The Heart vs. the Mind: Part 3
Aka Get Ready for Some Relationship Math
Ah, well, in the last post, I promised a case study, but… I’ve changed my mind. The reason why is that, in reality, I can only use myself as a case study because the only person whose thoughts, feelings, and motivations I know well enough to do so is me. It wouldn’t be fair to assume otherwise.
However, Ms. Gomez isn’t in the clear, yet! She’s the subject of what I like to call “Relationship Math” (which btw, isn’t really math; I’m just saying that because I used equal signs liberally, lol)
We’ve explored both the emotional self and the rational self and I’d say, by now, we’ve got a pretty good understanding of what is meant by those terms and how they apply to us.
The goal of all this was to figure out whether we could get these two parts of ourselves to work in tandem, rather than against each other. I wonder if you believe that’s possible yet…
If you think back to the song that started it all, the premise was that no matter how much you know something is bad for you or you can’t have it, you want it all the same.
This is how you’d expect to analyze that situation with your newfound, bad *ss self-analyzing skills:
Knowing it’s bad and/or I can’t have it = rational self
Wanting it anyway = emotional self
However, there is an inverse that is actually waaaaaaaaaaaay more helpful to you:
Knowing what’s good = emotional self
Wanting it because it’s good = rational self
Huh? What does that mean? How does that work?
I’ll tell you.
When my fiancé hugs me, I love it. I love the feeling of it and I love hugging him back. I get an emotional high and I feel good. Because of this, I want more. I want more hugs because I know they make me feel good.
Our equation thus becomes:
Knowing hugs feel good = emotional self
Wanting more hugs because I know they feel good = rational self
I can understand how this might seem like I’m just playing with semantics. Please bear with me a little bit longer ^_^
So, Selena is saying “oh man, I know Bieber is bad for me and I can’t have him, but I want him anyways”.
Wanting Bieber = emotional self
Knowing Bieber is bad and I can’t have him = rational self
What if Selena were to take the other equational statements and say “What about my relationship/situation with Bieber feels good? What about Bieber himself feels good?” (Probably nothing, but that’s just an educated guess : D ) For the sake of argument, we’ll assume his hugs, like my fiancé’s, are very good. (‘cause it sure as hell isn’t his music! Lol)
And I bet, she’d want more of what feels good – we all want more of what feels good.
Now we have:
Knowing Bieber’s hugs feel good = emotional self
Wanting more Bieber hugs because she knows they feel good = rational self
The problem comes in when Selena can’t get more of Bieber’s hugs. While the above equation still holds true, there is a sudden disconnect. And that’s when it slides into:
Knowing I can’t get any more of Bieber’s hugs = rational self
Wanting his hugs all the same = emotional self
What can Selena do? Sit in relationship purgatory forever? Write more songs about it? Be sad and lonely for all eternity, pining after some putz who can’t even wear his hat the right way? Sure, these are options, but what if she changes one part of the equation? What if she removes the Bieber? (always recommended anyway ^_^ )
With the first one, we get:
Knowing I can’t get any more hugs
Wanting hugs all the same
There’s an untruth in this. No matter what anyone says, I guarantee somebody’s got hugs waiting for Selena (and you, too!). That means we need to remove the Bieber from another set of statements instead:
Knowing hugs feel good
Wanting more hugs because they feel good
Wow – look at how her world just opened up! She wants hugs! And she knows why! And there isn’t anything or anyone limiting her ability to get them. She now understands emotionally what makes her happy (hugs) and she knows rationally why she wants them (because they feel good). These are compatible statements – the contradiction inherent in the other set of statements is what causes her distress. Also, these are actionable statements – by removing the limiting factor (Bieber), she has identified at least one way of working towards her happiness instead of wallowing in her misery.
You can do the same. Really, I’ve made it much more complicated than it has to be (sorry, if you’ve only just found that out ^_^ )
The point is, now that you know how to identify your emotional statements/actions/reactions versus your rational ones, you can analyze how they are interacting with each other. If they are in opposition to each other, then switch it up. Find the way that makes them complimentary. Remove limiting information (especially specifics) and see if there is a new angle that you can approach the situation from.
You never know what you’ll find. (I pray it’s not Bieber…lol)
I hope this works for you. If you want to try some relationship math together, send me a message or leave a comment in the box below!
P.S. Next time, I’ll talk about a gaping hole in my argument (What if she only wants Bieber’s hugs??)