majority group members’ positive attitudes and action toward minority members. These issues of group identity, group boundary, and group permeability have been studied across many cultures as early as 1979. This Chinese study also includes references to many studies such as Gaertner et al., 1996; González and Brown, 2003, 2006; Guerra et al., 2010; Banfield and Dovidio, 2013; Scheepers et al., 2014 and many more. The simple introduction of including nationalistic subgroup identities with larger supra-ordinate nationalistic identities seems to offer one solution for promoting prosocial, positive, egalitarian, humanitarianism within intergroup relations. This is different from trying to create a new supra-ordinate identity which seems popular with some groups today.
    Humans have always been possessed by the idea of creating their own supra-ordinate groups that surpass the identity of all other groups. A fundamental kind of social hubris. In doing so, they create more problems for themselves by now having less in-group identity members who struggle against all the other more closely identified groups. This puts them at the most severe duality while that is being hidden from them by their new supra ordinate identification. Resulting in a counter-reinforcement of avoidance, enmeshment of their narratives, further dissociation. What other ways can we understand how this process works? We will take a look at this predicament in several other contexts.  
      Mary Frances O’Connor presents a slight revision of the common grief models that are based on an oscillation of loss oriented and return to daily life orientations. I think that is such a poorly constructed distinction that does not even stand as a distinction. That really echoes the larger themes of misrepresentative indicators so all-pervasive and increasing in human activity today, especially in America.
      The dynamic Professor O’Connor focuses on is the dual messages of this person will always be here for me, they are no longer here. That includes dual messages like, I will always have this person to be here for me, and I will always be here for them. And, I will always have this person to take care of, and they will always be here to take care of me. I think the difference between this model and the more conventional or popular model is significant. I will not be addressing the more prolonged types of complicated grief or childhood grief here, as those are special applications. I will just outline these two grief models and focus on the insight of Mary’s model.     
      Professor O’Connor also presents research on the avoidance of grief issues that causes sufferers in grief to encounter more repeated triggers from the immediate environment as well as other environments. This also decreases the opportunities to heal and learn through experiences related to a person's loss. Avoidance, also known as negative reinforcement, increases the fears around the contexts of loss. The sufferer needs to find ways to integrate, relate to, associate with and learn from the losses.
    CS Lewis the Christian based writer said that grief was the form love takes when a loved one dies. Here we can see another example of a dual message that can be very difficult to assimilate. These kinds of dual contents and contexts are representative of many cultural understandings and perspectives.
      A lot of literature often focuses on the domination of one view over another. The conquest of an opposing way of thinking, relating or demonized fellow(s). Or again the development of some new supra ordinate understanding will altogether supersede other relations. This is also found in the logical systems of humans known as syllogisms or dialectics. While these systems are no doubt interesting and alluring one might start to question their validity across many applications. The models suggest that in the synthesis stage things lose their original characteristics. I suspect this is largely a misrepresentation by platonification of models.                                                                                              If we look at biological models, which I often suggest as an alternative view and additional basis for examinations, we can observe other kinds of relations and processes. For example, transcytosis the process of identifying and integrating foreign elements into a cell shows a calcium ion, or sodium, can function in many different capacities in different cells but retains it’s characteristics of said ion. This biological model supports the conditions of Dual Identity and Dual Messaging in grief. The griever is asked to consider the two opposing views without necessarily adopting a new view of the situation.                                                     Conjugation is another process that has many more applications. This process often changes the composition much more significantly. Another transformation is the states of matter. Which are now found to be basically four. Solid, Liquid, Gas, and Plasma in which the properties of electrons do not conform to the other three. It can also include other properties such as compressibility, pressure, buoyancy, viscosity, and surface tension that do not conform to the other three. We now have significant evidence that there are many other variations and states and may be six or seven or even more. It is likely we will contiue to find more states of existence for compounds and other substances. The conjugation method analogy is more supportive of the syllogism, dialectical process. For my more simplistic metaphors I am just presenting that the models of syllogisms and dialectics do not apply well in the application to Dual Identity and Dual Messaging where no supra-ordinate, or synthesis occurs by a third condition.
     Imagine if all consumer product advertisements were required to come with a disclaimer similar to dpharmaceutical adds. Fro exmple, imagine if a fragrance product such as a room freshener or laundry sheet which depicts the products ability to make your entire life a soohting walk on the a sunny quiet beach in the late afternoon, perfect conditions, your feet splashing in gentle waves, with a hollywood star-like beautiful committed lifetime partner, unconditionally embracing and swaying in each others arms as you meandeeffortlessly care free with the breeze that carries your freshness product scent, were required an accordingly informative disclaimer that all your hair might fall out, permanently numb all your senes, make you impotent, and give you a horrible auto immune disease that cripples your body, confining you to a wheel chair in the back ward of some decrepit state hospital, a stale cadaverous seedy scent that reminds you of the fragrance product deleivered with uncaring, abusive care takers. Don’t laugh, it could be you.                     
    I often wonder if human systems are an adequate measure for humans, or if some other less human-centric understandings might be more valuable to consider to consider for understanding humans. I often use biological models to look at human models. I consider religions to be very human-centric.                                                                                    Popular models on grief employ the above mentioned dual structure of loss oriented experience to restoration oriented experience. The restoration is contextualized as returning to daily life. This is simply characterized by a return to typical daily behavior. I question the validity of such a distinction to be able to impart the kind of insight that could be attained by considering the dual messaging of my loved one is here, and the reality that they are not. Is returning to a more normal routine going to provide a way of looking at our changing relationship with our experience? Or is it a reinforcement of the typical avoidance that characterizes much of life in America? An avoidance of deeper reflections promoted and sustained biologically, neurologically, educationally, informationally and socially imposed on one's experience. How does returning to this state, which may be a huge factor in the inability to integrate loss in the first place, going to support a person who is struggling to make sense of their new life. It is never going to return to any resemblance of daily life before that loss anyway. Why emphasize returning to a state of dissociation, isolation, lack of connection and communication that is the source of everyone's dysfunction to begin with? The person's routine is obviously altered and daily activities such as eating, sleeping, working, communicating have been significantly impacted and some of those activities will never be able to return to what they were because the nature of the context is irreversible. There is thus a significant difference between the way these two representations function.                                                                              In another area of representation, MRI’s and especially FMRI’s have been getting a lot of attention in brain studies. These are especially popular with academics, institutionalized educational programs, institutionalized media outlets, and institutionalized promoters of popular social trends trying to make a name, a brand, and a position for themselves. I have never met an actual clinician speak even remotely favorably of insights afforded by such technology. Those have found discordancies of FMRI’s to be inconsistent and not to reveal any clinically relevant identifications of peoples conditions. Clinicians are rare. Institutionalized protocols and trends have replaced clinical knowledge and development. The hallmark of knowledge being trial and error. Not centralized conventions. Another method of misrepresentation and mis-contextualization that has been debated through the ages but now such inverted understandings provided by centralized power govern much of human life. These positions of top down regulation often appear at the end of a civilizations development and perpetuate the downward spiral of death.
      O’Conner examines the shoulda, woulda, coulda, phenomena and associates that with counterfactual misrepresentation. She sees those perspectives as avoidance that perpetuates fear and the related stress response. Adding to other cycles that create barriers of relating, communication and learning. An important quality you don’t often hear in the context of learning is vulnerability. While we are avoiding looking at and misrepresenting our environments we miss the life changing opportunities that are the hallmark and birthright of all humans.
      As basic human capacities and rights we see a history of human relations that are based on positive human dignity and universal respect. What if we based societies on capacities like vulnerability, dignity, respect and reflection over economic theories and counterfactual principals?
      On ethnic I’d like to point out is that this models also show another way that misrreprerstation occurs is through creating distinctions where there are none and not making distinctions where we should. These often occur due to how boundaries are represented and the learning that takes place by effects of boundaries. This shows the importance of marginalized information and groups. The actions of boundary give the most improatint information for occruances in side the boundaries. This dynamic can be seen in biology by the effects of capillaries on the tissues far beyond the capillary boundary. Studied with Wyn Hoff on vascular properties shows that increasing both ends of the oxygen and carbon dioxide potentials have profound effects on tissues functions and performance.
      I’d like to follow that with a little developmental story beginning with our human prolonged infancy. One of the human dramas begins with a state of complete vulnerability and dependance on one's givers. A state of no almost no organization, with corresponding absent control and almost no sphere of influence. The infant is on the receiving end of most communication and the views of a very small population that may be reduced to one person. Its expression is completely limited to the interpretive skills of its recently significantly decreasing support network that bears little resemblance to the larger historical context of older more extended family systems.
      This condition intensifies the effects of a concentrated attention, perceptive and behavior of often one human for the first perhaps year of it’s life or more, especially in America. This condition of narrowed relations begin the development from complete vulnerability to societies enforcement of the development of a sense of control. This includes an emphasis on maintaining control and in effect maintaining domination characterized by an aggressive outlook as to what that development should look like and how it should function. While the importance of vulnerability to learning and communicating is systematically eliminated.
    The most common dual messaging I heard in my professional life was along the lines of; why do I feel like shit and my doctor tells me I’m fine. That dual message is probably contributing as much stress for the patient as their own pathologies, as it appears to have no reconcilable messaging. The structure of the dual message is also highly problematic and reinforced by the rigid and narrow position of the patients conventional doctor. Here we can easily observe the rigid role and position of the conventional doctor and see how this rigid role reinforces the doctors highly selective methodology ignoring much of the patients presenting symptomology, history, and worst of all ignoring much of the easily detectable laboratory data. This is promoted by the pharmaceutical industries disregard of associated chemistry and biology left out in the production of pharmaceutical drugs. These two reinforce each other stigmatizations. Here the dynamic of narrow views and resulting enmeshment with those views due to the lack of acknowledgment of a wider completely valid context. This plays out in the above scenarios and all aspects of human experience. Misrepresentation always results from an exclusion of more complete evidence inherent to the conditions.  
      In this brief introduction to some ideas on characterizing and addressing the severely depraved state of human relations in America today. We see a need to address complicated polarized conditions that exist on many levels of human experience. Dual messages are so all pervasive, from fantastical, magical claims of products that do not do what the producers claims to support in dual message dynamics from the wider circles of education, media, politics and economics that are part and parcel of the rest of personal human relational needs, and community infrastructure needs. The narrowing conditions of communication, connection, context with reinforced rigid roles and enmeshment that blinds people in and to their positions. The irreconcilable nature of such conditions are apparent in socio-economic problems such as a particular groups sense of isolated nationalistic interest, as in the case of affirmative action have been identified as failures by researchers such as Thomas Powell in world wide studies.  I continue to address recalcitrant conditions of misrepresentations and other methods of perpetuating these irreconcilable dual states. I suggest that an educational and informational program along with a compassionate guide to navigating and implementing the information is effective for change. Secondarily, and in accordance with the above information, approaches such as visualization, various play and role playing techniques, professional EMDR approaches, and meditations on loving kindness, compassion, joy, equanimity may be used as accepted and in agreement with the patient's interests, temperaments and dispositions.