I think this is at least mostly true. The brain learns which emotional states best achieve its objectives and activates the states that seem to have worked in the past. If one isn't feeling good, it's because of an evaluation saying that feeling something different is more useful
This doesn't mean that you could just decide to become happy, but it does mean that there are different techniques you can use to dig into the brain's emotional learnings in order to evaluate and update them if they are mistaken.
(I would note that "re-evaluating the brain's emotional learnings" may also include unlocking the capability to feel more _negative_ emotions, if it is excessively blocking them. E.g. many people feel uncomfortable with expressing anger, which is not always a good thing.)
"The Upside of Your Dark Side" argues for a flexibility that allows us to switch to non-happy mindstates when it’s beneficial. They call this “wholeness”: a person is whole if they are able to flexibly tap into all aspects of their being when warranted.
That said, I do think that most people could be vastly happier with few downsides, because much of the learning saying they need to be less happy is outdated. (Even that book suggests that being happy 80% of the time seems like a good number; I'd guess many people are not that.)
So why _would_ (parts of) your brain feel the need to make you unhappy?
So how do you actually revise your emotional learnings?
At the core of it is a process called memory reconsolidation, which I describe in more detail in this post. If you can access the implicit belief behind an emotion, it becomes available to change.
Of course, doing that for _all_ of your emotions and issues is easier said than done. There are a variety of techniques and methods you can use, but few silver bullets. (Most of these can be used alone, but work much better with a skilled facilitator or therapist.)
One approach is learning to pay more attention to your "felt senses", through some technique such as Gendlin's Focusing. lesswrong.com/posts/eccTPEon…
Internal Family Systems is another great method, I'd say it uses similar skills as Focusing does but offers more things you can try and a slightly different way of conceptualizing issues. At best, you can have literal conversations with your emotions.
Recently I've also been getting a lot of value out of attachment repair and ideal parent figure protocol, which aims to heal very early emotional conditioning that other modalities cannot necessarily access, as much of it is pre-verbal in nature.
I've only done a single session of @DougTataryn 's "Bio-Emotive Framework" but that session was really powerful and unblocked some important emotional programming in me.
Core Transformation is a technique some people have a lot of success with; it used to work great for me but eventually I started having issues with it that I never quite debugged. Still, might be worth a try. (Ignore the cringe-inducing cover and title.)
Then there are various forms of meditation, e.g. loving-kindness helps your brain notice how nice it actually feels to experience warmth and compassion towards others and how that feeling can actually be maintained.
Then there are various "insight" practices that help you notice how your mind constructs reality and how those constructs can be changed. I'm a little averse to recommending them because they can be risky, but personally I've benefited from them a lot.
So who else wrote instruction manuals for imaginary video games as a kid?
E.g. the instruction manual for an imaginary platformer had a long list of levels with their descriptions, together with a list and pictures of every power-up etc.
I had at least one series called "and Fly", where you played some bug. Started with, I think, "Plant and Fly", in which you were in a garden/forest, followed by the sequel "Home and Fly" in which you were in someone's home.
Today's trauma paper is "Neural Computations of Threat", Levy & Schiller 2020, Trends in Cognitive Sciences. sciencedirect.com/science/articl…
Much of this is very similar to trauma therapy stuff, but from a cogsci / neuroscience angle so sounds more reputable and scientific. ;)
The overall frame is familiar: anxiety disorders and PTSD are manifestations of a similar underlying mechanism which involves fear learning. Either can be learned as the brain comes to predict that a particular stimulus is predictive of danger.
A learned threat prediction can be triggered and made available for reconsolidation through several processes, including extinction (repeatedly experiencing the trigger without experiencing something threatening), counterconditioning (associating it with something positive),
- Same level of technology as today
- Basic human psychology is the same
- But you are allowed to change prevalent institutions, cultural assumptions etc.
So e.g. if you hate school, you can describe a world that has something else instead.
But you should describe the alternative at least a bit - what kids do with their time instead and how they learn skills and are selected into jobs. Don't just say "no school".
Within those constraints, you're allowed to change as much as you like and can think of.
Notes on Soulmaking Dharma, based on a conversation with my friend.
Epistemic status: had dozens of hours of lecture summarized to me in two hours. Summarizing that and adding own interpretations. Might get a lot wrong, don't really know what I'm talking about.
Soulmaking Dharma is a Buddhist practice mostly developed by Rob Burbea and Catherine McGee. This page has various additional resources, which I have not looked at. \:D/ reddit.com/r/streamentry/…
First thing to note is that Mainstream Buddhist (MB) practice focuses on reducing suffering. Soulmaking Dharma isn't about that; it's more about something like creating and understanding meaning. That may reduce suffering or keep it the same, but either way, that's not the focus.
Things that I imagine would be cool to do with my kids (if I manage to have some): taking bedtime as a moment to reminisce about the day together.
Recalling enjoyable moments is by itself enjoyable. So ask, what parts of the day did you like? What were some good moments? What about it was enjoyable?
At first, just mention things. "You seemed to really like playing with those toys today." "You looked happy being with uncle X."
Hopefully soon the kids will notice that this is enjoyable, and start bringing up things on their own. (And feel like that was their own idea.)
We tend to think of a "cult leader" as someone who *intentionally* sets out to create a cult. But most cult-like things probably *don't* form like that.
A lot of people feel a strong innate *desire* to be in a cult. Michael suggests it's rooted in an infant's need to attach to a caregiver, and to treat them as a fully dependable authority to fix all problems - a desire which doesn't necessarily ever go fully away.
Once someone becomes a teacher of some sort, even if they had absolutely no desire to create a cult, they will regardless attract people who *want* to be their cultists.