Primal Primer for Outsiders

Primal theory claims that almost all psychological disorders are caused by Primal Pain from childhood and/or birth.  Pain is overwhelming emotional or physiological pain that was repressed immediately, and is roughly equivalent to what clinical psychologists would call “trauma”.  Janov uses the pain suppression gate theory and makes the mistake of assuming it is relevant to his type of  “Pain” ( or trauma) too.  Primal theorist do not seem aware that real pain is a real signal, and the gate theory applies only to those physical pain signals from the peripheral nervous system.  They do not seem aware that the gate theory itself is also open to criticism even when describing real pain signals.

Primal theory says that when the “gates” are weak, Pain seeps through and you get symptoms.  If the gates are very weak you get schizophrenia (”psychosis” is the term used by Janov).  If enough pain exists, but the gates are solid, you get “neurosis” (the milder psychological disorders which involve no psychosis).  Primal theory said there is a “pool of Pain” that can be emptied out by reliving that Pain.  Primal therapy is thought to reverse psychological disorders by removing the Pain.  The capitalization of “Pain” in Janov’s early works was dropped in later books I think due to criticism of grandiosity.

Primal theory takes the idea that the brain comes in three parts (from Paul McLean’s triune brain model http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triune_brain which is an idea that has roots in ancient Greece)  and then applies this model in a very broad way to Pain and gates between the three levels.  Primal theory claims the brain is made up of a physical brain (primal jargon: first line), an emotional brain (second line) and an intellectual brain (third line).  Out of this Janov created:

1. First line Pain which he said is physiological trauma laid down at and around birth

2. Second Line Pain, which is emotional Pain usually laid down in childhood, and

3 Third Line Pains which are Pains in adulthood or adolescence, current day pains.

Primal therapy evolved from the screaming of the early 1970s, and developed into a deep crying and birth reliving therapy.  Critics should avoid calling it “Primal Scream Therapy” because this is taken as a sign by primal people to stop reading because the criticism will be bogus (even when it is not).  “Primal Therapy” (or “primal therapy”) is the term to use.

Sympath and parasympath are terms used to describe the personality type of a person that came about from the birth trauma.  A sympath’s birth supposedly ended with an effort that brought about success.  The sympath’s imprint is: “if I try I will succeed”.  The parasympath’s birth supposedly ended with the baby giving up and being helped out by others.  The parasympath’s imprint is “if I try it doesn’t work”, and he is believed to give up too easily in life.

Sympath=someone who tries

Parasympath= someone who gives up

Janov draws on the autonomic nervous system terminology of sympathetic and parasympathetic to describe these imprints.  Again, it may be considered an excessively broad application of narrow neurological findings to primal theory.  It is possible the terms are being used to give the impression that primal therapy is more scientific than it actually is.  The use of sympath and parasympath personality types is not used in the wider psychological community and may be viewed by some to be obscurantist pseudoscientific jargon (see criteria for pseudoscience in “detecting real science” section, criteria number 8)

Primal theorists use the word “compounding” to describe how first line Pain is laid down first, then second line Pain “compounds” it in childhood, and third line current life Pain is often thought to compound Pain further.  They believe the way to undo all that Pain is to relive it in reverse order, third line first, then second line and then first line.  They often explain negative outcomes in primal therapy to reliving out of sequence.  There is very little evidence for the way “Pain” is “laid down” or “compounded”, yet Janov seems certain of it, but it seems to be mostly assertion and confirmation bias of an unfalsifiable idea.  This compounding of trauma idea may have been acquired from earlier psychoanalytic theory and passed off as a new discovery.

Psychologists who want to criticize primal therapy should realize it will be difficult and confusing to pin it down.  For example they will find themselves making good points, only to find the primal theorist saying that primal therapy or theory is not about that.  For example if you say it is an abreactive therapy (which it is) they will say no, it is a new type of feeling called primal, which involves real connection.  It is very tricky to unpack.   You will find this “slipperiness” in every aspect you try to criticize.  If you say rebirthing occurs in therapy, they will say it doesn’t because they REALLY relive birth, and in proper sequence, and they will then proceed to warn about rebirthing!  Yes I know - try catching that fish with your bare hands!   If you criticize past results and ideas, they will say that everything has changed, even when it hasn’t.

Almost every human being is believed to have an unbelievable load of Pain, even people without psychological disorders, even though primal theorists may deny it if you try and pin them down on this.