Understanding absolutisation and why it is a problem is a central issue of Middle Way theory and practice. I’ve tried to distill the key points in this chart (click to enlarge). Feel free to download it, print it, or use it for any other personal (non-commercial) use.
I have spent my entire life feeling as if I don’t fit in, like I don’t belong. Other people have always seemed like a mystery, especially in the effortless way they navigate the twisted path of social interaction. As a child I thought this would change as I became an adult, that I would suddenly learn to ‘be like everybody else’. But it didn’t. Nevertheless, I’ve always managed pretty well, compensating in a variety of ways: drifting off into my own world, sticking to subjects I know (avoiding those I don’t), or by finding the alternative music scene and embracing my place as an outsider (one of the more successful strategies, although I never felt I fit in there either). Even now I prepare myself for potential conversations by preparing answers to the common kind of ‘small talk’: ‘what did you do over the weekend?’, ‘how are the kids?’ – that kind of thing. In the past, forgetting to do this could result in a long-lasting, sometimes debilitating, state of anxiety, as could a whole host of other seemingly innocuous situations. Then in 2019, after years of cognitive behaviour therapy, counselling, medication, and a pervasive sense of confusion, I was diagnosed as having Level 1 Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD). Suddenly I had a framework in which my experiences made sense. My preference to play alone as a child, the gullibility that I spent years trying to overcome or those social difficulties I have experienced as an adult.
People often ask what point there is in ‘having a label’. I can’t speak for anybody else, but my life has become immeasurably easier. I still need to prepare myself for small talk but knowing that this is because of my neurodevelopmental differences, rather than stubborn habits to be fixed, has significantly reduced my anxiety. This is true of many aspects of my life.
The National Autistic Society says that ‘Autism is a lifelong developmental disability which affects how people communicate and interact with the world’. Autism isn’t one, easily definable, condition, but rather a ‘spectrum of closely related disorders with a shared core of symptoms’. The definition of autism has changed over the decades and is likely to change some more (not all that long ago I would have been diagnosed as having Asperger’s Syndrome, and while this remains in common usage, it has now been diagnostically incorporated into the umbrella term ASD). While most of these changes have been made to make diagnosing a complicated range of overlapping conditions easier, it has caused some confusion in the general public and exacerbated various misunderstandings, such as the often heard ‘everybody is on the spectrum’, which mistakenly frames the spectrum as a gradient on which everybody falls, ranging from ‘mild’ to ‘severe’. In fact, the spectrum is a complex range of symptoms, of which a certain amount, in specific combinations, must be present for a diagnosis to be made. Everybody has some traits that exist on the spectrum, but that does not make everybody ‘a little bit autistic’. A bicycle is a mode of transport that uses wheels to facilitate motion; a trait it shares with a motor car, but I’ve never heard anyone say that a bicycle is ‘a little bit car’.
The spectrum of autistic traits can be categorised into three broad categories:
Social and Communication Difficulties.
For me these include:
Repetitive and Restrictive Behaviour.
For me these include:
Over or Under Sensitivity to Light, Sound, Taste and Touch.
For me these include:
Recently, I’ve been reading, Iain McGilchrist’s (psychiatrist, writer, and Patron of the Middle Way Society) The Master and His Emissary; a book which ‘argues that the division of the brain into two hemispheres is essential to human existence, making possible incompatible versions of the world, with quite different priorities and values’ (for those unfamiliar with McGilchrist’s seminal work, Robert M. Ellis has produced a fine summary and review here). It became apparent to me, as I read that autism shares many traits with left-hemisphere activity, and therefore appears to be a ‘left-brain’ condition. People with a diagnosis of ASD tend to function better in familiar situations, they are often more inclined to divide the world (and the things in it) into categories or type, and can have, or appear to have, superficial emotions. They often struggle to view the ‘bigger picture’, understand implicit metaphorical language, or maintain complex social relationships. The list goes on.
However, the more I thought about it, the more I became convinced that, while the similarities must be more than coincidence, the relationship between the two is much more complicated. McGilchrist hints at this potential complexity in The Master and His Emissary, even if he does not discuss ASD in great detail. He suggests that, in relation to ‘some forms of autism and Asperger’s Syndrome’ there may be ‘a partial inversion of the standard [left-right brain hemisphere operational] pattern, leading to brain functions being lateralised in unconventional combinations’.
I have always struggled with metaphorical language – and while I have learnt to understand and use it in prose, much of the symbolism found in poetry is lost on me. I am also inclined to rigid thinking, and the emotions I feel tend to be relatively simplistic and superficial.
So far, so left-hemisphere.
But then there’s the fact that listening to music is one of the most important things in my life, and the experience of it transcends cognitive thought. I’ve never been overly interested in understanding the structure of a piece of music, and I’m not usually fussed by listening to lyrics (quite often I don’t even hear them but experience the voice as another instrument). It’s the embodied experience of listening that I crave. And while many of my emotions tend to be quite simple, I experience empathy in such a deep way that I sometimes joke it is pathological. All of which seems decidedly right-hemisphere.
My ASD diagnosis suggests that I require ‘little support’ with my day-to-day living, which is largely true. Therefore, it might be assumed that these apparent right-hemisphere anomalies are specific to me. That they are only present because my autism is ‘mild’. This, however, doesn’t seem to be the case
There is a growing body of research which suggests that many children with autism, some of which have very limited communication skills, respond remarkably well to music, and through it are better able to express their emotions to others. It has also been shown to help facilitate the acquisition of language in those who did not previously demonstrate it (those who have read The Master and His Emissary will recall the significance of this to a part of his thesis).
And while there is a wide-spread assumption that people with ASD do not have the ability to feel empathy, this, as my experience suggests, is also not necessarily the case. In fact, the very opposite may sometimes be true. According to The National Autistic Society:
“Autistic people can and do feel empathy. They can be more empathetic or emotionally aware than non-autistic people”.
I often have the sense that I feel empathy more acutely than those around me, sometimes feeling deep empathy for people whom others judge to be undeserving of it. For example, if a news report comes on the TV about a child that has been killed by a drunk driver, I experience deep empathy, concern, and sadness for all involved – including the driver. On occasions when I’ve mentioned this, I’ve noticed that people can become quite angry, as if I should choose where my empathy is directed. Of course, my deepest feelings are felt for the child and the child’s family, but I am also intuitively aware that the driver’s life has also been ruined because he or she has made one bad decision. I see no conflict in being resolute in my belief that the driver should be held responsible for their actions while also extending my empathy towards them. I don’t know why I respond this way because it is entirely involuntary. Perhaps it comes from a lifetime of learning to ‘read’ other people. Consciously trying to ‘put myself in their shoes’ so that I might understand them better. These are things that come naturally to most people at an early age but take significant and purposeful effort for someone with ASD. It could be a case of ‘practice makes perfect’ (not that I’m claiming perfection).
McGilchrist has yet to explore these issues in detail, although I believe he has hinted that he will explore them further in his next book. All I have been able to do here is reflect on the similarities I have noticed, relating them to my own experience, and to the recent thinking about aspects of ASD. Whether McGilchrist will reinforce my conclusions or not is unknown, but I eagerly await the chance to find out.
In terms of practising the Middle Way, autism comes with specific challenges: rigidity of thought, difficulties with metaphorical language, and other features common to left-hemisphere activity. There also seem to be traits that are obviously useful, such as a rich, embodied response to music, and a strong sense of empathy (be that instinctive or learnt).
Engagement with Middle Way Philosophy has enabled me to explore those aspects of my personality that seem like they could be barriers to it. In doing so, I’ve learnt to utilise those traits in increasingly helpful ways; by directing rigidity of thought towards avoiding dogmatic extremes, for example. On paper, it might seem that autism and the Middle Way are incompatible, as if the left-hemisphere has too firm a grip to allow meaningful progress, but this is not the case. If anything, they can complement each other. The things that make me autistic have created challenges, in life as in my pursuit of the Middle Way, yet they have also been beneficial and enriching. Being diagnosed with autism has helped me understand myself, the Middle Way has helped me understand my autism, and in turn autism has helped me embrace the Middle Way.
Image One by SplitShire. Image Two by giorgio9377. Image Three by GDJ. Image Four by ElisaRiva. All courtesy of Pixabay.
The next main meeting of the Middle Way Network will be on Sun 11th October 2020 at 7pm UK time on Zoom. This is the second of a series of three talks and discussions focusing on the nature of Middle Way practice: that is, how we can create the conditions for better judgement overcoming conflict in the long-term. We will be looking in turn at the integration of desire, meaning and belief as interdependent aspects of practice, linked to a potentially wide range of specific practices including meditation, the arts, and critical thinking.
There’ll be a short talk on practice as integration of meaning, followed by questions, then discussion in regionalised breakout groups. Some other regionalised groups will meet at other times. If you’re interested in joining us but are not already part of the Network, please see the general Network page to sign up. To catch up on the previous session, on integration of desire, please see this post.
Practice and the Integration of Meaning
Integration of meaning is important to Middle Way practice, because it provides us with the resources we need to draw on (in the development of synaptic links in our brains or associative awareness in our minds, to consider new alternative beliefs. To be able to think differently from the absolute assumptions we may have fallen into, we need to develop the capacity to think differently by understanding and relating to alternative symbols.
It is likely that we already engage in some practices that help to integrate meaning – for instance the arts, education, reading. However, recognising their role helps us to value these practices sufficiently, and see how they inter-relate to other aspects of the process of integration.
Other resources
There is already an introductory video (22 mins) on integration of meaning as part of Middle Way Philosophy, which is embedded below. You might like to watch this for an initial orientation before the session. This is relatively long and detailed in comparison to some of the other introductory videos we have used. A somewhat different approach will be taken in the session.
Here is the video from the actual Network meeting stimulus:
Suggested discussion questions
1. Give your own examples of integration of meaning that you have developed in the past: these could be internal or external, predominantly cognitive or predominantly emotive.
2. Have you ever experienced temporary integration of meaning? How did you benefit from it?
3. In what ways do you increase your stock of symbols?
4. In what sorts of situation in your experience would it be helpful to clarify, and how would this add to integration of meaning?
5. In what ways could tolerance of ambiguity help you to integrate meaning, and in what sorts of circumstances do you most need to practise it?
Suggested further reading
Migglism section 4, ‘The Arts’
Middle Way Philosophy 3: The Integration of Meaning. (See this link for a summary, this link for full text as part of the Omnibus edition)
The Meaning of the Body by Mark Johnson (University of Chicago Press, 2007) on the embodied meaning approach
The next main meeting of the Middle Way Network will be on Sun 27th September at 7pm UK time on Zoom. This is the first of a series of three talks and discussions focusing on the nature of Middle Way practice: that is, how we can create the conditions for better judgement overcoming conflict in the long-term. We will be looking in turn at the integration of desire, meaning and belief as interdependent aspects of practice, linked to a potentially wide range of specific practices including meditation, the arts, and critical thinking.
There’ll be a short talk on practice as integration of belief, followed by questions, then discussion in regionalised breakout groups. Some other regionalised groups will meet at other times. If you’re interested in joining us but are not already part of the Network, please see the general Network page to sign up. To catch up on the previous session, on integration in general, please see this post.
There is already an introductory video (18 mins) on integration of desire as part of Middle Way Philosophy, which is embedded below. You might like to watch this for an initial orientation before the session. This is slightly longer than the other introductory videos we’ve had so far, but it goes through some key ideas carefully in a way that there probably won’t be time for in the stimulus talk. It is mainly about cake!
Here is the video from the actual talk on 27th Sept 2020:
Practice and the Integration of Desire
The integration of desire is a way of thinking about practice that can help us to bridge the gap that is too often assumed between our “biological urges” and our “values” or “better natures”. Too often, “ethics” has consisted in telling people to repress their desires in the service of a “higher”, sometimes socially-sanctioned, sometimes “rational” rule. In the longer term, this doesn’t work, because repressed desires have a habit of coming back and re-asserting themselves. That seems to happen just as much at the socio-political level (repressing other groups) as it does at individual level (repressing basic desires). We need a better model of moral practice than merely one of rule-following, and the integration model offers one. Such an alternative model can also be symbolically inspired in the stories of the Buddha by his recognition that asceticism (denying and repressing desire) does not work, and him turning instead to the Middle Way.
Meditation is probably also a basic practice in which we can directly experience how integration of desire is possible, at least on a temporary basis. Simply by relaxing our bodies sufficiently, we can sometimes put what at first seemed overwhelming conflicts in a bigger perspective. Other embodied disciplines, such as yoga or tai chi, may have a similar effect. However, to overcome conflicts of desire in the longer-term we need to also address fragmentation of meaning and conflict of belief, which are the subjects of the following two sessions.
Some suggested reflection questions:
1. Which kinds of desires do you most often experience as conflicting?
2. How could those desires be integrated?
Suggested further reading
Migglism section 4: ‘Integrating Theory and Practice’ and ‘Meditation’
Middle Way Philosophy 2: The Integration of Desire
For a summary of this book by section see this webpage. For full text see Researchgate.
For discussion of the issues in relation to Buddhism, see The Buddha’s Middle Way 1.e (on the Buddha’s renunciation of asceticism) and 6.c (on craving).
The next main meeting of the Middle Way Network will be on Sun 13th September at 7pm UK time on Zoom. This is the fifth of the series looking successively at five principles of the Middle Way (scepticism, provisionality, incrementality, agnosticism and integration), followed by three levels of practice (desire, meaning and belief).
There’ll be a short talk on integration, followed by questions, then discussion in regionalised breakout groups. Some other regionalised groups will meet at other times. If you’re interested in joining us but are not already part of the Network, please see the general Network page to sign up. To catch up on the previous session, on agnosticism, please see this post.
There is already a short introductory video (9 mins) on integration as part of Middle Way Philosophy, which is embedded below. You might like to watch this for an initial orientation before the session.
Integration
Integration is the process by which conflicting desires, meanings and beliefs can be reconciled. It is central to the Middle Way, because it is absolute beliefs that prevent different desires being integrated and thus maintain conflict. We can see how absolutisation creates conflict in all sorts of contexts, from an individual trying to give up smoking to a global conflict between nations. In all cases, it is the ability to reframe the assumptions with which conflicting beliefs are based (as in the story of the two mules on the video), that makes it possible to reconcile these conflicts. A basic attitude is required of reconciling ourselves with our shadows (hated objects) rather than merely trying to eliminate them.
Integration thus forms the basic framework for Middle Way practice that can change our conditions of judgement over a period of time. There are three levels of integrative practice, each of which will be discussed in more detail in the next three stimulus sessions: integration of desire, that unites conflicting desires in the immediate situation; integration of meaning that makes it possible for conflicting selves or people to communicate; and integration of belief that questions our frameworks of assumption and seeks better, more adequate ones. Mindfulness, the arts and critical thinking provide examples of key practices at each level.
Some suggested reflection questions:
Suggested further reading:
Migglism ch.2, fifth section ‘Integration’
Middle Way Philosophy 1, section 6: summarised here, full text available here.
Middle Way Philosophy volumes 2, 3 and 4 give a much more detailed account of the different levels of integration. These can all be found in the Middle Way Philosophy Omnibus.
The Buddha’s Middle Way 3.g: Integration: The Wet Piece of Wood