Suffering From The Perspective Of Phenomenology

Suffering from the perspective of phenomenology

Phenomenology is but what is now called descriptive psychology. The phenomenology that precedes Kant, Fichte and Hegel. It is practically based on the description of the mind, but also on the description of the phenomena, from the experience formed by feelings and hence the experiences that are experienced. In short, a description of phenomena, from the perspective of experiences and experiences.

Suffering, as well as its relief, are main issues that have been studying throughout the history of philosophy and psychology; The suffering will be defined in a different way, according to the perspective where it is interpreted. Any approach to the phenomenon of suffering presumes elements related to metaphysics, cultural, methodological, philosophical and psychological aspects.

The intention to describe suffering as a phenomenon, is nothing but to discover its mechanisms, to know those elements that constitute it and that is what triggers it, focusing mainly on the thought of Anthony de Mello, where it mentions precisely of psychological suffering, To have a better understanding of suffering itself, that is, to make a phenomenology of suffering, which means studying the phenomenon of suffering as as it is experienced by the person, from their subjectivity.

Although it is aware that the issue of suffering is so extensive that it is impossible to limit it or limit it to a single explanation, since the phenomenon of suffering can be explained from multiple perspectives and based on this you can build an idea that defines it.

Anthony de Mello said that suffering does not exist, but rather it was a creation of the same mind, that is, a mere illusion. Desire is nothing else, but a counterless desire, in other words, suffering happens for believing in expectations, because people, situations, circumstances or things occur exactly as the person would like to happen.

Or do, behave, say, think and feel how the person would suffering.

The problem arises from the insistence that something different happens or happens to the outside reality, it is the claim to distort the external reality with its inner reality to integrate it as its attachment.

That is, their expectations, their beliefs, their perceptions and interpretations collide with the ultimate reality, which is the outside reality, because all of the above only exists and happens in your mind, and suffering is the reaction of the clash with all of them.

Being suffering, a creation of the mind that arises from a thought that distorts its inner reality, makes it totally illusory. The person suffering, suffers because he has decided, perhaps unconsciously, to consent to his emotional pain. So, it can be seen that suffering has happened to be part of its personality, it has been identified with its suffering, that identification is nothing other than attachment, and everything to which people adhere, whether material things, beliefs, Ideas, concepts, people, emotions and memories, sooner or later it will be the cause of their suffering.

As soon as the person detaches himself, to the idea that things have to be as he imagines them, he renounces in turn, to release their attachments. When people accept and become aware that what makes them suffer only exists in their inner reality, but that not precisely and very surely not related to external reality, it is when they will realize that there is no reason why which to be addicted to their suffering.

The ultimate reality is one that crosses every concept, it is ineffable. The important thing is to develop the ability to observe itself, to do an introspection job that allows the person to identify the very causes of their suffering, gradually open their conscience to the things that until now lived as mental habits and schemes , neuronal connections, beliefs, programs and everything that led him to have a distorted idea of ​​his reality, of which he was obviously not aware.

Anthony de Mello said that nature is not the cause of suffering, but the mind of man who is full of expectations, desires, attachments and fears that condition his mental schemes. Happiness cannot depend on the circumstances, but the reaction you have before those circumstances that make you suffer.

Conclusions

It is interesting to see how from phenomenology, either from the perspective of Husserl, Hegel, Kant or Heidegger, they are not only related to philosophical but also psychological aspects. Come on, try to give an explanation to subjective ideas, to describe and narrate them, those existentialist issues, with an intention of deconstructing knowledge. Suffering clearly lends itself as a model of psychology to understand it. Objectivity makes it impossible to understand such abstract experiences as love, suffering or other sensitive issues. That is, describe the psychology of suffering from the person’s very experiences and not as much as a concept.

Bibliography

• From mello, to., Valley, p., & Terán, S. D. (1988). Interior self-liberation. Lumen.
• From mello, to. (1994). Wake up. Editorial Norma.
• Sánchez, s. (2019). Obtained from http: // www.Philosophica.INFO/VOICES/PHENOMENOLOGY/PHENOMENOLOGY.HTML