I converted this to a post for two reasons. 1) b.. ‘s synthesis represents an achievement of replicability. The good news is that one can learn to understand the internal processes of the animal mind, we do all have one after all. However the bad news is you might end up thinking like me. 2) I’ve been unable to edit in comments section so hopefully this will straighten out in a post.
b…
So, can it be said that…
– Prey Drive accounts for the attraction. >Is the basis for the entire interaction.
KB: Yes, but to break it down; the basic state of attraction is the result of a whole body state of tension induced by hunger versus balance mandates. Hunger craves input/change, balance craves stasis and prefers “defined” inputs.
Hunger —> <—Balance = Tension.
Release from Tension when the two mandates are satisfied equals Emotion. That which resolves Tension (so that the CNS allows an action predicated by hunger) is embodied by a Preyful Aspect.
Emotion —-> Preyful Aspect (+)
So emotion is always a positive state of attraction. Then when an expression of emotion meets with Resistance as it always does, stress is produced and stored as a physical memory of the experience.
Emotion ——-> Resistance ———> (+) = Stress
When stress is subsequently triggered by an Object-of-Resistance, and if the emotional capacity is high enough, then it will add to the emotional current to produce Drive. Drive is aroused by the Source of Resistance, or Negative Polarity (-) while still remaining cognizant of the preyful aspect (+) and additionally a Midpoint (*).
Stress + Emotion = Drive —–> (-) ——- (+)——–(*)
b. .
– High Emotional Capacity provides strength of Hunger (over Balance), which accounts for maintained state of Drive vs. reversion to Instinct.
KB: Yes, however, first hunger is stronger than balance (HUNGER/balance) and this then renders a high emotional capacity. Thus the infants of all species (infancy being the phase of life where hunger is prototypically stronger than balance) have higher emotional capacity and a stronger social disposition then the elders of their species. Whereas when balance is stronger than hunger (BALANCE/hunger) than instincts take over. A high capacity dog will weight the preyful aspect over the predatory aspect in an Object-of-Resistance so that it is aroused rather than inhibited by the resistance it encounters. Below is a process of elaboration between dogs (A) and (B) wherein emotion is reflected and absorbed back and forth in a state of high emotional capacity.
1 (A) Projector ——-> (B) Projectee
2 (A) Projectee <——- (B) Projector
3 (A) Projector ——-> (B) Projectee
4 (A) Projectee <——- (B) Projector
The higher the emotional capacity (HUNGER/balance) then the longer the process of elaboration can go on until it reaches a point of intensity that induces both individuals to align and synchronize their movements around a common and greater Object-of-Resistance in order to accelerate it by absorbing their stress loads.
(A)——-> O-R ——->
(B)——->
b…
>Evidenced by arousal response (mouth on midpoint) vs. alarm/overload/stiffness response (fight/flight/paralysis). Stress triggered by deer is channeled into flow vs. collapse. Also, continued pressure elaborates into stronger engagement with midpoint (dog accelerates object-in-common, i.e., bite + carry).
KB: Yes, exactly right.
b… – Low Prey Threshold explains why dog is deflected onto midpoint vs. direct connection with object of attraction/resistance. The deer exceeds the dog’s prey threshold because it doesn’t fit in its mouth, like a bird would.
KB: Yes, exactly right.
b..
– Breeding (selection for amplified neonate state) accounts for the soft mouth vs. firm grip (as with a GSD doing police work) or crushing bite (as with a ratter dispatching vermin).
KB: Actually, the firm, hard but not maximum crushing bite as in the calm carry, is the same as the soft mouth for the bird dog (or I should say, the equal/opposite). The killing bite of the terrier with all the thrashing is balance suddenly becoming stronger than hunger (BALANCE/hunger) at a peak state of intensity. In other words the process of elaboration collapses into the kill as things are no longer going fast enough once prey is in the mouth. The shaking of course would kill the prey as well as begin its dismemberment. But the dog is led to this because of the momentum not yet brought to terminus and still energizing the dog. The shaking dissipates the running the dog would otherwise be doing were it chasing the prey. (In contrast note the cat bringing the prey, paralyzed with the strength of the grip, yet still alive—-back to the den. This enables a further process of elaboration that brings the young into the formula. The prey is the midpoint that connects the adult to the predatory aspects of its offspring.)
b….
So… Prey Drive provides the attraction.
KB: Technically emotion provides the attraction to the body, stress the attraction to the predatory aspect. High emotional capacity enables Drive which then marshals Stress to provide Force so as to overcome Resistance. So it’s correct to call it Prey Drive, but we can break it down into these constituents.
b…
Low Prey Threshold causes the attraction to be deflected from object of resistance (deer) onto midpoint (rock) to express “fight drive”. High Emotional Capacity allows the dog to channel continued pressure (stress triggered by object of resistance) into continued work (“fight drive”) and subsequently to give credit for flow to the negatives (deer, human).
??
KB: Yes, exactly right. Because the Golden does have strong Fight Drive in the technical sense of the term, and because hunger is stronger than balance but its nerves are attuned to the vibration of the small prey so that when it is aroused, it is easily deflected. Thus the human is in position to turn this Drive into all manner of complex work so that the dog can overcome a level of complexity/resistance that would be the equivalent to any working police dog, it would just play out over the long term in not quite such an intense expression.
b..
I was also trying to put my finger on what provides the fuel for work/overcoming resistance. That is, what trait accounts for the ability to work harder or longer – what might be seen as a variable level of drive (as in what’s referred to by “high-drive” or “fight drive”). But I think I see here that the “fuel” is the dog’s stress reserves triggered by resistance, and the extent to which the dog can continue to channel that stress into work is a function of its emotional capacity, i.e. its capacity to stay in drive under continuous or increasing pressure without emotional collapse. Does that sound right?
KB: Yes, the fuel is hunger/arousal to Resistance so that Stress is processed through a sensual body, rather than a sensitized one. In regard to traits, this illustrates the systems logic underneath behavior because a trait is the capacity to switch to the complementary phase of a wave, in other words, Dog B collects when Dog A projects, and then vice versa. Flipping from one trait to another is the same by way of Pavlovian imprinting as running at full speed, hence, intrinsically satisfying. The ability to make a trait-on-demand results from high emotional capacity due to hunger over balance and now the dog can execute its Drive-to-Make-Contact at whatever frequency of vibration (prey threshold) it has been selectively bred to have in the hunt. These are the options when Resistance hits a high intensity, collapse and then fight/flight, or arouse and then fight to penetrate to essence (direct/active typical of terrier orientation) or deflect for indirect/reactive approach (herding, gun dog)
I try so hard to understand these concepts, if I can map them across to myself it makes it easier! I have a point about the word emotion as it relates to me and trying to square it with the NDT model. Apologies if I am repeating myself. I believe emotion is energy in motion. These days I am very much more aware of my feelings and physical location in my body. For example, sometimes I might get a blocked feeling in my throat as I am trying to unravel something, either when speaking to someone, or writing something. The feeling reflects some inner tension in myself. ( I had this feeling when I was trying to explain my apporach to rub-a-dubs in an NDT discussion recently – and I have it again just now!) I believe that ‘blocked’ feeling is energy trying to move. If I follow the thought processes and try and further articulate, tears may come. Whether they do or not, the feeling indicates to me that I have uncovered some deep, repressed truth from my psyche, and it represents progress. So when you say emotion is always a positive state of attraction’ I was confused…but, thinking about it, in my example, it is stuck feelings trying to be released, so it is positive state of attraction ..a move to the deep truth. And thanks for the reference to ‘bite and carry’ that helps my understanding a little bit more.
I’m reading about Francis Bacon at the moment and am always trying to map ideas across to other areas in my life. The reference to ‘hunger and balance’ reminded me of a quote I read recently – which may be a bit far-fetched for others. From Peter Dawkins, ‘The Great Vision’ “[Frances Bacon] recognised, as few do, that active service in all life was a fundamental part of becoming divinely conscious; that contemplation and action must go hand in hand, the first to direct the second, the second to perfect the first” Maybe talking about dogs and divine consciousness in the same sentence seems ludicrous, but I see patterns within patterns and suggest ‘contemplation’ could represent a more advanced form of balance and ‘action’, a more developed form of ‘hunger’ And personally speaking, I am amused to note that I can sit at my PC/journal and develop these ideas, a lot easier than I can make progress with NDT….and I do know, for me, progress will be made as I increase my emotional capacity!
Thanks for the thoughtful comment and trust the following clarifies:
Joanne: “I believe emotion is energy in motion.”
KB: Yes from my study of dogs I agree. However, pure emotion doesn’t move at random. At the root of all movement is a desire. Emotion always has an object-of-desire as focal point and the animal mind never desires something that isn’t positive. Therefore emotion is positive. Any other formulation would require us to believe that there is such a thing as a bad energy.
Joanne: “I believe that ‘blocked’ feeling is energy trying to move.”
KB: I would rephrase as — “I believe that ‘blocked’ SENSATION is energy trying to move.”—-
Repressed or denied movement requires force to move. Anger, guilt, grief have denied emotion as their core, they are intimately affiliated with each other this way. Sensations are about balance and warn the system about an impending collapse. Because in humans they are almost always present in emotional experience they are mistaken for “pure” emotion and a “true” feeling. But they are like capsules that contain the “emotional momentum,” a movement that wasn’t expressed. When the capsules give way because they can only hold back so much, the anger, guilt, grief is experienced. But these are not pure emotion, they are composites of a more complex construction. Pure emotion would be experienced listening to sad music, but still enjoying the experience because music always has emotional movement at its core. Emotional momentum is conducted through a wave, this is the domain of feelings. Music has a pure wave form and therefore even sad music feels good. A “true” feeling creates a wave. Therefore there is no such thing as a bad feeling. We can parse apart a complex emotional experience by applying these standards, emotion = positive attraction; feeling = good. Everything else is due to thoughts, judgments, primordial templates, habits of mind, instincts, sensations.
Joanne: “progress will be made as I increase my emotional capacity!”
KB: If we can find the attraction at the root of an emotional experience, we can increase our emotional capacity. Keep On Pushin! (and Collectin’–Rub-a-dubbin’–Barkin’—and Bite-n-Carryin’)
Thankyou Kevin, your revision to my words adding sensation makes sense to me. I have been dwelling on that last comment ‘if we can find the attraction at th eroot of an emotional experience’ and it has been quite illuminating for me, although not sure what I’m going to do with the ‘light’ right now 🙂
Appreciate this discussion. On the human front, I think NLP and related approaches have developed very effective protocols that parse out just these distinctions between emotion>sensation>thought and seek to reveal to the subject the discrepancy between the underlying emotion and the thought-based end product that we often mislabel as a “feeling”, which is really more like a mood created by the mind’s filters (beliefs/judgments).
The mood (anger, guilt, grief) is typically what we act on. And if we try to examine the causes of our actions, we only see the mood, which is a product of our thoughts. We mistakenly assign the emotional trigger (cause) to the mood (effect) because the mind shields the underlying emotion from our intellect by creating a story based on our beliefs.
I’ll take a stab at integrating the concepts using a driving example:
– trigger = driver cutting you off
– mood = anger
– underlying emotion = fear (an instinctive reaction to being knocked off balance when momentum is interrupted and we are suddenly disconnected from our projected physical COG. I’m attempting to map it onto Kevin’s locomotive model here, with uncertain accuracy.)
– story/beliefs = Driver is rude. Driver thinks they have right to do this to me because of X,Y,Z. Driver thinks they are more important than me. This roadway is full of rude people. People are rude. I am not respected.
In this example the trigger disconnected us from our desire (represented by the driving destination, and more immediately by movement to the point ahead on the road where we are looking/projecting). The resulting loss of balance triggered fear and our body responded with an autonomic fight-flight response. We look for the cause of this discomfort and pin the driver as its source. This association might trigger a physical memory of a previous interruption by another person that made us feel disrespected. Now this driver represents all those people who have made us feel disrespected (The Charge). Of course this is irrational, so our mind creates a story to align this chunk of uprooted stored stress with what kind of person this driver must be. The more intense the charge, the more awful the person. And if the charge is greater than can be absorbed by the capacity of the imagined persona, i.e., we now have more blame available than can rationally be assigned to the persona, then it radiates out into a more encompassing story about drivers in general on that road, etc.
Of course if such a charge is not triggered or we develop (or perhaps keep intact from early childhood) a higher emotional capacity, then we might perceive this stress as resistance that can be overcome and the incident is enfolded into what we see as our driving ‘adventure’. And perhaps the destination tastes a bit sweeter when we arrive, now with the satisfaction of greater resistance overcome.
So, where I think Kevin’s theory goes further, and deeper, than psychological models is to tie that underlying emotion to attraction/desire (beyond an Oedipal one). And my interpretation of “If we can find the attraction at the root of an emotional experience, we can increase our emotional capacity,” is that if we can strip away the mood, thought, belief, story, and sensation, and feel the desire/attraction that brought about the initial movement (got us in the car to begin with), we can not only enfold stress/resistance along the way into our drive to make contact with that object, but it may also give us the clarity (of feeling without story-making) to soften that charge.
In Joanne’s example of an action causing a physical blockage, perhaps a deeply ingrained belief is impeding connection to the underlying object of attraction. When examining such a situation, I think a lot of times it’s easier to tell ourselves a story that explains the conflict, and we stop there. But this obscures the desire, the pure emotion, the “truth”.
Since emotional processes are an energy system, since the animal mind is an emotional/energy system, since when we’re driving a car (an energy system) our animal mind comes to the surface of our awareness because it’s the animal in us that gets a feeling for the car, the road, and the flow around us, we can thereby use the experience of driving a car to completely map the animal mind that is within us and which we share in common with animals.
“b… – trigger = driver cutting you off”
KB: Yes, an interruption of flow is predator energy
b… – mood = anger
KB: When there is an interruption of flow (thus knocking the animal mind off/balance) Deep Inner Stress rushes to the surface as an energy reserve to maintain the flow and to assign the predator value to the source of the resistance. Since physical memories of being interrupted are configured around the p-cog, which is at the core of the unbalanced experience, old memories of interruptions come to the surface as well and the resulting anger is automatically projected onto the other driver.
b …..– underlying emotion = fear (an instinctive reaction to being knocked off balance when momentum is interrupted and we are suddenly disconnected from our projected physical COG. I’m attempting to map it onto Kevin’s locomotive model here, with uncertain accuracy.)
KB: Exactly right.
b ….. – story/beliefs = Driver is rude. Driver thinks they have right to do this to me because of X,Y,Z. Driver thinks they are more important than me. This roadway is full of rude people. People are rude. I am not respected.
In this example the trigger disconnected us from our desire (represented by the driving destination, and more immediately by movement to the point ahead on the road where we are looking/projecting).
KB: Our destination is the originating object-of-attraction (+) at the root of all emotional processing of the driving experience, and toward which a degree of emotional momentum has been invested and into which we have projected our p-cog so that it constitutes our emotional center-of-gravity.
b …. The resulting loss of balance triggered fear and our body responded with an autonomic fight-flight response.
KB: The sudden rise of DIS generally exceeds one’s emotional capacity and in that event the fight/flight response is triggered. This is not true of race car drivers on the track at 250 mph. They can potentially become aroused by the sudden intrusion of a car coming too close because this means there is an opening in the space they have vacated. The civilian driver hits the brakes and swears, the race car driver hits the gas and swerves.
b….. We look for the cause of this discomfort and pin the driver as its source. This association might trigger a physical memory of a previous interruption by another person that made us feel disrespected. Now this driver represents all those people who have made us feel disrespected (The Charge). Of course this is irrational, so our mind creates a story to align this chunk of uprooted stored stress with what kind of person this driver must be. The more intense the charge, the more awful the person. And if the charge is greater than can be absorbed by the capacity of the imagined persona, i.e., we now have more blame available than can rationally be assigned to the persona, then it radiates out into a more encompassing story about drivers in general on that road, etc.
Of course if such a charge is not triggered or we develop (or perhaps keep intact from early childhood) a higher emotional capacity, then we might perceive this stress as resistance that can be overcome and the incident is enfolded into what we see as our driving ‘adventure’. And perhaps the destination tastes a bit sweeter when we arrive, now with the satisfaction of greater resistance overcome.
KB: Exactly right.
b …. if we can strip away the mood, thought, belief, story, and sensation, and feel the desire/attraction that brought about the initial movement (got us in the car to begin with), we can not only enfold stress/resistance along the way into our drive to make contact with that object, but it may also give us the clarity (of feeling without story-making) to soften that charge.
KB: It’s interesting that most people who cut us off, are doing exactly what we do when we’re in their situation (trying to merge onto the highway, trying to change lanes, confused by a road sign, etc..). Yet we can’t feel their point of view by being able to change places with them and put ourselves into that same situation. That’s because we’re reacting instinctively to the sudden up-rushing of our DIS. Whereas when we’re at a high emotional capacity we can put ourselves into every other drivers’ point of view and anticipate what they are likely to do given the prevailing conditions. Because the emotional mind is an energy system, and because traffic moving down the roadway is also an energy system, our animal mind can apprehend all points of view, and this is precisely in contravention to the Theory of Mind conceptualization. Our capacity for a Theory of Mind prevents us from seeing other driver’s points of view, instead we project our narrative into their minds in order to justify our anger. It can become fun to parry the moves of other drivers as we are construing them to being part of the same flow system, albeit a turbulent particle, as we are in. This is what race car drivers can do at 280 mph and this is exactly what we have to do when training a dog, especially a problem dog.
b …. In Joanne’s example of an action causing a physical blockage, perhaps a deeply ingrained belief is impeding connection to the underlying object of attraction. When examining such a situation, I think a lot of times it’s easier to tell ourselves a story that explains the conflict, and we stop there. But this obscures the desire, the pure emotion, the “truth”.
KB: Yes, we have to become comfortable with the sudden uprising of DIS in our dog and already be in the process of attracting and bringing it to a safe landing, i.e. being the dog’s emotional ground. Most of the time when we’re being with a dog we’re reflexively transposing our narrative onto their mental domain and then are shocked by their DIS rising. Race car drivers, equestrians, lion tamers, charter boat captains, are always vigilant for interruptions of the flow. It’s the negative that defines behavior for the animal mind, not the positive.