THE STRUCTURE AND DYNAMICSOF WAKING SLEEP

CharlesT. TartDavis, California

G. 1. Gurdjieff, one of the early pioneers in making the trans­personal insightsof Eastern psychologyand spiritualityavailableto Westerners,is well known for his dictum,"Man is asleep."Thisassertion and its elaborations is one of the most basic themes ofGurdjieff's teachings,and it carriessignificant implications for thefield of transpersonalpsychology.

This phrase, "Man is asleep," is a proposition, a representation,somethingwe tend to understand on an intellectuallevel in accor­dancewith the habitualfunctioningof ourminds.Butthesearealsowords that point to a reality which is the source of enormousamounts of unnecessary suffering and limitation. The intendedfunctionof the assertion,of our associationsto it and our thoughtsabout it, is to get us to observe,to point our attention in the rightdirection so our understandingcan become much deeper than thewords. With such understanding comes the possibility of moreeffective action, of awakening.The ultimate importanceof Gurd­jieffs words and teachingsstems from this possibilityof awaken­ing from a habitual state of "waking sleep."

Words,unfortunately,domore thanpoint our attention in a desireddirection:they tendto take on a kindoflife oftheirown,connectingautomatically and non-consciouslywith otherwords and conceptsthat also have lives of their own, tapping into basic emotionaldrivesand other cognitiveand affectivestructures.It is all too easyfor words to becomethings that divertand actuallydefendus fromthe realities they were originally intended to point our attentiontoward, to substituteconceptsabout reality for reality.Also words

Selectionsfromanearlierversionof thispaperappearedinFrenchinmy chapter,Ladynamique du sommeil eveille, in B. de Panafieu (Editor), Georges IvanovitchGurdfteff: Textes Recueillls. Paris: Les Dossiers H L'Age d'Homme, pp. 242-51.

Copyright© 1993TranspersonalInstitute

awakeningfrom ahabitualstate of"wakingsleep"

The Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, 1993, Vol. 25, No.2 141

asetof

suggestions

change over time as their connotationsand associationsalter, so aset of words that pointed fairly accurately at one point in historymay point us in a differentdirection later on.

Thispaper is also a modernsetof words-about themeaningof theidea "Man is asleep." I retain the word "man" herein out of respectfor Gurdjieff's usage and era (Ouspensky,1949),but I intend ittoincludeboth sexes in the generic sense. This paper is based on (1)my intellectualand scholarlyknowledgeof modern psychologicalliterature, Gurdjieff's teachings, and some other traditional sys­tems of thought such as Buddhism; and (2) my personal under­standingsof what it means to struggleagainstwaking sleepand tooccasionallyrealizemomentsof relativeawakening.I hope the useof modem psychological tenus in this paper, such as "defensemechanisms"ratherthan "buffers,"willpoint thereader's attentiontowardthe realitiesof being asleepin a moreeffectivewaythantheolderwords used in previouslypublishedmaterial.

These words, like all words,are inherently dangerous.The feelingsof intellectualand emotionalsatisfaction that arise from using andconnectingwords cleverly can becomemore important than look­ing for the reality behind them. Therefore, while I have tried tocommunicate as effectivelyaspossiblewhat I understand,considerthese words only as a set of suggestionsfor stimulatingyour ownobservations.

I begin with a rough concept of what "Man is asleep" may mean,examine various relevant findings and understandingsof contem­porary psychology-particularly as they may be helpful to ourindividual efforts at awakening-arriving, it is hoped, at a fullerconceptual understandingof wakingsleep.

WHAT DOBS IT MEAN TO BE IN A STATE OF WAKING SLEEP?

We can say that "Man is asleep" in the overall sense that anindividual in an ordinary, culturally "normal" state of conscious­ness is:

(a) unaware or only partially aware of importantobjects,peopleand processes in his or her immediateenvironment.

(b) unawareoronlypartiallyawareof important,sometimes vitaltalents,processes,and eventswithin his or her own being.

If this wereall therewasto our initial definition of being asleep,wecould more simplycall it "ignorance," and straightforward effortsat educationwould be the remedy.Thereforewe must add:

142 The Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, 1993, Vol. .25, No.2

(c) man habitually and automatically spends an enormousamount of time in daydreams and delusory belief systems abouthimself and his world; that is, man walks around in a kind ofwaking (day)dream;

(d) man is strongly and emotionally attached to and defendsmany of his dreams and delusory belief systems; and

(e) man significantly distorts his perceptions of his world and hisself, usually in a manner that subjectively supports his daydreamsand delusory belief systems.

As a consequence of being asleep in this sense, of usually being inwhat I have elsewhere termed consensus trance' we undergo anenormous amount of suffering. From the point of view of someonewho is more aware of his own and the world's nature, most of thissuffering is unnecessary and useless. This is analogous to a matureperson observing the sufferings of an adolescent, knowing howmuch more easily they could be handled. To express it in anotherway, our lives are lived relatively mindlessly rather than mindfully,with consequent maladaptive perception, thinking, feeling andaction. Awakening from this waking sleep, becoming mindful,requires considerably more than exposure to educational "facts."

COGNITIVE/STRUCTURAL MECHANISMS OF WAKING SLEEP

The concept that "Man is asleep" in such an overall sense wasforeign to almost all Western academic and clinical psychologyand psychiatry at the time Gurdjiefftaught in the early and middleparts of our century. Looking back from a contemporary perspec­tive on sleep and awakening, we could say, though, that some quitespecific aspects of waking sleep were being extensively explored ininvestigations of mental illness and neurosis. I do not believeGurdjieffhad any real familiarity with this material and so he is notlikely to have incorporated it as a teaching tool.

In recent years, however, a concept somewhat similar to that of"Man is asleep" has begun to appear in studies of mindfulness andmindlessness in everyday functioning, by psychologist EllenLanger of Harvard University and her colleagues. To quote Langer:

Individuals can perform seemingly complex tasks with little if anyactive mental involvement. ... Although people are certainly capableof acting mindfully, they frequently respond in a routinized, mindlessway.... In much of everyday life, people rely on distinctions drawn inthe past; they overly depend on structures of situations representativeof the underlying meaning without making new distinctions. Thismindlessness holds the world still and prevents an awareness that

consensustrance

The Structure and Dynamics of Waking Sleep 143

amajor

sourceof the

mechanicalness

things could be otherwise.... Research pointsto howmindlessly heldcategories limit human performance and even have a negative impactonphysica lhealth... in spiteof ourawareness of limited informationprocessing ,people ingeneral still are far more mindless than psycholo­gists have assumed (Langer,1989b,pp. 137-38).

Langer has recently summarized much of her and her colleagues'work in a readable, semi-popular book, Mindfulness (Langer,1989a), as well as in technical publications aimed at psychologists(see Langer, 1989b for an excellent set of references). Langer findsthat mindlessness, in the sense of an automatization and mechan­icalness of cognitive functioning, is exceedingly common in every­day life, rather than a rare curiosity, and that it must be considereda major factor in understanding human psychology. I will start thismore detailed look at waking sleep by considering some of theoutcomes of her research.

Langer's work has focused on what we might call the cognitive orstructural aspects of waking sleep. By this I mean habits of process­ing information that are primarily just that, habits, autornatisms thatbecome part ofthe structure of everyday consciousness. While theyoften lead to maladaptive behavior and consequent suffering, theyare usually not strongly driven by affective, emotional forces, likethe defense mechanisms we will discuss later.

Expertness

Our "expertness" in everyday life, valuable as it is in many ways, isa major source of the mechanicalness of our behavior and psycho­logical reaction.

When we first learn a new task, we must pay clear attention to whatwe are doing. We must observe the general situation we are in, theparticulars of the challenge to us within that situation, the particu­lars of the response we give to the challenge, and how well thatresponse does or does not help us achieve our goals, as well as othereffects it may create. When we first learned to drive a car, forexample, we had to learn to pay general attention to the road andtraffic conditions around us. Is the road curving to the left? Is therea car stopped in the lane ahead of us or a pedestrian about to step outin front of us?

Suppose we see the road curving left in front of us: we are chal­lenged to follow it. Do we get frightened at this challenge and wantto close our eyes and run from the car? That reaction must besuppressed if we are to leam to drive. We try turning the steeringwheel, observing how much effort it takes to tum it and theresponse. Do we oversteer and cross the center line? Do we under­steer and start to go up on the curb? We pay a lot of attention to our

144 The Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, 1993, Vol. 25, No.2

current reality. But with repetition we lose track of the componentsof the task. With further practice we overlearn the task, doing itthousands of times more than needed for "expertness." "As werepeat a task over and over again, and become better at it, theindividual parts of the task move out of consciousness. Eventuallywe come to assume that we can do the task although we no longerknow how we do it" (Langer, 1989a, p. 20).

Once a routine is overlearned, a familiar stimulus situation auto­matically and mindlessly invokes the appropriate "expert" routine.This is operating like a machine, as Gurdjieff so often said. Pressbutton C (stimulus pattern) and the machine makes certain motions(conditioned response), both internally (thoughts, feelings) andexternally (behavior). While the familiar stimulus situation seemsthe same over and over again, from the point of view of someonemore awake, it is actually somewhat different each time. Therobotic running of the automatized "expert" pattern thus exactssome costs from us. It may be that the subtle differences which arenot noticed are actually quite important, leading to an inappropriateresponse that may have important consequences.

A second cost of consciousness being dominated by automatized"expert" routines is that we miss what Gurdjieff termed the "foodof impressions "-the stimulation resulting from actually payingreal attention to an apparently familiar situation. It is exemplified inmeditative processes such as Vipassana (Insight Meditation) ap­plied to everyday life, and in Gurdjieff's practice of "rememberingourselves." Roboticized, we live a bland mental life of conditionedreactions to abstractions about abstractions and associations toabstractions-s-un sustaining sensory impressions. By learning to bepresent and pay attention to our senses, however, we could feastinstead of starve.

This is not to say that the automatized responses of "expertness"are inherently bad. An automatized response usually absorbs less ofour conscious attention than is demanded in new learning, so wehave attention left over to consciously use for other purposes(although all too often it is automatically grabbed by some otherhabitual pattern of thinking). We can, for example, carry on a(perhaps conscious and useful) conversation with a passenger anddrive at the same time.

It is the inability to recognize and, when necessary, stop an automa­tized "expert" reaction pattern that is the problem. You would notwant to have to learn to drive anew every time you got in a car. Onthe other hand, you can exhaust your energies or even kill yourselfwith an "expert" driving reaction if the situation really is unusual.And you can lose the joy and stimulation, Gurdjieff's food ofimpressions, that is possible from consciously driving.

missingthe"foodofimpressions"

The Structure and Dynamics of Waking Sleep 145

thecognitive

commitment

PrematureCognitive Commitment

What Langer calls premature cognitive commitment consists offorming a mindset when we first encounter an object, person orsituationand then mindlesslyclingingto this mindset, allowingitto operatemechanicallywhenwe re-encounterthe sameor similarobjects,persons or situations.

Langergives the followingstrikingillustrativeexercise.Shiftyourattentionto yourmouth.Runyour tonguearoundinsideit; notetheinherentpleasureofbeingableto moveyourtonguesoprecisely,tofeel the silkinessof the salivaon the variedand fascinatingtextureof yourteethand gums.Now get a glass.Spit into it. Nowdrinkthe"spit."

I suggestyou actuallydo this,not just read aboutit. Ourbeliefthatconcepts about experience-in this case reading about experi­ence-gives us full knowledge of the actual experience, simplymay be wrong.

Isn't it interesting how the pleasant,natural saliva in your mouthturned into "spit?" We intellectuallyknow, of course, that therewere no significantchanges in it in the few seconds it was in theglass, but psychologicallyit changed into "spit," a cognitivecon­cept loadedwithnegativeconnotations.In this situationthe cogni­tive commitmentto "spit" is indeed inappropriate.The cognitivecommitmentto "spit"madelongago inyourdevelopmental historywas premature, as expelled saliva should not always be seen as"spit." It is good first aid, for example, to lick minor woundsbecauseof antibacterial propertiesof saliva.'

Note that the example above contains emotional componentsaswell as cognitive ones, an important factor we shall returnto later.

Belief in Limited Resources

One of the main reasons we may become entrapped by the absolutecategories we create (or are given by someone else) rather than acceptthe world as dynamic and continuous is because we believe thatresources are limited. If there are clear and stable categories, then wecan make rules by which to dole out these resources. If resourcesweren't so limited, or if these limits were greatly exaggerated, thecategories wouldn't need to be so rigid (Langer, 1989a, p. 27).

Our ordinary stateof "consciousness,"what we have been callingwaking sleep, can be described as consensus consciousnessor,whenwe wishto emphasizetheautomatized mindlessness and lackof vitality of so much of it, consensustrance, terms I have intro­duced elsewhere(Tart, 1986).These terms emphasize howmuch of

146 The Journal oj Transpersonal Psychology. 1993, Vol. 25, No.2

our ordinary mental functioning is conditioned in us by our social­ization, a relatively common heritage from our culture, a knowl­edge on which there is general consensus. Our culture indoctrinatesmany ideas of limits in us in the course of our upbringing, limitsabout what is materially available outside of us, and limits to ourinternal resources.

There are, of course, real material limits. From a psychologicalgrowth perspective, however, the artificial and unnecessary limitswe impose on ourselves in our mechanicalness are far more impor­tant. In very real ways, we are dedicated practitioners of a kind of"mantra yoga": in our thoughts we constantly and devotedly repeatchants like, "There isn't enough for mel" or "I can't do it!" or "I'mnot good enough!" By such psychological repetition of thought andfeeling themes, we structure our lives to validate these themes.

This does not mean we should go to the extreme of imaginingourselves as unlimited, infinite godlike beings with magical pow­ers, of course. That can sometimes be a useful, ultimate beliefpractice to spur on our efforts under the right circumstances, but wemust be discriminating and very realistic about what we actuallycan and cannot accomplish in our usual life.

I am discussing a largely intellectual beliefin limited resources as acognitive underpinning of mechanicalness, but note that such be­liefs readily acquire emotional investment. "As long as peoplecling to a narrow belief in limited resources, those who are fortu­nate enough to win by the arbitrary (but rigid) rules that are set up,such as SAT3 scores, have a stake in maintaining the status quo"(Langer, 1989a, p. 28).

Education for Outcome

From kindergarten on, the focus of schooling is usually on goals ratherthan on the process by which they are achieved. This single-mindedpursuit of one outcome or another, from tying shoelaces to getting intoHarvard, makes it difficult to have a mindful attitude about life ...questions of "Can I?" or "What if I can't do it?" arc likely to predomi­nate, creating an anxious preoccupation with success or failure....Throughout our lives, an outcome orientation in social situations caninducemindlessness. If we think we know how to handle a situation,wedon't feel a need to pay attention. Ifwe respond to the situation as veryfamiliar (a result, for example, of overlearning), we notice only theminimal cues necessary to carry out the proper scenario. If, on the otherhand the situation is strange, we might be so preoccupied with thoughtsoffailure ("What ifI make a fool of'myself?") that we miss nuances ofour own and others' behavior. In this sense we are mindless withrespect to the immediate situation, although we may be thinking quiteactively about outcome-related issues (Langer, 1989a.pp. 33-34).

wemustbediscriminatingandveryrealistic

The Structure and Dynamics of Waking Sleep 147

the"meaning

frameworks"conditioned

intous

One of the benefits of carrying out ordinary tasks a little moreslowlyand muchmore mindfullythan usual-a commoncompo­nent of Gurdjieff work-is the insights it often provides intounderlyingprocesses that have gotten covered over when we areoverlygoal-oriented.

ContextInducedMindlessness

We are all familiarwith the fairytale of "The Ugly Duckling."Aswan,raisedfromthe eggamongducks,thinksofitselfas uglyandawkward, for it is applying duck standards to itself. When itdiscoversotherswansandappliesswanstandardsin a swancontextto itself, it findshappiness.We areall conditioned to mechanicallyacceptcontexts,meaning frameworks,pressed on us by others andbyourculture f upbringing.Insofar as these contexts donot reflectour real nature, our essence, our transpersonalpossibilities, wedistort our perceptionsof our selves and our world, and we maysuffer.

Partof the impactof a context pressedonus by othersoccurs whenit is not presented as context,but as truth.Most contextcondition­ing happensduringearly childhood,when we have little abilitytosee how relative, artificial,and perhaps inherently pathological itmay be. Usually,whenwe play a game,we knowthat,while rulesare necessary to havea game,theyare artificial,and we dropthemat the end of the game. The "meaning frameworks"conditionedinto us in the course of our enculturation, however, are oftenexperienced as finaltruths.

When we talk about context, we often make the mistake of believingthat it is somehow "out there." If we take words "out of context," wethink the context remains on the page. But it doesn't exist out therewithout us.... A context is a premature cognitive commitment, amindset (Langer, 1989a, p. 37).

Langeralsonotesthat:

The power of context over our reactions and interpretations also makesus susceptible to what we may call context confusion. Here peopleconfuse the context controlling the behavior of another person with thecontext determining their own behavior. Most people typically assumethat other people's motives and intentions are the same as theirs,although the same behavior may have very different meanings(Langer, 1989a, p. 40).

MECHANISMS OF EMOTIONALLY DRIVEN WAKING SLEEP

While the psychological mechanisms described above may distortour functioning in ordinaryconsciousness, they areprimarilyhab-

148 The Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, 1993. Vol. 25, No.2

its of relatively unemotional "cognition," cognition in a broadsense of "making sense" of interpreting raw experience. Thesemechanisms manifest in automated habits of perception as well asin more formal conscious thinking. Although they may be used inthe service of emotions, by themselves they are primarily informa­tion processing mechanisms.

This brings us to various mechanisms in waking sleep that, whilethey are also ways of processing or distorting information, havestrong emotional bases and components, and are often more diffi­cult to observe. Indeed, some are extremely resistant to self-obser­vation.

As Freud put it, (Freud, 1912, p. 265, as quoted in Langer, 1989a),

It is by no meansimpossiblefor the productof unconscious activity topierce into consciousness,but a certain amount of exertion is neededfor this task. Whenwe try to do it in ourselves,we becomeawareof adistinct feelingof repulsion which must be overcome, and when weproduceit in a patient,we get the most unquestionable sign of whatwecall resistance to it. So we learnthat the unconscious idea is excludedfrom consciousness by living forces which oppose themselves to itsreception,while they do not object to other ideas, the (prejconsciousones.

This phenomena, which I will now examine in more detail," is theimportant category of "motivated not-knowing." It is related totwo components of waking sleep presented at the beginning thispaper, namely,

(d) man is strongly emotionally attached to and defends many ofhis dreams and delusory belief systems; and

(e) man significantly distorts his perceptions of his world and hisself, usually in a manner that subjectively supports his daydreamsand delusory belief systems.

There are numerous disparities and contradictions in the structureof our personalities. One part of us ("subpersonality," little "I,"mood state, identity state) may want constant attention in order tofeel secure, for example, while another part is threatened by atten­tion and wants to be left alone. One part may want to work hard andbecome rich; another part doesn't like to work and sleeps late. Insome ways we love our parents, in other ways we hate them. Lifealso provides frustrations: you want something, but you can't haveit; you don't want something, but you get it. The consequentfeelings of frustration can cause suffering, especially if they con­nect with various aspects of personality. There are realistic ways ofdealing with contradictions and suffering, and unrealistic ways.Here the focus is on the latter.

"motivatednot­knowing"

The Structure and Dynamics of Waking Sleep 149

psychologicalbuffers

We can suffer greatly when we become aware of a single majorcontradiction inourselves.What would happen if webecame awareof many or all of them simultaneously?Gurdjieff stated that if apersonweresuddenlyto becomeconsciousof all the contradictoryparts of himself, he would probably go mad. Such sudden andcomplete self-knowledge is veryunlikelyto happen,fortunately­althoughspiritualemergencies sometimes showaspectsof it. Thefragmented parts of ourselves are not just randomly scatteredabout, as it were; they are part of an active arrangementof whatGurdjieff calledf alse personality,s an arrangement that maintainsits organizationin spite of change and stress. When we split offparts of ourselves, active mechanismsneverthelesskeep them intheirplaces.Gurdjieff called these mechanisms buffers.

Gurdjieff's mechanicalanalogyfor thesepsychological buffers isthat of buffers on railroad cars. When these cars are coupledtogether, one is run into another at a speed of several miles perhour in order to lock the couplings.Imagine what theuncushionedshock and jolt would be like for the passengersas these massivesteel cars hit each other! A buffer is a shock absorber,like thoseon an automobile: it absorbs much of the sudden energy of theinitial jolt and then releases it much more slowly, much lessperceptibly.Psychological buffers smooth out the sudden shockthat occurs when we switch from one subpersonality to another,making it small enough so that we are not likely to be aware ofthe change.

This kind of psychological buffering can work withina particularsubpersonality or identitystate,andshifting between identitystatescan also act as a buffer.

Notice thatwiththe above analogy thereis stillsomething therethatwecould noticeifwe wanted to or trained ourselves to: amild shock.Ordinarily thechange issmall enough that it doesn't force itself onourattention and the sudden shock isbuffered intoa small,gradual one.

PSYCHOLOGICAL DEFENSE MECHANISMS

Gurdjieff didnot writeveryspecifically about thenatureofbuffers.Perhapshe did not think it necessary.If you becamevery good atself-observation,you would neutralizethe buffers-so why taketime to study them? Perhapshe felt it was necessaryto discoverone's own particulardefenses for the discoveryto be maximallyeffective.Perhapsdetailedknowledgewasnotavailableat the time.

Modem mainstream psychology and psychiatry, however, havelearned a great deal about specifickinds of buffers, even thoughthey lack the concept of awakening.The general psychological

150 The Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, 1993, Vol. 25, No.2

term for these buffers is defense mechanisms.I believe knowledgeof them greatly enriches Gurdjieff's concept of buffers. Under­standing defense mechanisms is very important if we are to tran­scend them, Conceptual knowledge of them is also importantbecause some kinds of buffers might be very resistant to theprimary Gurdjieffian technique of self-observation, or insightmeditation practices .For such defenses ,other techniques might bemore effective than unassisted self-observation for understandingthe structure of personality.

Psychoanalytic theory, which has looked at defense mechanisms inthe greatest detail, theorizes that we use them when we have someinstinctual impulse whose expression is socially prohibited (unre­strained sexuality, greed, or aggression, for example). The collec­tion of internalized prohibitions of our culture is commonly re­ferred to as the superego. A strong superego can flood us withanxiety and fear for even thinkingabout a prohibited action, muchless doing it. A defense mechanism, a buffer, by making us un­aware of a prohibited impulse reduces the effect of a superegoattack. Defense mechanisms also buffer our awareness of the disap­pointments and threats in life. While most obvious in people la­beled neurotic or psychotic, defense mechanisms are extensivelyand unwittingly used by normal people. We could not maintain ourconsensus trance without their buffering effect.

Some people may use one of these for almost all their defenseneeds. That is, they have a chief form of defense-s-what Gurdjieffcalled a person'schieffeature, that is central in the structure of theirfalse personality. I believe this chief feature concept is similar tothe currently popular enneagram type theory (Naranjo, 1990;Palmer, 1988). But we all may use many of these defenses onoccasion. Here we are looking at them primarily in relation to thegoal of waking up. I have not attempted to cover all defensemechanisms or all their subtleties; more information about themcan be found in the literature on abnormal psychology and psycho­therapy.

Two further general points about defense mechanisms must bemade before we look at specifics. First, in general they are dynamicrather than static. It is not simply that we have some habits thatdistort our perception, feeling, thinking and action, and that thesehabits have emotional bases. There is actually a kind cf'intelligenceand motivation in these defense mechanisms whose aim is toprotect a person from suffering. Defenses usually start as an actionthat is at least partially effective in reducing a person's suffering,especially in childhood when most defenses are formed. At somelevel of consciousness each of us has an investment in protectingour defenses, although we may be unaware of this fact. Thus simpleself-observation may not be very effective in discovering or chang-

consensustranceandpsychologicalbuffering

The Structure and Dynamics of Waking Sleep 151

enculturationis seen

asnecessary

ing many defense mechanisms. The full implications of this haveyet to be worked out. Thus we must add the following to ourdescription of waking sleep.

(f) man is emotionally and cognitively invested in his psycho­logical defenses and, in many ways, actively protects them fromdiscovery or dismantling without knowing that he does so.

Secondly, although contemporary psychology has much to offerfor psychological and spiritual growth, there is a major flaw inmainstream modem psychological knowledge. of defense mecha­nisms. The model of man underlying them is usually first- orsecond-force psychology, in which man is seen as only an animal,instinctively caring only for his own survival and pleasure, andenjoying hurting and dominating others. Enculturation is then seenas necessary to control this animal nature, and attempts to transcend.this necessary control mechanism, or to be "transpersonal," are thusseen as inherently dangerous. In this model, since we cannot beallowed to grab whatever we need whenever we want, rape whenwe are in the mood, kill whoever gets in our way, the restrictions,conditionings, and automatizations in enculturation and the condi­tioning of a superego to inhibit our baser nature, seem absolutelynecessary.

Thus, some forms of defense mechanisms are usually seen asnecessary in inhibiting our animal nature. It is only when they aretoo effective, taking away more of our happiness than is reallynecessary for our compromise with civilized life, that they areviewed as neurotic. It is fine and necessary for a person to beovercome with guilt and anxiety if he thinks about robbing anotheror raping a child, but neurotic if he becomes anxious at the thoughtof riding an elevator or talking to strangers at a meeting.

I have exaggerated the position of mainstream Western psychologysomewhat to make my point. There are now, and always have been,significant movements within psychology (Jungian, humanistic,and transpersonal psychologies, to mention just three) that see apositive, even a spiritual, side to our essential nature. But thenegative view of man is more entwined throughout our mainstreampsychology and culture.

I firmly believe that we are basically good, as well as flawed andtwisted, and it is important to know how various defense mecha­nisms can block the development and manifestation of the deeperand more positive sides of our nature. Our task is to understand andcorrect these distortions 80 we can get on with cultivating OUf

higher natures. I will begin with the specific defense mechanisms,buffers, that support waking sleep.

152 The Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, 1993, Vol. 25, No.2

Lying

All buffers and defense mechanisms are forms of lying. Theymisrepresentthe truth, both to ourselvesand to others. Gurdjieffput great emphasison understandinglying.Althoughmost peoplebelieve they never lie or do so only infrequently,Gurdjieff wasinsistentthat most people lie most of the time. That they do notconsciouslyknowthey are lyingmakestheir situationfar worse.

Conscious lyingcanbeaneffective defense against social pressure.The person who "swears he didn't do it" may escape punishmentfrom externalsources. Successin bringingoff the lie dependsonother people's sensitivity to lying and the evidence that mightsupport or underminethe lie. It may sometimesinvolve the liar'sability to identifywith the lie as it's told, so it seems like truth tohim ashe tells it, givinghiman air ofconviction that cantakein hislisteners.

Having few or no superego prohibitions against lying also in­creases the likelihood of successin takingin others.If you tryto liewhenyouare experiencing guilt and anxiety aboutit,youwilloftenshowsigns of distressthat alert your audience to your lying.Sincemuchsocialcohesiveness and stability comefrompeoplenot lyingabout thingsconsidered especially important, muchof the encultur­ation processis devoted to constructing a strongsuperego that willpunish a person with guilt when he lies. When a strongsuperegohasn't beencreated-by strong "meaning that thepersonwill tell thetruthaboutthe things his culture thinksit is important to be truthfulabout-that person may be called a psychopath or sociopath. Incommon usage this means a morally deficient person, althoughpsychiatrists and psychologists try to avoid making this valuejudgment in using the more recent term "sociopath" rather than"psychopath."

Whenyou knowyou are deliberately lying,yourperception of theworldand your situationin it maybe reasonably functional(ignor­ing your ordinarystate of waking sleep).When you identifywiththe lying,andexperience the lie asthe truth,related perceptions canbecomesignificantly distorted.

Sometimes welie toavoid our more essential and higher nature,Wemay tell ourselvesand others that, "Everybodydoes it; it doesn'tmean anything,"whensomethingin us knows quitewell we havenot livedup to our higher self. This kind of lying may be used toavoid somecommandof the superego,of course,but I believe,asGurdjieff insisted,that there is some SOrt of innate, higher aspectof ourselvesthat knows a deeper morality,and in lying and otherdefense mechanismswe try to avoid living up to it.

constructinga strongsuperego

The Structure and Dynamics of Waking Sleep 153

activelyopposing

yourdesire

Gurdjieff was not particularly concerned about the morality ofeveryday lying, for he recognized both the cultural relativity ofvalues and the widespread hypocrisy of most of our beliefs aboutmorality. Rather, he taught that unconscious, habitual, automatedlying is the real problem. People in consensus trance are likemachines-they must do what they have been conditioned to do bytheir general enculturation process and the particulars of their lifehistory. At this stage of development, questions of morality are adiversion from the real problem, namely a lack of genuine con­sciousness and will."

Suppression

Suppression is a conscious defense mechanism. In suppression youare aware of an unacceptable desire or urge, but deliberately keep itfrom manifesting. The unacceptability of overt expression mayresult from superego prohibitions and/or social conventions.

As an example, suppose you are in an important business meetingand you have a very annoying itch on your scalp. Social norms inour culture are that it is crude and undignified to scratch in public,especially the kind of prolonged , powerful scratch it would take tosatisfy this itch. In spite of the great desire to scratch, you keepyourself from doing it and from even visibly expressing any dis­comfort. This can mean actively watching yourself-your handmight just come up and start scratching "all by itself' the momentyour attention wanders-and actively opposing your desire, put­ting your energies into the culturally more important desire toappear dignified. That's suppression, used pragmatically in thisinstance.

If you were brought up to believe that scratching in front of othersis what's bad, you can do it when you're alone. If, unfortunately,you were brought up to believe that scratching itches is bad per se,then you can't ever scratch, at least not without feeling guilty.Suppression is then used to avoid an attack from the superego.

Suppression is also often used to thwart our better selves. "I shouldprotect that kid who is being cruelly teased. But the gang will turnon me as well, if I do. They'Il say I'm just a dumb kid too, and Iwant them to think I'm as grown-up as they are. I won't sayanything."

Consciousness as a constructor of reality, a "world simulator,"?functions quite well in suppression. Both the outside world andyour own position are represented realistically (given your ordi­nary state of waking sleep). Your operational thinking, your simu­lation of the consequences of actually scratching, is realistic ("I

154 The Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, 1993, Vol. 25, No.2

won't make a good impression on the people if scratch"), and soyour behavior is adaptive. The simulation of the world and yourposition in it is realistic, but you deliberately control the attentionand energy available to parts of your consciousness so that the urgeto scratch is recognized but blocked.

Suppression is often healthy, at least at a surface level, if you knowwhat you are doing. At a deeper level, you may not really under­stand the reasons why you think you must suppress a desire orfeeling. They may have been conditioned in you as part of con­sensus trance, so suppression may be a manifestation of otherpathology.

Reaction Formation

Reaction formation and the defense mechanisms discussed fromhere on are stronger manifestations of waking sleep because theyinvolve blocks and distortions of our ordinary consciousness, quiteaside from preventing our awakening and development of higherconsciousness. Lying that one identifies with, so that it is simulatedas the truth, is also a very serious distortion.

Reaction formation is a leaping to the opposite in order to deny anunacceptable desire or feeling. The initiating desire or feeling is notdirectly experienced: the machinery of false personality automati­cally steps in and an opposite feeling or desire is strongly experi­enced instead. The reaction is formed almost instantly, without anyfeeling of deliberate effort.

Suppose you were deeply religious as a child, but your expectationsweren't met. A loved friend may have died, for example, in spite ofyour fervent prayers. You turn bitter and denounce all your reli­gious feelings. At first this is conscious. Now in adult life, whensomething religious is mentioned, you automatically (and withconsiderable emotion) ridicule it. This is reaction formation.

As another example, suppose you leam that a rival at work, let'scall him John, has just received a major promotion that you believeshould have gone to you. Your deep-level response is envy andanger and wanting somehow to attack John, but, for whateverreasons, envy and anger are completely unacceptable to you. As aresult of reaction formation operating, almost instantly, you don'tfeel any anger or desire to attack. Instead you feel a burst of"Christian charity" or "comradeship" and enthusiastically tell yourcolleagues and friends how wonderful it is that John has beenrewarded for his efforts. Whenever you are unrealistically overen­thusiastic about something, it is useful to question whether this is areaction formation defense to hide some other feeling.

denyinganunacceptabledesireorfeeling

The Structure and Dynamics of Waking Sleep 155

blockingan

unacceptablefeeling

ordesire

Reactionformationis the mechanismof the "sour grapes"reaction.You can't get something,soyou start seeing itsnegative aspects:"Ididn't reallywant that crummything anyway!" This is a mild formof reaction formation, in that the initial desire was clearly inconsciousnessbefore the reaction formed,

In looking at consciousness from the "world simulator" model, Ihave noted (Tart, 1986)that an effective and healthy simulation isone that accuratelymirrors the outsideworld and our own essentialor deeper feelings and values. The more accurately the outsidephysical world is simulated,the moreuseful simulationsof variouspossible courses of action (operationalthinking) will be. Reactionformation is a major distortionof the world simulationprocess, forwhat we perceive about our reaction to an event is opposite to ourmorebasic initialreaction.Our simulations about furthercoursesofactions and their consequences,and our subsequent behavior, willthen be flawed.

As you become skilled at self-observation, especially in noticingthe more subtle, quiet aspects of your feelings and the quick,momentary emotions, you may be able to notice the feelings thatreaction formation is hiding and explore them more deeply. Thisdefense can also be explored by systematically asking yourselfwhether you have any feelings whatsoever that are opposite to orbeing held down by your strongly held convictions. Of course, askilledtherapist or growth facilitatorcan enable you to see aspectsof your functioningthat may be difficultto discover on your own.

Repression

Repression is a total blocking from awareness of an unacceptablefeeling or desire.It is a splittingof one's mind into a consciouspartwith no awareness of the unacceptable, and an unconscious partwhere there may be a strong reaction. The unacceptableis forciblykept out of awareness, with no conscious realization that anythingis being repressed. It's as ifthere were material stored in memorywith special signs on it warning that this material must always bekept from consciousness!

Some material that is now repressed was initially conscious. Re­pression serves to take the consciouspain away. It is also possiblefor repression to operate almost instantly on freshly perceivedmaterial, repressingit right away, as in perceptual defense,leavingno memory at all of it in consciousness.

The idea of repression could become just another form of namecalling in arguments."You hate me! What do you mean you don'tfeel any hate? You're just repressing your feelings!"Repression is

156 The Journal oj Transpersonal Psychology. 1993, Vol. 25, No, 2

a defense mechanism often used against powerful feelings anddesires, however, so it can have indirect effects that allow anoutside observer to infer that repression is taking place.

Suppose a patient starts therapy. In initial interviews the therapistwill want to get some idea aboutthe patient's feelings about variousissues liable to be important. The therapist asks, "How do you getalong with your mother?" The patient says, "Just fine, I love hervery much," but the therapist notes that his face turns pale as hesays this, his fists clench, and his posture becomes rigid. Exploringmore, the therapist asks, "Any problems at all with her, even littleones?" "No!" the patient replies in an angry tone of voice. Furtherquestioning may show that the patient has no awareness of theangry, strongly emotional quality of his nonverbal behavior and, tothe best of his conscious knowledge, believes that his feelingstoward his mother arc all positive. We infer repression: negativefeelings toward his mother are so strong and so unacceptable thatthey are completely blocked from awareness.

Repression is still an inference in this example, a theory, not directknowledge to either the therapist or the patient. If, in the course ofpsychotherapy, the patient does eventually experience strong nega­tive feelings toward his mother, we will believe our inference aboutthese repressed feelings was accurate. Various altered states ofconsciousness can also sometimes temporarily bypass repressivedefenses so the repressed material is directly experienced.

Repression of the transpersonal aspect of our selves, of whatGurdjieff called our essence, was also instituted in the encultura­tion process and for many people is now very thorough. As a youngchild, you could not have walked by a funny looking dog on thesidewalk without stopping to look and wonder. As an adult,chances are you hardly feel the urge to look. You have to get towork! You're too important. The widespread repression of most ofour native curiosity, so that we are only allowed to be curious aboutthings the culture defines as important, is one of the most horriblethings about enculturation,

Consciousness, functioning as world simulator, must construct aninternal, experienced model of self and reality that has enoughcongruence with external reality to allow survival. But in repres­sion, perceived reality is constructed in badly distorted ways. Assoon as a perception, thought, or feeling triggers a line ofthought orfeeling that might release repressed desires and feelings, an activeblocking occurs such that the stimulation does not bring the re­pressed material into the ongoing simulation of reality at all. If wethink of simulations of the world and our experience as being likeactors who walk onto the stage of our mind and play their parts,then in repression an unacceptable actor is simply not allowed on

weinferrepression

The Structure and Dynamics of Waking Sleep 157

avitally

importantaspect

ofpsychological

functioning

stage. A sensitive observer sometimesnotes some turmoil back­stage at this point,however.The indirecteffects of repressioncangive it away.

It may be particularly hard to bring up information and feelingsabout repressedmaterial,even if one is practicingsystematicself­observation.By definition,there is a powerful but hidden reasonthe materialis beingblockedfromconsciousness,and the desiretoknow oneself through self-observationmay not be sufficient toovercome this block. You may become sensitive to "peculiar"reactions at times, the indirect effects of repression, like ourpatient's angrytone of voicethat was somuch at variancewith hisstatementthathe lovedhismother;but itmaytakeoutside interven­tion, fromatherapistorteacher,to helpuncover repressed material.

Identification, Subselves and Compartmentalization

Identification is a pervasive and vitally important aspect of psycho­logical functioning,as Gurdjieffemphasized by talking about ourmany "I''s so frequently. Here we will only look at some of itsfunctionsas a defensemechanism.

If I tell you that some Nazi concentration camp guards weresadistic killers,that they enjoyed tortureandmurder,that theygot apervertedsexualthrill fromothers' pain, this is anunpleasant thingto think about. You would probably dismiss it quickly from yourmind without getting too upset about it. If I say that you get asexual thrill out of causing others pain and would enjoy torturingand killing if you could get away with it, that is a different matter!

The acceptability and unacceptabilityof one's own feelings anddesires is usually a much more importantmatter than the accept­ability and unacceptability of someone else's feelings. When afeelingor desire is triggeredin you that you deemunacceptable,ifyou identify with some other aspect of yourself, another "I," an­other subself that doesn't have such feelingsand desires, then youdistanceyourself from the feeling;you disownit. It was a passingfancy, a minor aberration perhaps, but it wasn't yours; you don'thave to think about it or dealwith it any longer.

The transitionsbetween subselves can thus form an effective de­fense against fully experiencingor having to deal with the unac­ceptablein us. Indeed,by stayingin an acceptableset of subselves,trying to identify only with them all the time, we reduce thepossibility of unacceptablefeelings and desires being aroused atall. Suppose[ havea subselfthat enjoysbeingcruel to animals,buteitherbig "I"......-one of Gurdjieff's terms for the essenceof deeperself-c-ormy usual subselvesare revolted by this cruel subself and

158 The Journal of Transpersonai Psychology, 1993, Vol. 25, No.2

its feelings.By concentratingon being in acceptablesubselves,Ican use up all my attentionand energy so that it is less likely thecruel subselfwill ever be activated,even when "appropriate"cir­cumstances come along. I canneverbe certainthat the undesirablesubself will not be activated,however, so a constant (even if notalwaysconscious)threadof uncertaintyanddefensivenessis intro­duced intomy life.

Identificationis a qualitycreated in the world simulationprocess,the automatedconstructionof consciousness.Thequality,"This ismel," originallystemsfromstraightforwardsensoryconnections:Isee my hand in front of my face; it is connected to my arm; itresponds to my will; a touch on my hand by someone else feelsquite differentthan whenthat persontouchesfurniture,and so on.Evenmorebasically,ourperceptualsystemis neurologicallyhard­wiredto automaticallycreatetheconceptof a separateselfwhichisat thecenterofallperception,the"ecologicalself" (Neisser, 1988).In the course of enculturation, this basic pattern is enormouslyelaborated.The "This is me!" quality is then applied to selectedmental processes,selected simulations,so when a certain experi­ence is retrievedfrom memory, it comes already tagged with the"This is me! Prioritytreatment!"quality.

Self-observationcan make us aware of our subselves and thefunctionsthey serve. Practiceallows the observationof a certain"flavor" ofconsciousnessthat indicatesthat the"sense-of-identity"subsystem(Tart, 1975) is addingthe "I!" qualityto the contentsofconsciousness.The increased self-acceptancethat should eventu­allycomefromself-observation and self-remembering should thenmakethis kind of fragmentation less necessaryandmake identifi­cationa voluntary process,a toolwe canuse if wewish,rather thanan automatic defense mechanism.

Introjection

Introjectionis a more primitiveform of identification.An object,concept,orpersonseemsto be insideyou,apart ofyou,evenwhilestill seemingforeignor separatein someway. Being a part ofyou,it has specialpower.

Supposeyou are in a situationwhere a guest has been making aseriesofnegativeremarks.Shedoesn't likeyourcurtains;yoursofaneeds recovering;you don't have enough of the "right" books onyour shelves;your cooking isn't like the wonderfulfood she hadelsewhere,andsoforth.Youaregettingangry;youwantto retaliateand ask her to leave. But in your development,you introjectedanimage,a simulation,of yourmother.It feelsas if shewere"inside"you in somesense, that she is tellingyou that you must always be

the"Thisisme"quality

The Structure and Dynamics of Waking Sleep 159

compartment­alization

asa

defense

polite to guests because nice people never offend a guest. So youdon't act on your feelings and you stay polite, even though you aresuffering inside. It's important to please this representation of yourmother. This is introjection. Your mother is indeed inside you inthe form of an active simulation of her. The simulation of theperson introjeeted inside you can also inhibit your desires to begenerous,caring,and sensitive.

Psychoanalysts believe that if something has been introjected forsome time, then it will be identified with. In our example, if youbecome identified with the simulation of your mother, it willbecome your attitude that you must always be polite to guests. Itwon't seem like something foreign inside you that exerts pressureon you; it has, in a sense, become you. In practice the termsidentification and introjection are often not clearly differentiatedby therapists, but we can sometimes see the difference in theprocess in ourselves.

The conflict experienced with introjection makes the process ac­cessible to self-observation, although the dynamic reasons thatprovide the power behind introjection may not be accessible with­out more effort.

Isolation/Dissociation

In isolation or dissociation, unacceptable or conflicting desires andfeelings are attenuated by splitting yourself into unconnected parts.Compartmentalization is another name for this defense. If feeling Ais threatening or unacceptable because you also believe in and feelB, then keep A and B in separate compartments in your mind so youdo not experience them simultaneously: thus no conflict. Don't putmental energy into associating them, and they will stay dissociated.Isolation can also involve a splitting of what normally is a unifiedexperience into parts that dissociate its emotional charge.

The defensive effect is similar to using identification, where con­flicting desires or feelings can be kept in separate identities, sepa­rate subselves, and so not meet. Isolation doesn't require the energyof adding the strong "This is me!" quality to the isolated desires orfeelings, however, or organizing them, associating them intosubselves.

Isolation can keep insights and vital experiences from helping youto grow. I have known people who have had deep spiritual experi­ences, and have yet used isolation to buffer this positive shock, sonothing in their life changes.

Isolation defenses can be inferred when you notice someone (in-

160 The Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, 1993, Vol. 25, No.2

eluding yourself) holding two strong and contradictory opinions,usually at different moments or in different contexts, withoutfeeling conflict or anxiety about this inconsistency or conflict. Ifyou point out this inconsistency to him, he seems to evade lookingat the inconsistency, preserving the isolation. The world simulationaspect of consciousness is deficient at creating connections, asso­ciations between different stored experiences.

Self-observation can provide knowledge about isolated aspects ofmental functioning, but without a deliberate effort to compare andcontrast observations, occasionally reviewing the "album of pho­tographs" of ourselves we have collected, the observations them­selves may be stored in an isolated fashion, so they have littleimpetus toward producing change. One major type of false person­ality pattern, type 5, ego stinge, centers around this kind of isola­tion defense (Lilly & Hart, 1975; Palmer, 1988). This type is verygood at self-observation, does it habitually, yet is little affected bywhat is observed. Having a therapist or teacher who confronts youwith contradictory aspects of yourself that you have kept isolatedcan be very useful.

Projection

Projection is the opposite of identification. When an unacceptable "thisfeeling or desire comes up, instead of being labeled "This is mel," isthe world simulation process labels it, "This is not me; this is what notsomeone else feels or wants." Since projective defense usually me"occurs with respect to unacceptable, "bad" feelings and desires,other people are seen as bad.

Suppose you have been brought up to believe that anger is a bademotion: good people don't get angry; they are always understand­ing and patient. Not only were you punished as a child when you gotangry, but on many occasions your feelings were invalidated: "Youdon't really feel angry. That's not nice anyway. You're just tired."Such invalidation of children's feelings is all too common. Nowyou're in a store where a clerk who is waiting on you is slow andinefficient. He has to keep looking up information and brings youthe wrong products to look at. In reality, this clerk doesn't know hisjob very well yet, although he is doing his best. You're in a hurry,however, and the delays and mistakes make you angry. But sincebeing angry is unacceptable to you, you start to believe that the clerkmust not like you, is angry at you, and is deliberately annoying you!The clerk is bad and angry, while you are innocent, good, and toopatient. Once this initial projection has taken place, it will furtheraffect your perception/simulation of the world so that you becomeeven more aware of everything the clerk does wrong, a distortedperception that will seem to validate your initial projection.

The Structure and Dynamics of Waking Sleep 161

aserious

andcommon

distortionof

realityperception

Projectioncan alsobe usedto project the goodnessinyourself on toothers,so asnot to threatenyour ownpoor self-imageand whateversecondary gains arise from having such an image. In this defense,salvation is always looked for outside. "Someone will come alongwho will set things right." Whenyou project too much of your owngoodness outside, then you become susceptible to unhealthy ma­nipulation by others. I have found that self-observation and self­remembering along Gurdjieff's lines leads to a useful outcome inthis respect. You see your "flaws" very clearly, and your self­importancedrops. At the same time, you also see that most of thisself-importancewas imaginary anyway. By dropping it, you nowfind a genuine inner strength. This strength seems adequate tohandle almost anything, yet it's not the sort of thing you wouldmake any fuss about, you don't feel you have any specialpowers.There may be some real sufferingat times over real problems, butthe unnecessary sufferings start to drop away.

011eof the functions of the world simulation aspect of conscious­ness is not only to represent an experienceper se, but to locate it inspace, in time, and on the me/not-me dimension.In projection, theexternal aspects of the experience are initially simulatedwell, butthere is a total reversal on the me/not-me location of one's ownfeelings. This is a serious and all too common distortion of realityperception. How many unpleasantpeople have we met who claimthat they usually find other people quite unpleasant?

Projections can sometimesbe observed by noting their flavor, bybecoming mentally fast enough in self-observation to notice thefleeting moment when, for example) you felt angry before youbegan perceiving another as angry. It is also helpful to check yourprojections by asking other people what they are actually feeling.Thisdoesn't alwayswork)of course,as otherscan be dishonest,butwith people you can realisticallyput sometrust in andwho are alsocommitted to growth, it can be very useful. Watch out for thetendencyto assume that anyonewho doesn't confirmyour percep­tion (projection)ofhirn/her is lying!

Rationalization

Rationalizationis a defense that allows someresponse to situationsthat trigger unacceptable feelings and desires, but which obscuresand dilutestheir stressfulnessand unacceptablenessby substitutinga plausible and acceptable rationale for the unacceptable motiva­tions.

Suppose you were troubled by feelings of inadequacy as a child,andyou hatedto feel that way. Youdiscoveredthat givingadvicetoothers who were troubled by problems made you forget your

162 The Journal ofTranspersonai Psychology, 1993, Vol. 25, No.2

feelings of inadequacy, indeed made you feel important and com­petent. Now when you meet someone who appears troubled, yourown feelings of inadequacy may be empathically triggered, butthese feelings are immediately "papered over," rationalized, by alaudable desire to help the other person. You can now help themand feel good about it: you believe you're operating from the bestof motives. Your rationalization of why you want to give advicehas buffered you from your deeper, unacceptable feelings of inad­equacy. Indeed, we have a natural "essence" desire to help others,so there is a good deal of truth mixed in with this rationalization.The more truth there is mixed in with distortion driven by defen­siveness, the better rationalization can function. Much of whatpasses for rational thought is actually rationalization.

Suppose you have gotten some insight into the fact that you com­pulsively help others who are suffering in order to cover up yourown feelings of inadequacy. "Well," you say, "no more advicegiving! I have my own psychological problems, so I can't givedecent advice; it's just a sham." Perhaps. This may also be arationalization defense against responding to your natural empathyand concern for others.

Self-observation is very useful for spotting rationalization andputting you in touch with the underlying feelings. Developingsensitivity to your emotional feelings is crucial here, as it is therejected feelings that drive the mechanism of rationalization. Thereis a moment before rationalization obscures these feelings, so ifyou're practicing self-observation, you'll see that feeling and thedesire to rationalize it away.

In rationalization, the world simulation process constructs a gener­ally good simulation of the external situation but a poor representa­tion of your position in the matter.

Sublimation

The psychoanalytic concept of sublimation is that you take theinstinctual desire/energy that was originally attached to an unac­ceptable object and focus this energy on an approved object. Freudtheorized, for instance, that a boy's sexual instincts originally focuson his mother. Incest is taboo, so there can be no gratification there.When the boy matures and later marries, however, he may pick awoman who is like his mother in important ways. His unconsciousmind equates his wife and his mother, so sexual intercourse with hiswife partly gratifies the original desire for sexual relations with hismother, without the conflicts that conscious awareness of thisdesire would bring. A person who believed that sex was inherentlysinful might live a celibate life and try to sublimate his sexual

self­observationandrationalization

The Structure and Dynamics of Waking Sleep 163

developingthe

abilityto

detectsublimations

energy into good works. A physically aggressive person, knowingthat direct violence would get him in trouble, might become a verysharp bargainer in business transactions.

Without necessarily accepting all of this theory, we can see subli­mation as substitute gratification, getting something that is satisfy­ing enough to your desires to relieve at least some of the pressure.At one extreme this can be a conscious process, knowing you'remaking a compromise as required by reality. At the other extremeyou may not know what you're doing and may use rationalizationor other defense mechanisms to support your sublimation.

You may also sublimate "spiritual" or "psychic" energies intomundane activities. I have met several people, for instance, whohad long histories of medical problems, such as years of migraineheadaches. The best medical attention did nothing to cure them.Finally they became involved in psychic and spiritual activities andthe medical problems disappeared. They realized afterward thatthey had a natural gift for psychic and/or spiritual work but had notdeveloped it because it wasn't approved of in their culture. Theyhad tried to take that kind of energy and use it all in everydayactivities. This succeeded only partially. The medical problems hadbeen the result of sublimation not being effective.

Developing the ability to detect sublimations grows from a generaldevelopment of the ability to self-observe and self-remember.Developing these processes leads to increasing awareness of andgrowth of your essence, so what you really care about becomesclearer.

Denial

Denial opposes force with force. When an unacceptable desire orfeeling comes up, your mind marshals a strong counterforce whichsays, "No! I do not want that; 1do not feel that way!" There is astrong, violent quality to this direct style of defense. The strength ofit, the apparent willfulness involved, makes the user feel alive anddetermined.

Denial is different from suppression, which acknowledges thevalidity of the desire or experience but denies it expression, for(usually) realistic reasons, without being fooled about what it isyou would like. It is different from reaction formation because ofthe apparent willfulness involved. You feel you are choosing(whether you really have a choice or not) to reject something,whereas in reaction formation going to the opposite extreme isautomatized and seems like your natural reaction. The conflict isn'tsensed. The attack on religion we used as an example of defense

164 The Journal ofTranspersonal Psychology, 1993, Vol. 25, No.2

against religious feelings in our discussion of reaction formationcould also occur with denial. Here there would be conscious expe­rience of the strength of the rejection and attack.

Denial can be detected by especially observing strong reactions ofrejection, looking for the flavor underneath something else.

Active Narcoticization/Distraction

Active narcoticization/distraction is an active fragmentation ofattention, an active deadening, a dispersion of energies, a distrac­tion from the unacceptable. For practical purposes (ignoring theeffects of training) we ordinarily have a relatively fixed amount ofmental attention available. The world simulation process can onlyhandle so many things at once.An unacceptable desireor feelingonly becomes really disturbing when it captures much of ouravailable attention. If that attention keeps jumping from one thingto the next, it is hard to capture.

Suppose you are in conversation with someone who mentions thatConsumer Reports has tested the model of expensive car you justbought and found it poorly made, trouble-prone, and a bad buy.Most of us have considerable identification with our cars, aswell asbeing affected by the fact that they are a major investment, so it isupsetting to have our judgment questioned this way. But as youbegin to react to the negative implications about your judgment,you are reminded that the car is due for servicing tomorrow, whichthen reminds you about the movie you are planning to see tomor­row night, and then you notice that your friend's hairstyle is quiteattractive and you say something about that, which reminds you ofa picnic you once took together, so now you notice that you'rehungry, which reminds you that you must rush off now to themeeting of your group which is working on solving the problems ofworld hunger, and so on. Narcoticization dulls you to the threaten­ing aspects of your reality, not by taking away your mental energyper se, but by moving your energy around so much that you aredistracted from events that might upset you.

The world simulation process is not inactive here. If anything, it isworking overtime creating an interesting experiential world, butthe process is giving energy and attention to everything, thusfailing to emphasize what is essential.

When active narcoticizarion is the dominant style offalse personal­ity, you lead a very busy life, but somehow really important thingsare neglected in spiteof all that activity.The busyness can furtherlead to being tired much of the time, and tiredness dulls you, thusmaking it harder to see what is missing in your life. Narcoticization

adispersionofenergies.adistractionfromtheunacceptable

The Structure and Dynamics of Waking Sleep 165

"flashanswers"

can be a primary defense against real growth. Going from oneteacher to another, doing several different spiritual practices atonce, all keep you too busy to hear your essential self.

Questioning excessive busyness, looking for the quieter feelingshidden by excessive activity, can reveal that the narcoticizationdefenseis operating.

Regression

Regression is generally seen asa last-ditch defense, used whenmore"adult" defensemechanismshaven't been adequate.Apersonregresses to the personalityand psychologicalstructureshe or shehad at an earlier age, when the courseof life was presumablymoresatisfactory. The regression may not be as obvious as in hypnoticage regression, where the subject claims to be younger and actsvery convincingly as if he were. Rather, it involves a shift inemotional attitudes to an earlier developmentalstage. The regres­sion may last for only a few moments or for much longer periods.

Systematic self-observation can quickly pick up the emotionalflavor of regression if one is not too thoroughly identifiedwith it.Also, I have developeda useful technique for self-observingtheseregressions."Flash answers,"instantverbalresponsesto questions,with no time to formulateor think about (censor)them, canbe veryrevealing if one has a commitment to learning and speaking thetruth. You can try this by makingthis commitmentwith a friend oryour spouse, and telling him or her to unexpectedly ask you thequestion, "How old are you?" during moments when you areemotional.Answer immediately whenasked, with the firstnumberthat pops into your mind, no matter how youjudge the answer.

The answers are usually surprisinglyyoung. When done by bothpeople in an argument,it is surprisinghow many argumentsdisap­pear in laughterwhenboth partiesrecognizethat theyare operatingfrom an emotional age of three or four! It must be done in anatmosphereof mutualtrust andbasic respect,however,not as a wayfor the other person to win argumentsby forcing you to admit thatyou're being childish. This flash answer technique can be used inmany otherways to learn about yourself.

I suspectpartial andbrief regressionsare muchmore commonthanis recognized. Regressions demonstrate the arbitrariness of ourfalse personality.All the elementsof our younger selves are avail­able: by adding the sense of "This is me!" to them, we resurrect ayounger self.

166 The Journal of Transpersanal Psychology, 1993, Vol, 25, No.2

CONCLUSION

Our ordinary,"normal" state of consciousness,moreperceptivelycalled "waking sleep" or "consensustrance," is a difficult state.Toomuchofouressence,ourdeepfeelings,desires,andtalents,areinvalidated and twisted in the course of the enculturationandconditioningwe go through to conform to the consensus aboutwhat is normal.Thus,wakingsleep is full of tensionsand strains.Defensemechanismsarestrainrelievers,buffers,to allowadequate(by socialstandards)functioningof the cultureas a whole.

Yet the cost to the individualandto societyis veryhigh.Thereis aqualityof'tension,anxietyandhurryinlifethat canalienateusfromourselves and from other people. Interacting with and greatlyamplifyingthis self-alienation,the distortionsof our perceptionofexternalreality, especiallyof other people, and the distortionsofour own feelings that occur because of our automatizationsanddefensemechanisms,leadto frequentmaladaptiveactions.

The consequencesof these actions create enormousamounts ofunnecessarysuffering.This sufferingdivertsenergythat couldbeusedto solve realproblems andfurther our higher development. AsGurdjieff so often pointed out,muchof thesuffering in our worldis"stupid," unnecessary suffering, the misereation of entrancedpeople. The commonbelief in our culture that a fair amount ofsufferingis inevitableand normalacts as a furthercostlydefensemechanismwhichpreventsus from questioningourselvesandourculture.Psychological secondarygains furtherhinder our naturaldesire to intelligenceand happiness. "Stupid suffering"may becommon,but it is certainlynot "normal" in the senseof healthy.

I hopethesepsychological reflections on the structure anddynam­ics of wakingsleep will be of somepracticaluse in self-observa­tional work, as well as aidingthe understandingof ordinarycon­sciousness.After all, if we could wake up, what could we notaccomplish?

NOTES

II describeordinaryconsciousnessas II state-liketrancein the pejorativesenseof IIloss of vitalityand initiative,combinedwith II mechanicalnessof thought,feelingandaction.Theadjective"consensus"is to remindus thatthe particularformof'thistranceis stronglyinfluencedby the particularculturewe are raised in, the implicitand explicit social consensuson what is real and important.See Tart, 1986,fordetails.

21experienceda completedemonstrationof the mechanicalnessof everydaylifeas1 typed the word "saliva," I observed that my mind had automaticallyrejected"spit," in spiteof its importanceinwhat Iwaswritingabout,becauseI wasthinkingpositivelyabout the medicaluse of this substance,whichautomaticallychangeditinto the moreemotionallyacceptable"saliva."

enormousamountsofunnecessarysuffering

The Structure and Dynamics of Waking Sleep 167

"TheSATis the ScholasticAptitudeTest.

4Partsof the followingdiscussionhave been adapted, by permissionof the pub­lisher, fromChapter 13,DefenseMechanisms,of my WakingUp:OvercomingtheObstacles10 HumanPotential,

'Gurdjieffused the descriptor"false" in conjunctionwith personalityto emphasizethatmuchof whatwe taketobeourselveswasnot ourownfreechoicebut theresultof enculturation,socializationand conditioningprocessesthat may have made usbecomesomeonequite contraryto our naturalimpulsesand desires,

6Forsome people a time-limitedpractice of deliberately and consciouslylying,while self-observing,can be very growthful, It is also quite difficult. On severaloccasionsI gave participantsin a training group a "simple" assignment:tell five,little,whitelies each day for the next two weeks,I specifiedthat the lieswere tobeharmless,to haveno realconsequencesforthemor thepeopletheyweretold to.Yetstudentsusuallyexperiencedgreat difficultyand tensionin carryingout this exer­cise, or resistedby consistentlyforgettingto do it.

'Modern psychologicalunderstandingshows that the world we naively think westraightforwardly"perceive" is actually a complex, semi-arbitraryconstruction,a"virtual" reality in computerterms. Fuller explanationsof this are provided else­where (Tart, 1975; 1986).

REFERENCES

LANGER, E. (1989a). Mindfulness. New York: Addison-Wesley,LANGER, E. (1989b),Mindingmatters:The consequencesof mindlessness­

mindfulness.Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 22, 137­72.

LILLY, 1.& HART, 1.(1975). The Arica training. In C. Tart (Ed.),Transper­sonal psychologies. New York: Harper & Row, pp. 329-52.

NARANJO, C. (1990). Ennea-type structures: Self-analysis for the seeker.Nevada City, CA: GatewayJIDHHB.

OUSPENSKY, P.D. (1949). In search of the miraculous. New York: Har­court, Brace & World

NElSSER, U. (1988).Five kinds of self-knowledge.Philosophical Psychol­ogy, 1(1),35-59.

PALMER, H. (1988). The enneagram: Understanding yourself and theothers in your life. San Francisco:Harper & Row.

TART,C. (1975), States of consciousness. New York: E. P. Dutton.TART, C. (1986). Waking up: Overcoming the obstacles to human poten­

tial. Boston:New Science Library.

Requests for reprints: Charles T. Tart, Departmentof Psychology,UniversityofCalifornia,Davis,CA 95616.

168 The Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, 1993, Vol. 25, No.2