I'm currently studying a bit of psychology. It doesn't matter why, but it's partially just one of those things I picked up because it legitimately interested me. But anyway, the point is, that I'm reading a bit about it right now. And I found a section about the effects of stress. They seem to constantly be either positive or negative. Never neutral. Which, I guess, makes sense. For the most part anyway. It would just seem more intuitive, though, that if it could go one way or another, it'd also be possible to have no effect.
I've hypothesized before on the possibility of having an anxiety disorder. I don't remember if I actually wrote a post about it, but I know I was definitely thinking about it at one point when I wrote a post (although I'll be damned if I try to remember which one it was). I stress. A lot. Oftentimes for no good reason. If I have nothing to worry about, I will find or even create something to worry about. And I really wish I knew how to stop or at least control it, but anything I've tried hasn't worked so far.
So here I am, reading this book about psychology and considering possible positive and negative consequences of stress. And the impression I got was that with support and other positive influences, a person under stress could often better describe a traumatic event or synthesize pertinent information than someone who had not been flooded with stress hormones. On the other hand, those who were left to deal with stress on their own and lacked such positive support systems did worse, and were worse off on the whole.
I'm afraid this isn't making terribly much sense right now. I don't know that it's supposed to because, to be fair, I'm mostly just rambling to take up space. I'm trying to come to some conclusion about being stressed, but I don't think it's working. I'm tired right now, way too tired for this. I think I'm going to go to bed soon. Apologies for this post.
No comments:
Post a Comment