![]() A cogent theory of self should take into consideration aspects from both of these two standpoints, helping individuals to be more flexible ( Falkenström, 2003). In effect, neither theoretical position should be favored over the other: overemphasizing the approach of Buddhist psychology may bring about an impairment of an individual’s self-conception, while focusing disproportionately on self-entity could lead to the formation and fantasy of self-stability ( Rubin, 1996). It is undeniably important to develop continuity, identity, and an ongoing sense of self for all who suffer from pathological disturbances in their subjective sense of selfhood yet, under Buddhist psychology, it is equally clear that adhering to a sense of personal continuity and self-identity results in chronic discontent and psychic conflict ( Engler, 1984 Rubin, 2013). As a result, there appears to be a fundamental paradox in current clinical practice. Thus, according to Buddhism, people should let go of as many attachments as possible, which are very difficult to give up in actuality. However, Buddhist teachings maintain that the self is an illusion that is truly the cause of much of our suffering. ![]() ![]() Social-cognitive approaches to the self, as well as clinical practice, teach people that it is important to expend much energy solidifying and bolstering their sense of self, (re)-establishing secure attachments, as well as promoting self-esteem. It seems self-evident that perceptually, “I am the mind and the mind is I” ( Chan, 2008). For most people, the self refers to the things immediately connected to their body, and more importantly to their mind. In modern Western psychology, the self is constructed as a definable knowable entity with particular characteristics, universal needs, and somewhat predictable developmental thrusts ( Sedikides and Spencer, 2007 Chan, 2008 Donner, 2010). This differs from some schools of Western psychology in considering the concept of the self, though in some descriptions there are many similarities ( McIntosh, 1997). The central tenet of Buddhist psychology with respect to the self is that of “no self,” which posits that there is no unchangeable self. More generally, we suggest that the mindful self may also be an applicable concept with which to describe and predict the higher level of self-development of those who grow up in the culture of Buddhism or regularly engage in meditation over a long period of time.īuddhist psychology is largely focused on analyzing and understanding the nature of the self, and many positive effects of meditative practice based on Buddhist psychology have been documented by researchers interested in self-processes ( Gallagher and Shear, 1999). We further posit that the mindful self will be an important intermediary between mindfulness intervention and mental health problems, and an important moderator in promoting well-being. The mindful self is conceptualized as a mindfulness-enlightened self-view and attitude developed by internalizing and integrating the essence of Buddhist psychology into one’s self-system. Accordingly, we introduce a new concept-the “mindful self”-and compare it with related psychological constructs to describe the positive changes in self-attitude associated with mindfulness meditation practices or interventions. Our review of empirical research reveals that positive changes in attitudes toward the self and others as a result of mindfulness-enabled practices can play an important role in modulating many mental and physical health problems. This paper analyzes studies of mindfulness and the self, with the aim of deepening our understanding of the potential benefits of mindfulness and meditation for mental health and well-being. 3School of Psychology, Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing, China. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |