The Mindful Migraine

OK, so today’s post includes a little adventure into four anecdotes from philosophy before applying the ideas to concepts of health and wellbeing. It’s a bit of a mind-stretch, so I won’t be sad if your pain-brain choses to give it a miss and you come visit me another day…

*

First up:  Schrödinger’s Cat – a philosophical thought experiment – and it’s not very pleasant if you’re a cat-lover, so apologies in advance – but remember, no cats were harmed in real life. 

Erwin Schrödinger (1887-1961), wondered if it was possible for a creature to be both alive and dead at the same time. To challenge his query, he invented a HYPOTHETICAL test.  In his imaginary experiment, a cat was placed in a large box which is then sealed shut.  A tube is then placed into the corner of the box and a toxic gas is pumped into the box.  At some point, the gas will reach a critical level which prevents the cat from being able to breathe and it will pass away.

Because the box is solid, rather than see-through, there is no way to know at precisely which point in the experiment the cat dies.  At any given moment, therefore, the cat is hypothetically, dead or alive… dead AND alive.  Because reality cannot be verified – both (opposing) conditions have the potential to be simultaneously true.

Secondly: the American philosopher Willard Van Orman Quine wrote a work called “Word and Object” (1960) which looked at ontological relativism, or in normal language; the way words can mean more than one thing, and meaning isn’t always assured.  In Quine’s book, he gives the example of a mountain in the Himalayas: an explorer “has learned to apply ‘Everest’ to a distant mountain seen from Tibet and ‘Gaurisanker’ to [the same] one seen from Nepal” (1979, 49). [He then goes on to acknowledge he might have the terms mixed up – highlighting that fixed meaning is uncertain.]

Same mountain – two different perspectives – two different names – both simultaneously (in)correct.

Thirdly: yet another philosopher, this time a philosopher of ‘deconstructivism’ called Jacques Derrida, who was also interested in the inherent ambiguity of language.  He coined the phrase “(con)fusion” to describe how we put ideas about a subject together in a manner which may (or may not) lead to a hypothetically correct answer shared with others.  In his essay “White Mythology” (which explores metaphysics) he writes a complicated passage about a flower: “a flower always bears within itself its own double, whether it be the seed or the type, the chance of its program or the necessity of its diagram. The heliotrope may always raise itself up. And it may always become a dried flower in a book” (1974, 74).

The idea (I believe) is that a single flower can exist right here, right now, in this present moment, BUT ALSO contain its (genetic) past, and a future version of itself (by way of its seeds).  If the flower were to be pressed in a book, then it would be both dead and squashed, but, it would retain its potency as a symbol of itself.  Press a flower from your wedding bouquet, and that shriveled, flattened flower loses its bloom but not its magic.

Fourthly: One last foray into the world of relativism with one more thought experiment… this time by an architectural historian called Juan Bonta, who quotes Luis J Prieto.  He imagines an island of primitive people, who once discovered, appear to worship a particular flower for its magical healing properties.  A doctor who visits the island would be interested in the flower’s medicinal properties.  An anthropologist, on the other hand, would be curious to understand the background of the situation. “The doctor is interested in what the plant is; the anthropologist is interested in what it means to people” (1979, 13).

The plant remains the same, but the focus shifts depending on the investigator’s priorities.

So putting it all together – it is possible that a single thing can be interpreted in more than one way, sometimes opposite ways, sometimes simultaneously.

If I hold up a playing card to face you, I’ll see the pattern on the back of the card, but you’ll see a 5 of Spades, 3 of Clubs, or Queen of Hearts… we’re both right, but we both seem wrong to each other.  Two realities co-exist.

What then does this have to do with a migraine blog?

As someone with chronic migraine, there are times that I feel as if I am alive, but not really living. I once described how it is to live with a (dis)ablitly.  Some days I feel sick, some days well, some days a mixture of both.  I’m pretty much, permanently “(un)well”.  Perhaps it was the clarity of my message, (or the tshirt my blogger-friend Edward encouraged me to buy), but whatever the reason, that (dis)ability post had the highest interaction of anything on LinkedIn (until they cancelled my account for reasons unknown (but probably because I used “x” as my last name!)). 

The idea that we can be both struggling AND capable – sometimes in the same day – resonated with a lot of people. 

And because it resonates with readers, I think about it all the time, and wonder if there are other ways I can use the idea to explain to people what it is like to live with chronic pain, or what is often called a “dynamic disability” – one which is intermittent (like a migraine) but which significantly impacts functionality when it arrives.

That’s how, when I was editing my PhD dissertation (I’m so close to being all done!), I realized that a big part of my thesis is about avoiding polarized ideas and embracing ambiguity instead.  All of the authors noted above, except Schrödinger and his ill-fated kitty-cat, make an appearance in my PhD. 

Not only do I live a (dis)abled life – and embrace it – I essentially advocate a form of similar living for everyone in order to increase their creativity.

I realized that so many of my posts encourage you to recognize a middle ground in your routines, like Goldilocks, or challenge routines (such as the dream advice from Julius-Caesar). I advocate prioritizing self-care but not to spend too much time over-nurturing yourself at the expense of others…

Over and over, my posts seem to imagine a world where Schrödinger’s glow-in-the-dark cat might be chillin’ with some flowers on Mt Everest-Gaurisanker, but not at the pinnacle… oh no… it ought to be somewhere ambiguously close to halfway up… halfway down…

Take care taking care, and stay curious, Linda x

PS – sorry if this post was a bit of a brain-overload, but well done for making it to the end, clever you…!!