While vocalization during pain (e.g., saying “ow” or screaming) has been studied and shown to potentially increase pain tolerance, the psychological mechanisms and efficacy of internal vocalization (subvocalization or “silent screaming”) during acute pain episodes remain largely unexplored. This represents a significant gap in our understanding of cognitive pain management strategies.
Previous research has established that subvocalization involves micro-movements of the larynx and speech organs that are typically imperceptible without specialized equipment. These internal speech processes have been extensively studied in reading contexts but rarely in pain management applications.
Becky Kennedy’s approach to parenting has resonated with countless families seeking connection-based strategies that honor both parent authority and children’s emotional experiences. Her book presents a thoughtful framework centered on seeing children as “good inside” while offering practical strategies for common parenting challenges. However, when viewed through the lens of Patty Wipfler’s Hand in Hand Parenting, several significant limitations emerge in Kennedy’s methodology that merit careful examination.
Kennedy’s work has gained particular traction within the Internal Family Systems (IFS) community due to her innovative application of IFS concepts to everyday parenting challenges. Her framework extends Richard Schwartz’s pioneering model into parenting, discussing how parents can recognize and respond to different parts of their children’s emotional experiences. This adaptation of IFS principles to parenting has earned Kennedy significant recognition, including a formal endorsement from Schwartz himself, who praised her ability to translate complex therapeutic concepts into accessible parenting strategies.
On a rainy Tuesday afternoon in early March, I found myself hunched over not one but two versions of James P. Carse’s philosophical masterpiece, The Religious Case Against Belief. The first—dog-eared and coffee-stained—was Carse’s original 2008 publication. The second—pristine and unauthorized—was a dramatically condensed edition that has been stirring controversy in religious and publishing circles alike.
The unauthorized second edition, prepared by software engineer and religious studies enthusiast Joshua Pritikin, has been described as both “literary vandalism” and “an act of spiritual generosity,” depending on whom you ask. Released without Penguin Random House’s permission, it reduces Carse’s dense philosophical prose by nearly half. Entire chapters have vanished. Technical passages have been recast in simpler language.
A complex array of motivations drives dishonesty. They include: financial gain, self-preservation, social approval, ethical dilemmas, cognitive biases, and fear of punishment. Men are often more dishonest than women.1 Cultural and social factors also shape attitudes towards honesty.2
Dishonesty in a relationship creates several challenges:
Erosion of trust: Trust is a fundamental building block of any healthy relationship. When one party in the relationship is dishonest, it erodes the trust that the relationship has amassed over time. Rebuilding trust can be a long and difficult process.
Emotional toll: Being lied to or discovering dishonesty can be emotionally devastating. It can lead to feelings of betrayal, hurt, anger, and insecurity. Coping with these emotions can be exhausting and challenging, making it difficult to move forward in the relationship.
Communication breakdown: Open and honest communication is essential in any relationship. When dishonesty is present, it disrupts communication because it is hard to know what to believe or how to address the issue.
Questioning reality: When someone is consistently dishonest, it can make their partner question their own perception of reality. This gaslighting effect can be mentally and emotionally destabilizing.
Fear of recurrence: Once dishonesty shatters trust, a lingering fear may remain that it will happen again. This fear can be a barrier to true emotional intimacy and can lead to ongoing stress and anxiety in the relationship.
Decision-making dilemmas: When dishonesty comes to light, individuals in the relationship may face difficult decisions. They must consider whether they can forgive, rebuild trust, and move forward, or if it’s best to end the relationship altogether. These decisions can be complex and emotionally fraught.
To explore different ways to address dishonesty, imagine a fictional scenario.
Suppose Alice and Bob are in a relationship.
Alice got pregnant via Bob but tells Bob that she isn’t pregnant.
Carlos is Alice’s platonic friend.
There are a variety of ways that Bob and Carlos can address Alice’s dishonesty.
Abstract: The use of psychedelics in therapy may benefit both the client and the facilitator, and there is a debate about whether facilitators should have personal experience with the substance. While some traditions expect the facilitator to partake in the same dose as the participants, modern medicine expects the facilitator to remain sober. Facilitator sobriety is important to attend to the risks associated with psychedelic use, while communal use of the substance may increase empathy and compassion. Further research is needed to determine the circumstances in which facilitator sobriety or communal use is appropriate.
March 21, 2025
