Wisdom Notes on Philosophy

The Flow of Thought

The links in the table on the left take you to sub-headings on this page.

Thought flows through the mind in two main ways, which represent the influences of dialectics and abreaction. These ways have a profound effect on human nature and the beliefs and values by which a person evolves his /her character. 

First of all, I begin with the concept of dialectics, and use it in the Hegelian sense. Dialectics represents a movement of thought through three stages. First there is the opening idea, the thesis; then thought switches to the opposite conception, the antithesis. Finally both stages are blended together in the third stage, the synthesis. For example, in moral ideas, if the thesis is a concept of goodness then the antithesis is a concept of badness. If the thesis represents some badness, the antithesis is that of some goodness. The synthesis is the resolution of the conflict.

Secondly, I introduce my understanding of the process of abreaction. The term abreaction was first thought up by ancient Greek dramatists to describe the purging or cathartic effect that the release of emotion gives. It was a major influence on Sigmund Freud. However, neither the ancient Greeks nor Freud fully understood abreaction. They saw only the initial response and not the consequences. Abreaction is actually a flow of different emotions, and it takes several forms. The overall effect is to release anxiety from the subconscious mind.[¹].

What I have found is that some particular emotions are linked together to form four kinds of invariable sequence, which are ways in which the unconscious mind operates. These sequences link together positive emotions with negative ones, or happiness with unhappiness. I give the name abreaction to these sequences. The two main ones are the abreaction of guilt and the abreaction of pride. The first sequence links excitement to guilt and resentment, and the second one links sorrow and sadness to bitterness. 

Character Change

Now I can link dialectics and abreaction together as a means of explaining character change. A person’s evolutionary journey through life is always dialectical. To understand this statement, consider the effects of abreaction on a person.

First, the Abreaction of Guilt
This is the sequence: narcissism, then jealousy, then guilt, and finally resentment. The sequence starts when the person becomes excited about some desire or idea: excitement indicates that the current emotion is narcissism. As the sequence runs its course, eventually the person becomes resentful or frustrated about that same desire or idea. So initially we have the excitement, and then we have the resentment that opposes it. Finally we have the steady state of detachment when the contents of the excitement and the resentment phases no longer currently interest us. I consider this abreactive process to be a dialectical one.

Secondly, the Abreaction of Pride
The sequence begins with jealousy (which produces sorrow and sadness), then switches to narcissism (we now feel good after we have had a cry), then pride, and finally bitterness. So first there is the sorrow, then the bitterness which is the eventual reaction to it. Finally there is the detachment. This abreaction is a dialectical one as well.

These ideas mean that abreaction generates dialectical change. Abreaction releases anxiety from the subconscious mind during the process of character transformation, and this release occurs by an oscillation between states of mind. Therefore the process of character transformation is a dialectical one. Each person follows his own dialectical path as he encounters, and learns to surmount, the difficulties of living on Earth. A dialectical path means that whatever problems a person has, his particular path must provide an answer to those problems. Out of a negative situation must arise a positive one, whence the person can then synthesise them together so as to reach a higher understanding. By learning from his mistakes so the person discovers what is right for him.

A standard aphorism that encapsulates this view is: that by which man falls, is that by which man rises.

What abreaction demonstrates is the uncontrolled oscillation between states of mind whilst a person is doing intellectual work. Sometimes he will feel good about his work, leading him to explore some fresh avenues of thought. Some time later he will feel bad about the same work, and perhaps reject the new issues he has just been thinking about. Sometimes he can write for hours at an end, and at other times his creativity dries up (resentment and bitterness always hinder, and even stop, creativity). When reviewing another person’s work, he may be generous with his praise at one time, whilst at another time he may be extravagant in his repudiation of it.

Two Identities

Now I bring in the idea that a person consists of two basic psychological orientations or identities. Sometimes he explores his own individuality, being content to be on his own, and sometimes he prefers to work with groups. He or she has an individual identity as well as a social identity. Or, in different words, an individual consciousness and a social consciousness. Usually they function like a see-saw. When one identity is conscious and dominant, the other one is then subconscious. When any kind of thought is current in the conscious identity, the opposite thought (the antithesis) is often current in the subconscious identity.

The two identities of the person are always inter-acting because of the process of abreaction. Abreaction itself is a dialectical process, and so the person experiences a dialectical dialogue between his /her two identities.

The content of abreaction is a desire or a suggestion, and the person experiences different emotional responses to the desire or suggestion (corresponding to the different stages of the process of abreaction – each stage is based on a different emotion, and this produces its own particular response). This form of dialectical activity is an automatic function of the mind, and so it is an aspect of determinism.

However, a different form of dialectical activity occurs when aspirations or ideals are made the subject of consciousness. Significant or important aspirations or ideals are usually more long-term than desires, but the process is the same overall.

Aspirations (and desires) are channelled through concepts in order to be expressed. Consider the hustle and bustle of an important concept, a concept that influences a person’s life. Such a concept has value to the person. As a person’s understanding of some aspect of life changes, so too the value that he puts on relevant concepts will change in tandem. So concepts have a dialectical existence – both the good (the thesis) and the bad (the antithesis) valuations of them are experienced before they are assimilated (the synthesis). This form of dialectical activity revolves around values, and so it is characteristic of the person or the two identities.

Aspirations (and desires) follow concepts. Therefore aspirations are dialectical in their activity. There is the repetitive sequence: presence of aspiration, frustration of aspiration, and the resolution of the conflict. The aspirations change themselves through the resolutions. For example, consider the concept of power. An unsophisticated valuation of power will make it desirable. If experience then makes this aspiration (the thesis) turn sour, then powerlessness (the antithesis) may become attractive. Eventually, when power is seen in a more realistic light (the synthesis), then a more skilful valuation of it can emerge.

This form of idealistic process, which is independent of determinism, I call the dialectical consciousness.
When any particular thought is not important to the person, then the conflict between the thesis and antithesis (or the conscious mind and the subconscious mind) is not usually noticed, and so there is no impetus to resolve the conflict.

Short Summary

The process of thought creates a dialectical movement of consciousness between the two identities of a person, and this takes two forms.

• One form (that of desire) is an aspect of the mind, and so is deterministic in its effects.


• The other form (that of aspiration) is an aspect of personal values, and so reflects some degree of choice.

This separation between desire and aspiration is rather an ideal separation. Often there may be little difference between them. However, it is a way of indicating that sometimes the process of thought can be quite deterministic, whilst at other times personal choice can be the important factor.

The above ideas mean that I now add dialectics to relativity in my categorisation of human nature. A person is part relative, part dialectical in his /her being. I use these ideas for deriving the true nature of relativity.

[¹]. My articles on Abreaction are on the Home page.[1]

Copyright © 2026 Ian Heath
All Rights Reserved

The copyright is mine, and the articles are free to use. They can be reproduced
anywhere, so long as the source is acknowledged.