I have a friend who teaches psychology. Let’s call him Dr. since he has a Ph.D. in psychology. The Dr. is an okay guy. Nice enough, friendly and a little quirky. He’s a hybrid of Bart Simpson and Alfalfa.
The Dr. is a good illustration for knowing vs. knowing; knowledge vs. knowledge; and understanding vs. understanding.
Let me explain –
The Dr. has an in-depth knowledge of psychology, he knows a lot about it, he understands it enough to teach it. But the Dr.’s knowledge, knowing and understanding is mostly mental or intellectual. He relates to his emotions from an intellectual orientation.
The fact that he relates to them says a lot about the situation. He doesn’t live them or embody them. He understands them intellectually. The richness of knowing them intimately is missing from his experience. They are not integrated into his experience in a way that deepens his lived sense of the human experience.
His understanding of the human psyche is also limited by his intellectual position. He knows all the buzz words, but doesn’t feel a personal curiosity or challenge around exploring the deeper dimensions of the self. He understands things clearly.
The Dr.’s life is a little bit of a mess. He struggles with success and relationships. His knowing, knowledge and understanding of psychology gets in his way. It’s a defense against a significant aspect of the human condition – vulnerability.
He uses his knowing, knowledge and understanding as a means to try and control his life and events around him. A large part of this is trying to control his emotions.
The whole thing is in the way of knowing, knowledge and understanding.
[ad#post468]