these questions were based on the article
"The Conscious, Subconscious, and Unconscious,
a New Look at an Old Metaphor."
This Week's Questions
[posed by David A.]
Do you know?
[Question 1] What occurs when a parent is overprotective and attempts to keep a child before age three from getting injured?
Does this sound cold? It's not. Especially if you realize what would happen to a child if he or she were protected from all injury. To understand this, we need to consider the basics of human consciousness, both before and after being injured and healing.
First, remember the experiential mechanisms of both injury and healing. The experiential mechanism of injury in humans of all ages is  hyperawareness,  being startled, and  going into shock. The experiential mechanism of healing is  hyperawareness,  emergence, and  amazement.
Next remember how states of consciousness determine vulnerability to injury. What I mean is, a child's vulnerability for any given situation is based on whether this child has ever been injured and healed in this situation. For example, say we are talking about the phrase, "stop it." If a child has never been startled by this phrase, then he or she will be vulnerable to injury each and every time this child hears this phrase. We call this "never-injured" state, being "naively conscious."
Now say a baby gets wounded by hearing this phrase. At this point, the child will no longer be able to be wounded by this phrase, as hearing this phrase would put the child in shock. Here, we call the state in which the child experiences the phrase as being in "wounded consciousness."
In other words, in any given situation, once a child is wounded, they are always wounded in this situation. At least, until this injury is healed. In other words, once a child is wounded, the child is protected from being wounded again in this particular situation. Why? Because reliving the wound puts the child into shock, and being in shock prevents the child from becoming hyperaware.
In effect, the child has become unable to consciously witness this particular event and so, is now protected from further injury by being in the state of wounded consciousness.
Finally, say a baby has been wounded by hearing the phrase "stop it" and has also emerged from this wound. In this case, the baby is not only protected from further injury, but also, will experience delight each and every time this event occurs. Why? Because the baby has been programmed with both the shock of the initial wounding event and also with the amazement of the healing event. These two experiences taken together then mean the baby experiences this event in what is called, "tempered consciousness." Which is to say, the baby will never be vulnerable to this injury again and in addition, will experience delight when hearing this phrase for the rest of his or her life.
My point is, should a parent completely prevent a child from all injury, then this child would arrive into adulthood still as vulnerable to injury as a new born baby. This is similar to the idea of how protecting a child from disease by raising the child in a bubble would result in greater vulnerability to disease, not less vulnerability. Not exactly a desirable a state in which to spend adulthood.
Moreover, since both injury and healing progressively affect peoples' personalities as time goes on, the ideal situation would be for a parent to see and heal injuries in their child as soon as possible. This would then allow the child to experience the maximum amount of positive and protected personality development.
Said in other words, while protecting a child is a parent's duty, overprotecting a child causes many undesirable outcomes, including the inhibition of "tempered consciousness."
[Question 2] Why do some people feel less stressed after meditating?
Stress reduction is directly related to time spent either in Layers 10 / 9 or in Layer 1. No time spent in these Layers, no stress reduction.
Thus, spending time in either end of the Onion reduces stress. More important, spending time in these two ends of the Onion represents the two basic philosophies underlying all styles of meditation; vapasana (meditation for insight) and transcendental (meditation for restoration).
Granted, what I'm saying here is a gross over simplification. Even so, vapasana style meditations involve Layers 7 / 8/ 9 / 10. Transcendental meditations involve going from 7 outwards to Layer 1. Thus, the philosophy of vapasana style meditations is to go into the suffering and be with it, while the philosophy of transcendental meditations is to rise above the suffering and in doing so, regain strength.
Of course, practicing both styles of meditation can be stressful in and of themselves, especially for those who take them seriously. Outcome wise, though, the goal of vapasana style meditations is "insight," which in effect, means healing. The goal of transcendental meditations is to "rise above" the suffering of life and in doing so, recoup the strength which has been lost though this suffering.
The main difference, of course, then lies in the duration of the potential stress reduction, at least in theory. Thus, while transcendental style meditations can lead to temporary stress reduction, vapasana style meditations can lead to permanent stress reduction. At the same time, while transcendental style meditations are in and of themselves less stressful, while vapasana style meditations can be very stressful.
As for your question, "why do some people feel less stressed after meditating, the answer is simple. The stress reduction is directly related to the time spent in an end of the Onion.
[Question 3] What happens to the before age three child whose parents totally neglect to protect them from injury?
Realize too that children in our country rarely experience a childhood in which they experience total neglect. Thus, while is does happen, even a child whose parents seriously neglect them will in all likelihood have a teacher, minister, a relative, or neighbor who does end up being there for them. This, in fact, happened to my sister Teresa at age sixteen, and the family who helped her changed her whole life.
[Question 4] Can a parent prevent an injury to his child, as it is happening, by intervening at the "getting startled" point? In fact, can the parent change where the child is looking and in doing so, help the child to connect through eye contact, thereby avoiding point (3) going into shock?
[Question 5] If a stage hypnotist can program a person much like injury, what is the sequence of events that makes this happen? From the audience point of view.
Consciousness wise then, when people get hypnotized, they end up in the same state of consciousness as people who experience during an emergency or a sudden event; the state of "hyperawareness."
Of course, where the two experiences differ is in how they turn out. In effect, this difference hinges on how suddenly the programming occurs. In theory, then, should a hypnotist program a person suddenly, this could permanently injure a person. Usually, though, the hypnotist is gentle and considerate and stays connected to the person. This prevents and protects the person from being injured, as in, no startle, no injury.
On the other hand, consider how hypnotists bring a person out of the trance state. Often, they do something sudden, like snapping fingers or clapping hands. Should this startle the person, it could potentially program the person for life with an "injured" response. This is why better hypnotists rely on techniques which cause the person to gradually come out of the trance state rather than to suddenly come out of it.
[Question 6] How do we stay connected to our children for an extended period of time?
[Question 7] Why do some parents hold their children when they cry?
[Question 8] Why do some parents let their children cry themselves to sleep?
I can say this though. Children's crying is a whole language in and of itself. This makes learning to interpret all the possible cries a child can make is probably one of the most important tasks of parenthood.
[Question 9] Do some children not want to fall asleep because they fear disconnection?
In reality, the answer to your question is so complex that to assume any simple answer would be to reduce childhood to a mere mechanistic system of reason.
Even Newton didn't do that.
[Question 10] If that is the case, what can we as parents do to help our children fall asleep alone?
How can I be sure this actually happened? I am not sure. Moreover, I don't care if it literally happened. I only care that having this scene emerge healed my most painful injury.
As for preventing this injury in children, I'm not so sure we can or even, if we should. However, you can minimize this injury by allowing a child to attach to a transitional being, such as to a teddy bear or a "blankie."