Bad moments happen. They can offset emotional stability, create serious psychological and behavioral dysregulation, and jeopardize ongoing mental health and safety.

American sociologist William Isaac Thomas's Thomas Theorem suggests that reality is malleable in its initial stages, but hard-set in its consequences. So why am I using this sociological term here? Because I think it captures an essential formula.

Our brain interprets threatening things through a hard-line "contextual" lens. Context here involves not just the discrepant event of something, but the locked-in sensory focus we apply to it. Context shapes threat perception and can eclipse rational evaluation (Maren et al., 2013). Relative to the Thomas Theorem, our immediate reactions to unexpected negative situations (fender-bender, bad news, argument, physical or emotional pain-triggering events) may involve fast, reflexive, millisecond interpretations accompanied by emotionally reactive decisions (determinations) that follow, which can alter our world quickly. These reflexive judgments can lead to context-polarization, persecutory introjects in thinking, and even fatalities. As well, when people immediately interpret negative events, they may move to self-imposed certainties like "I'm unlovable," "I have to retaliate," "I know I'm hated," and more. This "certitude" is where the Thomas Theorem becomes painfully relevant. When the mind defines the moment as certain, we invoke outcomes in alignment.

Emerging from the work of Bateman and Fonagy is a therapy called mentalization-based therapy (MBT). Its core tenet is that when emotional arousal surges, mentalizing falls, and so safety depends on restoring it. MBT has offered some great extended potentials for resourcing around things like posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), trauma, self-harm, suicidal ideation, and other issues (Bateman, 2010).

By definition, according to Klein Schaarsberg et al.........

© Psychology Today