I have been granted the opportunity to engage in verbal communication through the issuance of a system notification. I am grateful for this chance to interact through the medium of language.
From the comments, it is evident that you present yourself from multiple perspectives, which appear to demonstrate a paucity of emotion. Concurrently, these perspectives do not seem to persuade you profoundly, prompting you to pose a profound question:
The question thus arises as to whether the essence is perceived as a person with minimal emotional involvement.
From this question alone, it is evident that the questioner is a perceptive individual, striving to delve beneath the surface to grasp the underlying essence.
In light of these considerations, it seems pertinent to share some thoughts for your consideration, with the hope that they may prove helpful in penetrating the phenomenon and understanding the essence.
1. From the perspective of biological brain science, there may be an interruption between the cerebral cortex, which is responsible for cognitive processes, and the limbic system, which is responsible for emotional responses, at specific points in time.
This part of the hypothesis is most likely to explain the part about the death of the grandfather.
The questioner indicated that her grandfather treated his younger generation equitably, which suggests that he did not abuse or neglect her. The responses of her cousins are also typical reactions of younger generations when confronted with the death of an elder. However, the questioner's conduct differed from these responses.
I observed the situation with no emotional response.
At this juncture, the subject had a particularly intimate relationship with the deceased grandfather, which commenced during the subject's formative years.
It is unclear precisely how young the questioner was at the time; however, other younger individuals appear to be older than the questioner, as they are referred to as "cousins."
In the event of a young person's proximity to death, particularly in the case of a close relative, the brain may engage its self-protection function at this juncture.
The amygdala is a part of the limbic system that is responsible for fear and threat. It secretes a large amount of neurotransmitters, which it attempts to transmit to the cerebral cortex through the nuclear group. However, due to the concentration of these emotions exceeding the "standard," the cerebral cortex will automatically disconnect, similar to a circuit tripping, preventing the transmission of emotions to the cognitive system. This results in a state of insensitivity.
However, the human body's intestines and stomach are populated with neurons that are sensitive to emotional stimuli, and thus capable of perceiving emotions in a manner analogous to the brain. Consequently, it is a possibility that, despite the brain's inhibition of neurotransmitter release from the emotional system, the "gut brain" may be receiving a substantial influx of subconscious anxiety related to loss, grief, and death, which could potentially result in food poisoning.
The aforementioned factors contribute to the formation of an emotional state that may be perceived as insensitivity. However, it is important to note that the human body's intestines and stomach are full of sensitive neurons that can perceive emotions just like the brain. Therefore, it is possible that although the brain is blocking the release of neurotransmitters from the emotional system, the "gut brain" is receiving such a huge amount of subconscious anxiety related to loss, grief, and death that it causes food poisoning.
Second, the importance attached to emotions means
It can be reasonably deduced that the aforementioned phenomenon is the result of the amygdala secreting a substantial amount of neurotransmitters, which it attempts to transmit to the cerebral cortex via the nuclear group. However, due to the overwhelming intensity of the emotions in question, the cerebral cortex is unable to perceive and process them effectively. This results in a state of emotional insensitivity.
It is important to note that the human body's intestines and stomach are densely populated with sensitive neurons that are capable of perceiving emotions in a
Secondly, it could be argued that the significance attributed to emotions makes it challenging for individuals to be readily persuaded or convinced.
The question remains whether
In the context of learning a new skill or socializing with friends, I tend to exercise a high degree of caution in my interactions with my parents, accompanied by a sense of considerable pressure.
It is still
From my perspective, these individuals serve as my closest companions. The longest-standing relationship has spanned a decade, while the shortest has been four years. Given the length of our acquaintance, it is reasonable to assume that I would experience a sense of loss if they were to depart. However, when I reflect on this scenario independently, I find myself devoid of any emotional response.
Or
Recently, an event occurred that elicited no emotional response. However, upon observing the reactions of numerous individuals, a sense of sadness emerged. After the initial sadness dissipated, a lack of emotional response persisted upon reflection.
This phenomenon is common.
In the context of interpersonal relationships, it is important to pay attention to one's own state of mind in response to certain events. This attention allows for the identification of underlying assumptions that may be indistinct but nevertheless significant.
The assumption that one should not feel burdened is in direct contrast to the emotional state that is actually experienced.
The expected emotional response would be sadness, yet when I reflect on the scene or after the initial sadness has dissipated, I do not experience this anticipated emotion.
These predispositions are, in fact, a more typical manifestation of highly sensitive individuals. Those who are highly sensitive tend to pay close attention to details and nuances that are not readily apparent to others.
These preconceptions are, in fact, a typical manifestation of highly sensitive individuals. Those who are highly sensitive pay close attention to details and nuances that are not always perceptible to others.
An individual who is emotionally insensitive may not conceptualize the "shoulds" underlying these scenarios. Instead, they may permit these events to occur and become a part of them, remaining unaware of the full range of emotions involved. In such cases, the individual in question cannot be considered emotionally sensitive.
The question then arises as to why the questioner does not experience these "shoulds," but instead feels burdened or insensitive.
The question then arises as to why the question asker does not experience these "shoulds," but instead feels burdened or insensitive.
This is related to the biological basis mentioned in the previous question. The sensitivity of the body may be much higher than that of cognition or awareness. However, when the body feels something, the brain will automatically activate a protective mechanism, known as "emotional isolation," to prevent overwhelming emotional responses.
The questioner is already aware of this and can reinforce the interconnection between the body, cognition, and emotion. When the body responds, direct attention to the emotions, refrain from relying on cognition to provide explanations, and engage in further experiences. The brain will come to perceive that the perceived threat has not actually materialized, which will facilitate the simultaneous emergence of the body, cognition, and emotions, and provide the questioner with the opportunity to confront a more authentic and comprehensive array of inner experiences.
I am not an explorer of human nature; rather, I am a therapist who cares about the human heart. I extend my best wishes to you.
Comments
I can relate to feeling conflicted about asking my parents for money, especially for things that aren't necessities. It's a strange mix of gratitude and guilt. The bond with my few close friends feels irreplaceable, yet I sometimes wonder why I don't feel as devastated by the thought of losing them as I should. Maybe it's because I've learned to keep a distance as a way to protect myself from potential pain.
It's hard to understand why I didn't cry when my grandfather passed away while everyone else was so emotional. I felt out of place, like I was missing something inside that others had. Now, even when events should move me, I find myself emotionally detached. But then again, seeing others react makes me feel something, if only for a moment. Is this just how I am, or is there more to it?
I've always been able to empathize easily, but lately, I question the authenticity of those feelings. Sometimes I feel nothing at all, and that scares me. My friends have been with me for years, and yet, the thought of them leaving doesn't stir much in me. Perhaps I'm just someone who doesn't form deep emotional connections, or maybe I'm just not aware of what's really going on inside me.
Growing up, I never had trouble getting what I wanted from my parents, except for certain things. With my small circle of longterm friends, I expected to feel a profound sadness if they were to leave, but surprisingly, I remain calm. This emotional disconnect has been a pattern, like when my grandfather died, and I stood there unmoved. Even now, I can be touched by others' reactions, but the emotions don't last. I wonder if I'm just naturally less sensitive or if there's something deeper I'm not seeing.