Psychological Health - And "Largeness of Mind"

[Philip Coates]

(I mentioned in the smallness of mind thread that I wanted to start a more positive - and broader in scope - thread called largeness of mind)

There are things holding psychology back from becoming a mature science: Elimination of subjectivism, a non-overlapping set of fundamental definitions, a good definition of what constitutes psychological health, to name three. For all three, Objectivism's focus on rationality is a central missing piece. But to -specify- and flesh out what "be rational" and "use reason" consist of across a life and a sea of problems is a major undertaking.

I've often noticed a trait present or missing in people. My shorthand for it is "largeness of mind". It's not exactly synonymous with mental health, but it certainly is a foundation or tool in furtherance of it. ("Mental health describes either a level of cognitive or emotional well-being or an absence of a mental disorder...Mental health may include an individual's ability to enjoy life and procure a balance between life activities and efforts to achieve psychological resilience." - wikipedia.)

One aspect of having as sharp and able a mind as possible is its *size or scope* in a certain sense. If your most important and most universal tool, your mind, is larger, if it has greater capacity, scope, and power, then you are capable of greater success or fulfillment in using that tool to deal with the many issues and challenges life presents.

By contrast, a "small" mind could be i) one that is concerned with petty things ((in today's culture the journalistic focus on people, scandals, political enemies lists as opposed to ideas -- the conventional use of the term "small-minded")). Or ii) one interested n small or lighweight or trivial or short-range concerns and not interested at all in 'higher' concerns. Or a small mind iii) might be interested but does not have adequate knowledge or intellect or accuracy or skill for those concerns.

My sense of a large mind is one that tends toward the opposite along those three lines.

Largeness first involves -scope (of concerns or involvement)-. All other things equal, someone has a larger mind, who, for example, is constantly reading good literature rather than comic books or who thinks about what is wrong with the world rather than only what sauce to have on his taco or whose focus is on making himself a better person rather than on revenge fantasies to "get even" with the ex-spouse. This scope of concern or focus aspect of largeness is about what the mind chooses to be aimed at, spends a major portion of time and energy on. (And whether that interest is appropriate for well-being or a successful life.)

Next, largeness involves -efficacy- in major areas, how successful or effective a mind is in its work of importance. Steve Jobs was efficacious as a creator of electronic hardware, software, and companies organized to deliver and support them. Michelangelo's mind was effective in another whole sphere. For most human beings who walk the planet, areas where you measure this dimension include life tasks - personal life, job, creative outlets or satisfactions.

So, how do you break down what aspects of the tool make it powerful along the lines of efficacy?

[Philip Coates]

How do you break down what aspects of the tool make it powerful along the lines of efficacy?

Several things leap out:

--"Largeness" of knowledge. The older you get, the more ideas and principles, concepts, facts, information you can acquire. It has to be applicable and relevant to your life. And if you don't integrate it well and non-contradictorily, then you would call it a scrap heap; you wouldn't use a term of praise such as largeness of knowledge. Similarly, if it is a compendium of trivia: like the overspecialist who has a post-graduate degree in knowing more and more about less and less and not enough about the important things for one's life. (It might have the 'largeness' of a tumor or a malignant growth, but it wouldn't be very usable or useful in either case.)

--Skill and will: Related to knowledge about facts or things - and strongly overlapping - is the ability and proclivity to -do things-, to act or enact. To bring values and goals into reality. This area is commonly called "skill" - whether it be about how to understand one's own emotions or how to write a coherent essay or in any of a wide range of other activities. And it involves the actual doing. The actual -execution- of skills. Not just being able to eggheadishly list the steps to give a great speech or introspect but having implemented or executed it, being able to do so.

--The suppleness, resourcefulness, adaptability - the ability to tap into or increase or move between all this vast knowledge and skill is a capability of using all the content of the mind. For lack of a better concept, this is often called intelligence. But what does it mean to say one has 'largeness' in this area and that one's intellect is 'efficacious' or capable of success Wikipedia: "Intelligence has been defined in different ways, including the abilities for abstract thought, understanding, communication, reasoning, learning, planning, and problem solving."

I would suggest that a useful way to view largeness would be that one has the wherewithal to be successful in each of the 7 abilities mentioned in that wikipedia quote. that one either currently has those abilities or has displayed them before, or can elicit them or bring them to the fore as need be.

,,,,,

So this is my first draft** at defining a key sphere in a positive science of psychology, a key concept for what one needs to measure and develop in assessing or developing psychological health, a resource to use against neurosis, a way of measuring the capacity a person has for rational thought. "Largeness of mind". Note that this is capable of development. And, in a healthy psyche, it can and does get more powerful and more capable - and more mature and better refined - across one's lifetime. This, I submit, is not quite the same thing as intelligence or the will to be rational and it is more than just one's knowledge or skills base. (Aside: Largeness of mind is probably a the goal all those dusty, old-fashioned old schoolmarms in some sense had in mind when they told you to get a good liberal arts education, to become "well-rounded", to continue lifelong learning.)

Aristotle spoke of happiness as the "pursuit of all one's vital powers along the lines of excellence". But one has to -name- what those vital powers are or what pulls them together. Taken together, being large-minded is a key component in the toolkit. Or perhaps -the- key interrelated 'constellation' of components for a healthy human being.

"Francisco..was to be the climax of the d’Anconias . . . He had the vitality of a healthy human being, a thing so rare that no one could identify it."

,,,,,,

**This needs some refinement. I welcome constructive criticism. I particularly welcome insight as to what I've *left out* in my essay on largeness. Or, especially from those familiar with the literature, if there is somewhere where what I'm trying to say has been fully said, or more comprehensively or more eloquently than I am attempting. Note: I don't mean "largeness of mind" to be the only root of psychic health, well-being --- Or to deny or exclude a host of other major issues needed to make psychology into a mature, objective science. Obviously, I left for another time a discussion of the emotional side of man's nature, as well as the all-important but elusive concept of 'character'.

[caroljane]

OK, Phil. I'll bite. It's an ambitious topic. I would be very interested to know who, in real life and fiction, exemplifies the qualities of psycholigical health and largeness of mind, outside of MSK and me? Michael is a given, of course, but I will exclude myself as the topic should be from the Objectivist viewpoint and I do not think foreign socialist trade unionist utility players have much to contribute.

[Philip Coates]

> the topic should be from the Objectivist viewpoint

Actually, no it shouldn't: It's not only Oists who have psychological health or largeness of mind.

In fact, Cliff Clavin at the local bar informs me that 57.287% of Objectivists exhibit neither.

On the other hand --- little known fact! --- 27% of medical doctors specializing in colonoscopy or proctology exhibit both. While of those with an advanced degree in modern art and who like jazz music, only 7% exhibit either. . . .Not as much correlation as a smug OIst would think has been found with political views,so you're still in the sweepstakes. (Unfortunately, I'm S. O. L. I lack both PH and LOM.)

[Peter]

The way a child is praised when they accomplish something should be extended into adulthood by someone you love and who loves you. I try to do that. I am not sure if this subject is for laymen.

Peter

[Philip Coates]

> I am not sure if this subject is for laymen.

Peter, if you are referring to the subject of "largeness of mind", it's definitely something the layman could understand. And even the man on the street, someone without the slightest 'academic' interest or who thinks psychological topics put him to sleep and are a waste of time will have a better, more fulfilled, more successful life to the extent he can better use his mind. And what I'm doing here is trying to provide non-technical standards of measurement that any person can understand for the more effective development and use of the mind.

If I say people will have a better life if they are healthy so get healthy, that is not as practical as if I break it down into a list: they should lower their cholesterol, keep their blood sugar within bounds, take in more calcium to avoid brittle bones, eat vegetables, get blood pressure below a certain number, exercise regularly.

If I say people will be happier and more successful across a lifespan if they "build up their minds", that is less specific than the unresting effort to develop the components I listed in posts 1 and 2.

Largeness of:

1. Domains of Focus --- don't be narrow or too concrete-bound or too unchallenged and 'easy in your areas of thinking and action. Widen your scope of thought until you include major areas of importance in life to yourself and other human beings. Take on new things because they are hard or expand your capacity and comfort zone.

2. Knowledge -and- 3. Skills and Abilities --- in the core important areas (and in other chosen areas of interest)

4. Intelligence --- capacity for learning, reasoning, understanding, and other mental activity

5. Will and Character --- choosing to bring each of the above areas into reality, making them a solid part of your nature and character

Focuses, knowledge, skills, intelligence, choice. In today's world with today's educational systems and culture and media, people often drop into a lazy comfort zone in regard to what they focus on. And therefore in terms of how little they know and how little they can do. This, of course, causes and is caused by their developing a lower intelligence than they would otherwise (IQ tests don't measure it well so if someone scores high on one it doesn't always mean his actual intelligence is high). And if the "motor" is shut off, if a lifelong choice to make a rather Victorian/Aristotelian ongoing effort has not been made driving all of the preceding, they will atrophy or stagnate.

For most people, the pattern is not that stark. Everyone has areas of strength and areas of weakness. They will be quite strong in all or many of those five areas in some parts of life but not others. A great businessman but bad at personal relationships. Mastered academic subjects and got good grades, but an unfocused egghead who has been drifting through life ever since with no productive center. The world's greatest expert at neurosurgery but who lacks common sense and self-discipline in other areas and has lost his savings through over-optimistic investments.

Barring accidents and luck, which doesn't usually stretch across a lifespan or every aspect of living - relative "health" in those five aspects of a mind are a necessary even though not sufficient cause for a fulfilled life. But in one sense they are a source of fulfillment in and of themselves. If you are a tribesman who drags his weary body and walks with a limp through the African savannah, you may get lucky and not be eaten by the lions but even so, having robust athletic physical health is a constant source of fulfillment and pleasure every moment of the day.

[Philip Coates]

Question 1: Which of those five areas (focus, knowledge, skills, intelligence, will) do you think is least important for most people to develop?

Question 2: Which of them are *you* strongest in?

Question 3: If you could wave a magic wand and strengthen one of them in the culture, which would it be. Why?

[Dennis Hardin]

Phil,

This is such a huge topic that I would hardly know where to begin. If I get some time over the holidays, and I can say something worthwhile without missing any major football games, I will definitely do so.

Sorry. I grew up in Tennessee where football is the major religion. And I'm sure you understand that we are all helpless victims of our early childhood experiences.

It's not my fault. . . (I blame my father.)

[Selene]

Phil,

This is such a huge topic that I would hardly know where to begin. If I get some time over the holidays, and I can say something worthwhile without missing any major football games, I will definitely do so.

Sorry. I grew up in Tennessee where football is the major religion. And I'm sure you understand that we are all helpless victims of our early childhood experiences.

It's not my fault. . . (I blame my father.)

Who blamed his father...who blamed his ...oh well, back to that big bang theory of the infinite father's and mother's.

[Dennis Hardin]

Phil,

This is such a huge topic that I would hardly know where to begin. If I get some time over the holidays, and I can say something worthwhile without missing any major football games, I will definitely do so.

Sorry. I grew up in Tennessee where football is the major religion. And I'm sure you understand that we are all helpless victims of our early childhood experiences.

It's not my fault. . . (I blame my father.)

Who blamed his father...who blamed his ...oh well, back to that big bang theory of the infinite father's and mother's.

Well, I hope everyone will appreciate the outrageous irony of a therapist blaming his parents for anything. People are always telling me they can’t tell when I’m joking.

I try to remember to use smiley faces when I say such things, but I always think the absurdity should be too obvious to make that necessary. (Especially on a thread dealing with psychological health!)

[Selene]

Phil,

This is such a huge topic that I would hardly know where to begin. If I get some time over the holidays, and I can say something worthwhile without missing any major football games, I will definitely do so.

Sorry. I grew up in Tennessee where football is the major religion. And I'm sure you understand that we are all helpless victims of our early childhood experiences.

It's not my fault. . . (I blame my father.)

Who blamed his father...who blamed his ...oh well, back to that big bang theory of the infinite father's and mother's.

Well, I hope everyone will appreciate the outrageous irony of a therapist blaming his parents for anything. People are always telling me they can’t tell when I’m joking.

I try to remember to use smiley faces when I say such things, but I always think the absurdity should be too obvious to make that necessary. (Especially on a thread dealing with psychological health!)

I got it Dennis. It was really funny. I was just going with it with my back to the big bang remark.