The formation of human thought processes throughout a lifetime is an amazing thing. Nearly all of it involves what types of environments a mind is exposed to. The inputs for these exposures – touch, taste, smell, sound and sight – are the only perceptions that can make an object ‘real’. A person comes into contact with any object and at least one of the senses has to be activated in order to be a realization that the object exists. As data is collected, from the womb to puberty, and puberty to the many stages of adulthood, it is stored, retrieved, analyzed and then put into different classes of perspective as new experiences are encountered.
One of the key elements of this is the kind of data and the amount of data that a mind is exposed to. If a child is abandoned to the wild and somehow survives for a long period of time, when found they will have little societal development in them. For instance, language may be reduced to grunts and pointing gestures. Emotional control may be reduced to a great deal of fear generated fight or flight instincts, each triggered at a moments notice. Hygiene and general care for any civilized mannerisms would be unnecessary and therefore absent. Essentially, the child would have the compounded data of surviving in the wild and lack all of the data they would have obtained living in civilized society. It would take the amount of time the child was lost and then some just to get back to speech and behaviors that were acceptable in social settings, and even then, permanent triggers would be set into the mind from the prior experiences of the wild.
That example is extreme. It has happened and has been studied, but is an extreme rarity, particularly in today’s global world. Yet if any one of us were to be thrust into what’s referred to as ‘primitive tribal existence’ we would struggle and ultimately face failure because we did not have the data set to survive in that culture and under those conditions. We the civilized would be such a burden on the existing social structure that it is likely that we would be extricated.
We know this from experiences the early settlers had with the indigenous tribes in America’s history. Unless already versed in living withing the natural order of tribal life, the indigenous would have very little to do with adult settlers. Generally, they would be eliminated as useless. Children on the other hand have developmental value and would be adopted more readily. A child could adapt quickly to the new surroundings with rapid disciplinary instruction. An adult would only want to return to their own safety and familiarity and would therefore hinder tribal function and seek escape.
The reverse is also true. The indigenous were not willing participants in the civilization of the settlers. It was alien and unnatural. Even to this day there is an ancestral resistance to the quality of ‘civilized’ life by the indigenous people.
The exposure we humans have environmentally determines our maturity towards higher levels of survival in that environment. The greater the exposure, and the more data collected, means a greater opportunity to reach higher levels of influence and control over our own lives and the lives of others. If exposure is compartmentalized and limited, the data will reflect that and there will be less opportunity for the ignorant. A timeframe of limited experience will only result in limited maturity as a consequence. When an expectation is put on them to function at a higher level, a limited person will falter and fail.
This is true especially in relationships. If two people meet and one has much more maturity than another, the relationship may flourish initially based on fundamental physical and mental attraction, but as time moves on the authentic self will emerge and the limitations of each side of the relationship will either cause disruption to the point of dissolution, or each side will work within the relationship to come up to speed with the advanced maturity of the other. For example, one partner may be a poor judge of finances, while the other is a poor judge of keeping a household working cleanly and efficiently. If these limitations cause arguments and fights that have no plan for resolution, then it’s highly likely the relationship will end badly. If each side can admit to limitations in their experience and maturity, finding out and accepting what each is knowledgeable about and ignorant of, and then work together to share and gather more data and ability, then there’s a good chance the relationship can have solidity.
Take the example of a newborn, first child experience in a marriage. One partner may have some extensive babysitting experience as a background. The other might have had younger siblings. There may be knowledge from reading books, taking classes or other advice as part of the fundamental understanding of raising a child. But when it comes down to it, both partners are neophytes and will have to work together to develop not only the child, but the expectations of their own relationship.
In a single parent household, the dataset available and the checks and balances offered by two parents is reduced significantly. This isn’t to fault a single parent household, it’s to bring awareness that more experience included means more maturity as an outcome for parent and child alike. It also means that when times become stressful, one or both partners need scaffolding to hold them upright, as do the children involved. Seeing this as the environment of a family unit will only lead to this as a process in the current and future maturity of the children.
It’s come to my awareness that maturity and immaturity are both generational. A structured, positive family unit can be echoed for many generations. A limited and fractured family unit can also be echoed for generations. Once the gain or lack of maturity is engrained it will naturally repeat in subsequent generations. Is this always true? Of course not. But people will act out the belief systems they live under, and at their core all belief systems are derived from environmental influence. When those belief systems are constantly in an error mode, in other words they don’t compute with the expectations of current and future society, then escapism is an easy and plausible solution.
The difficulties of having a limited or incompatible dataset, i.e. a belief system, in a relationship, community or society, is difficult to overcome without some kind of positive intervention that is greater than the weight of limitation. An intervention is possible, but there has to be a personal acceptance that a different way has a greater purpose than the established system of beliefs. Can a person admit that a great deal of the data they’ve been exposed to is incorrect, and that new data should be brought into the system? Is there a desire to seek new beliefs or is escapism a more realistic and easier outcome? The mental effort it takes to admit systemic errors in one’s mental makeup is often perceived as insurmountable. If not that, then it’s seen as past the point of no return.
The purpose behind all drugs is to change perception. If life has become something to fear or loath then the quickest and easiest way to remove oneself from those feelings is to apply a change to those feelings. Using drugs as the force of change is quick and easy, and depending on the drug or the desired outcome, that application can be applied continuously. Alcohol is a prime example. Alcohol is an emotional anesthetic. From small amounts that limit inhibitions to larger amounts that completely numb the senses, alcohol can be ingested and an escape can be accomplished. For an alcoholic (an addict) it is a constant cycle of continued ingestion to keep the escape in play. Any pause will lead to physical and mental turmoil that will lead to further consumption.
So, what happens to a person during the alcoholic years? What is their level of maturity and how is it affected?
To begin with, the people that are alcoholic cover a wide variety of circumstances. There are highly gifted and intelligent alcoholics, as well as not so intelligent and poorly developed alcoholics. The outcome is the same: a timeframe of experience and growth is limited (if not negated) as constant substance abuse takes precedence over life. Even a ‘functional alcoholic’ is still limiting their ability to think and act, not to mention remember. Every bit of limitation is a lack of growth and results in stagnation. Stagnation means less maturity up to a point of zero or negative maturity. Those years spent devoted to the bottle are years that are devoted to little else, and once a person comes to terms with their dis-ease and seeks sobriety, they often find themselves behind their peers and society at large. They are living in a mental status reflective of what would be expected from someone far less capable. It’s tantamount to a teenager believing they are as smart as knowledgeable adults.
This is where recovery comes into play. Recovery isn’t about sobriety. Sobriety is a necessary change in order for recovery to take place. Clarity of mind, body and spirit have to be functioning in a state that makes recovery available and possible. Yet at the starting point of recovery, which is sobriety, many people have underdeveloped ability to function in a life that is absent of substance. Without environmental assistance involving mental and spiritual growth, combined with physical rehabilitation, recovery is impossible.
Let’s relate it to this; something that goes back to biblical times. If you try to grow a garden on rocky, poisoned soil, you’re going to end up with a rock garden and a bunch of dead seeds. If you transplant unhealthy plants to that rocky soil, once again you’re going to have a rock garden and lifeless plants. If the place of growth is absent from sunlight, and water and sustenance, then the only thing that will happen is deterioration. Removing an unhealthy plant from a poor-quality environment, making it healthy and then transplanting it back to that environment will do nothing but create that same unhealthy plant all over again.
A lack of maturity almost always includes a lack of physical awareness and personal care. It almost always includes a lack of mental intelligence and critical thinking ability. It almost always includes an abandonment of spiritual connection in favor of a devotion to substance. Recovery begins and continues based on removing a willing soul from these conditions permanently. Immediately following this, it requires exposure to conditions that heal and grow a person physically, mentally and spiritually. This means that people will have to improve their own knowledge of and attitude towards their own life. It means accepting responsibility and accountability for everything that has happened, that is happening and that will happen in the future. It requires exposure to the principles of self-awareness and taking ownership instead of taking life for granted.
If this sounds preachy it’s that way on purpose. You simply cannot give a person a 30-day rehab visit and then return them to the very place they left. You can’t throw someone into a tiny house and expect that their life is going to improve just because they’re off the streets. The lack of maturity that is inherent from the initial stages of development and then exacerbated during a long period of addiction will take time and external effort to even begin to reverse.
Even in 12-step programs the focused effort is not on recovery but rather maintaining sobriety. I will grant you that the 12 steps are geared toward setting life-conditions toward recovery and growth, namely by eliminating the poor aspects of a person’s physical, mental and spiritual environment. But the real work comes from that point forward. Using the steps as a plan with a result should produce a person with the ability to then move forward, leaving the practice of those steps behind while engaging with enhanced environments. Revisiting the steps as dependence creeps back into a person’s life is often the case. The driving force should be graduating from the steps and entering a new phase of life where one is surrounded by a community of people with the absolute intention of increasing maturity.
Once again, the way that a person’s maturity is developed is through the environments they are exposed to, whether exposed to via their own choice or by trusting in the choices of others. Once embedded in those environments, further exposure will only increase the development of relatable belief systems. Hanging out in toxic environments develops into a toxic soul. Hanging out in environments of intellectual growth and care results in intelligent and caring people. The soil that a person sets roots into can also harbor all sorts of other things like poisonous conditions, weeds, darkness, parasites, drought and a lack of nutrients. The soil conditions can also harbor things like bright, warm sunshine, a healthy dose of rain, clean and fertile dirt, and an environment free of parasites and obstructions. The human environment is no different. Where we set our roots will determine the conditions of our ability to grow. Poor conditions contribute to decay. Healthy conditions contribute to expansion.
Expansion and growth mean maturity. Maturity means functionality and purpose. Maturity provides the ability to contribute to society while at the same time teaching others how to mature and do the same. This is the cycle that has left much of today’s society, but a cycle that can be rebuilt if recovery truly is wanted and warranted.
Leave a Reply