Transformation of Fear (new tech. paper)

I have been thinking a lot since writing this tech. paper no. 63. Doing dishes, riding my bike, in dreams, there's somethings I need to express about it. Like for starters, it occurred to me to declare without no hesitation that "Fear ('fear') is deeply and systemically unconscious." Again, I am talking about its multicomplex dimensions, not a simple fear of spiders, etc. I'm talking about fear itself and its now intermeshed relationship with 'fear' (culturally modified fear). These processes and the phenomena are unconscious for the most part, with brief or symptomatic expressions, e.g., neuroses, that manifest to tell us: "Oh, there's that fear again."

My point is, in naming this unconscious dimension, and essential characteristic of fear ('fear') today, there then becomes a reckoning whereby any time we think we can "manage fear" or "transform fear" and someone writes another 'formula' or invents or gathers an ancient technology for handing fear--think again! Based on my research and theories, and Four Arrows' and VanderWeil's theories there is no such easy 'beast' to capture, net, and put in a bottle to then apply some soft technology, or hard (drug) technology to or lobotomy, etc. That's where I think we really get tricked big time. We think we can just grab fear (because we can name it) and put it on a string and treat it and train it and on and on... wrong! Everything tells me that you cannot do that with the unconscious. Consciousness is very small in relation to the unconscious, and any arrogance otherwise, is will and ego and a distinct distortion of the consciousness to unconsciousness relationship.

So, where have I been informed to make such a claim? I will answer that briefly here. I want to first say that Four Arrrows' and VanderWeil's theories of transformation of fear are leading-edge and valuable. They are what most people will be able to connect with if they are searching for something beyond what is already offered out there in ways of handling fear. But, I was also critical somewhat in tech paper no. 63 that both these theorists and practitioners of transformation are not yet fully operating at the 2nd-tier (integral, fear management system-7) level of thinking and conceptualizing FME (i.e., fear management/education) (see Fisher, 2010). My point is, that they have not fully embraced the reality of fear as unconscious primarily. They indicate they work with that unconscious, yet, their conceptualization of fear (Fear) is still not as extensive and expanded into embracing this unconsciousness as it could be. My work, in particular, that goes into a 2nd-tier critical analysis of FME, is based on, and informed deeply by, at least the following six streams of which one has to have some grasp of to understand why my work is different, and potentially more potent: (1) depth psychology, (2) liberation peer theory of healing, (3) 'fear' as a postmodern and integral post-postmodern construction based on continual deconstruction, (4) philosophy of fearism, (5) ecology of fear, as part of a meta-motivational theory, (6) matrixial (feminine, feminist) theory.

That said, I well-acknowledge, my theoretical fearologist is not going to compromise the advancement of the study of fear and fearlessness. And, that has consequences of few people being willing to try to understand it.

Fisher, R. M. (2010). The world's fearlessness teachings: A critical integral approach to fear management/education for the 21st century. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

You need to be a member of Fearlessness Movement to add comments!

Join Fearlessness Movement

Comments

R.Michael Fisher November 17, 2016 at 9:50am

I have been thinking a lot since writing this tech. paper no. 63. Doing dishes, riding my bike, in dreams, there's somethings I need to express about it. Like for starters, it occurred to me to declare without no hesitation that "Fear ('fear') is deeply and systemically unconscious." Again, I am talking about its multicomplex dimensions, not a simple fear of spiders, etc. I'm talking about fear itself and its now intermeshed relationship with 'fear' (culturally modified fear). These processes and the phenomena are unconscious for the most part, with brief or symptomatic expressions, e.g., neuroses, that manifest to tell us: "Oh, there's that fear again."

My point is, in naming this unconscious dimension, and essential characteristic of fear ('fear') today, there then becomes a reckoning whereby any time we think we can "manage fear" or "transform fear" and someone writes another 'formula' or invents or gathers an ancient technology for handing fear--think again! Based on my research and theories, and Four Arrows' and VanderWeil's theories there is no such easy 'beast' to capture, net, and put in a bottle to then apply some soft technology, or hard (drug) technology to or lobotomy, etc. That's where I think we really get tricked big time. We think we can just grab fear (because we can name it) and put it on a string and treat it and train it and on and on... wrong! Everything tells me that you cannot do that with the unconscious. Consciousness is very small in relation to the unconscious, and any arrogance otherwise, is will and ego and a distinct distortion of the consciousness to unconsciousness relationship.

So, where have I been informed to make such a claim? I will answer that briefly here. I want to first say that Four Arrrows' and VanderWeil's theories of transformation of fear are leading-edge and valuable. They are what most people will be able to connect with if they are searching for something beyond what is already offered out there in ways of handling fear. But, I was also critical somewhat in tech paper no. 63 that both these theorists and practitioners of transformation are not yet fully operating at the 2nd-tier (integral, fear management system-7) level of thinking and conceptualizing FME (i.e., fear management/education) (see Fisher, 2010). My point is, that they have not fully embraced the reality of fear as unconscious primarily. They indicate they work with that unconscious, yet, their conceptualization of fear (Fear) is still not as extensive and expanded into embracing this unconsciousness as it could be. My work, in particular, that goes into a 2nd-tier critical analysis of FME, is based on, and informed deeply by, at least the following six streams of which one has to have some grasp of to understand why my work is different, and potentially more potent: (1) depth psychology, (2) liberation peer theory of healing, (3) 'fear' as a postmodern and integral post-postmodern construction based on continual deconstruction, (4) philosophy of fearism, (5) ecology of fear, as part of a meta-motivational theory, (6) matrixial (feminine, feminist) theory.

That said, I well-acknowledge, my theoretical fearologist is not going to compromise the advancement of the study of fear and fearlessness. And, that has consequences of few people being willing to try to understand it.

Fisher, R. M. (2010). The world's fearlessness teachings: A critical integral approach to fear management/education for the 21st century. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

This reply was deleted.