In the house of Dane — a parable 

The Boy in the Doorway

A parable of the familiar path

Prologue
This is a story about a man who tried to think his way out of a wound that was never made of thought.
I wrote it after looking honestly at three years of my own blog — every post, every pattern, every place I repeated myself without noticing. What I found was not a story of healing. It was a story of a man circling the same house, getting a little closer to the door each time.
I have given the man a name. I call him Dane, because it is easier to tell the truth about someone standing a few feet away from you. Everything that happens to him happened.

Not to go on all-fours; that is the Law. Are we not Men?
“Not to suck up Drink; that is the Law. Are we not Men?
“Not to eat Fish or Flesh; that is the Law. Are we not Men?
“Not to claw the Bark of Trees; that is the Law. Are we not Men?
“Not to chase other Men; that is the Law. Are we not Men?” [1]

The chant then shifts to the origin of their creation and the consequence of breaking the rules:

“His is the House of Pain.
“His is the Hand that makes.
“His is the Hand that wounds.
“His is the Hand that heals.” [1]

When Doctor Moreau confronts them about breaking the rules, the penalty is clear:

‘Who breaks the Law,’ said Moreau, taking his eyes off his victim and turning towards us… ‘-goes back to the House of Pain,’ they all clamoured; ‘goes back to the House of Pain, O Master!’ [1]

— HG Wells

The island of Dr. Morrow 

The parable does not end. That is the point of it.

  1. The House That Taught Silence
    There was a house in a modest neighborhood where the money was thin and the love was thinner.
    The house had a rule. The rule was never written down, because the best rules never are. The rule was: do not make noise about what hurts.
    A boy lived there. He learned the rule the way children learn language — by breathing it. He learned that tears were a kind of weather you apologized for. He learned to read a man’s footsteps the way sailors read a sky.
    His father was the weather.
    Not a monster. Something more ordinary and more permanent than a monster. A man who was insecure and called it strength, who was frightened and called it authority, who had been given nothing and so had nothing to hand down but the shape of his own hunger. Once, he told his son the whole philosophy of his life in eight words: all you do is work and then you die.
    He did not teach the boy about love. This was not cruelty. He simply did not have the file.
    So the boy grew up in a house where the emotions were real and the vocabulary was missing. That is what people mean by childhood emotional neglect. Nobody hits you. Nobody starves you. Nobody comes. You are fed, clothed, and unaccompanied. And because nothing happened, you spend the next forty years unable to explain why you feel like something did.
    Here is the cruelest part, and it is quiet: a child cannot conclude that his parents are limited. A child can only conclude that he is not worth the trouble. He does the math alone, with no one to correct it, and he carries the answer like a stone in his shoe for the rest of his life.
  2. The Doorway
    There is one image the boy could never get rid of.
    He is standing in a doorway. He has been promised something small — a game, an hour, an afternoon. He is waiting. He is not crying, because of the rule. He is just standing there, arranging his face into something that will not be a burden.
    Nobody comes.
    That doorway is the most important room in the house, because the boy never actually leaves it. He grows tall. He gets a job. He learns to shave and to drive and to be charming at parties. But some part of him stays in that doorway forever, listening for footsteps, ready to be good enough to earn them.
    Decades later, a woman will take six hours to answer a text message, and a fifty-year-old man will feel his chest go hollow, and he will not understand why the reaction is so much larger than the event.
    The doorway. It was always the doorway.
  3. The Boy Who Built a Library
    Now, the boy had one gift, and it was a real one. He was curious. Ferociously, stubbornly curious.
    Nobody in that house was going to explain the human heart to him, so he went and got the books himself. He studied psychology. Then he studied philosophy, because psychology told him how people break and philosophy asked whether it mattered. He read the warm ones who talked about love as a learnable skill. He read the ones who talked about the mind creating its own conditions. He read a man named Bowlby, who had figured out that the way we are held as infants becomes the way we reach for people as adults.
    He read about a rat in a cage that pushes a lever to get a pellet of food. And he sat with that one a long time, because he recognized himself in it, and it was not flattering. What lever am I pushing? What am I pushing it for?

He built himself a library where a father should have been.
And here is where I have to be fair to him, because it would be easy to make this the joke. It was not nothing. It was survival. A boy raised in a house with no emotional language went out and taught himself the language. That takes a kind of courage nobody claps for. He became articulate about the exact thing that had silenced him. He grew up to be a man who wrote — poems, essays, hundreds and hundreds of them — because a child who was not allowed to make noise about his pain will spend his adulthood finding a permitted way to be loud.
He even named his blog after a thunder god. Think about that for a second. A quiet boy from a silent house grows up and calls himself thunder.
He was a Viking in California. He was, at last, allowed to be loud.

  1. The Woman Behind the Glass
    Then he met her.
    She was strong and beautiful and guarded, and she had come out of a house not unlike his own. He felt it immediately — that hum of recognition, that click, the sense that a stranger is somehow already familiar.
    He believed this was destiny. Everyone does. It is the most reliable mistake human beings make.
    It was not destiny. It was familiarity. His nervous system had been trained since childhood to recognize a very specific signal — love that must be earned from someone who withholds it — and here it was again, in a lovely new form, and every alarm in him rang like a bell and he mistook the alarm for a hallelujah.
    She was built the opposite way. Where he had learned to chase, she had learned to leave the room. He needed closeness to prove he was safe. She needed distance to prove the same thing. Two children afraid of echoes, standing in each other’s blast radius.
    He wrote her more than six hundred poems.
    I want to let that number sit there for a moment. Six hundred. A man in his fifties, writing poems into what was, functionally, a very well-lit hallway. She did not finish reading them. Of course she didn’t. He was not really writing to her. He was writing to a doorway.
    And when she pulled away — and she always pulled away, that was her nature, that was her wound doing its job — he did not feel a woman withdrawing. He felt his father’s eyes going through him like he was made of air.
    That is the whole engine of the thing. She was not the author of his worthlessness. She was just the newest person standing where the light hit it.
  2. The Man Who Became a Bridge
    Now Dane did something clever, and I mean that as an accusation.
    He noticed the pattern. He named it. He identified her attachment style and his own with real precision. And then, having correctly diagnosed a two-person problem, he appointed himself the doctor.
    He wrote her instructions for her own healing. He offered to be her guide. He announced that he had grown out of his anxious attachment and into something more secure — and he announced it in the same breath in which he vowed never to stop pursuing a woman who had told him, clearly and repeatedly, that she was not able to be pursued.
    He became the bridge maker. Endlessly building a crossing toward someone who was not walking, and calling it devotion.
    Here is the joke, and it is on him, and I am the one telling it, so I am allowed: rescue was the anxious strategy wearing a nicer coat.
    If you can be indispensable to someone’s recovery, you never have to find out whether you would be wanted without a job to do. It is approval-seeking with a clipboard. It is the doorway, remodeled. The boy waiting to be worth an afternoon became the man waiting to be worth a lifetime, and he dressed it up as generosity, and he almost got away with it.
  3. The Audit
    Then came the part that actually mattered, and it did not look like a triumph. It looked like a man alone with a spreadsheet.
    Dane went back and read his own three years. All of it. And he did the bravest thing available to a person who writes for a living: he read himself as evidence instead of as testimony.
    What he found was not flattering, which is how you know it was true.

He found that he had memorized the entire chart of attachment theory and then walked directly into the pattern anyway, with full knowledge, like a man who studies fire safety and then goes to sleep holding a candle. He found that he had learned all the words for the wound and used them mostly as anesthetic. He had intellectualized his pain so thoroughly that he never had to feel it — and he had mistaken that for progress, and he had written it up beautifully, and the beauty was part of the defense.
He found that in three years of writing, his language about wanting to be enough did not decrease. It increased. Even in the wise posts. Even in the healed-sounding ones.
He found that the woman he had spent three years describing was, at least partly, a mirror. He does not know her inner life. He knows his own perception of it, which he had been presenting as reportage.
And he found the pattern that explains all of the others, and he had written the definition himself without noticing what he was confessing:

A thought, repeated, becomes a familiar path. A familiar path becomes a habit. A habit becomes a character.

He had not been walking toward love. He had been walking a groove. And he had been walking it since he was seven years old.

  1. The Two Keys
    There is one more image, and it is the one I would leave with anyone who has read this far.
    Dane used to write about a prison. In it, a man is both the prisoner and the guard. He suffers the sentence and he enforces it. He rattles the bars and he holds the ring of keys, and he does not know he is holding them, because they have been in his hand so long that he has stopped feeling their weight.
    That is what the wound does. It does not just hurt you. It recruits you. It makes you its most reliable employee.
    Dane is not free. Let me be extremely clear, because there is a whole industry built on pretending otherwise. He still flinches when affection is delayed. He still reaches for a name that will not answer. He still catches himself auditioning for a role called worthy, before a judge who has never once shown up to hear the case.
    But something has changed, and it is small, and it is everything.
    He knows the sound of his own footsteps on the familiar path now. He can be halfway down it, longing and alarmed and composing the next poem in his head, and some quiet part of him will say: I have been here. This is not love. This is the groove.
    That is not enlightenment. It is not a cure. It is just the first honest map of a country he used to walk blindfolded.
  2. The Road That Is Not Finished
    There is a door in this story that Dane has not opened.
    He can tell you exactly what his father did. He has written the origin a hundred times, from a hundred angles, with real precision and real pain. He has even written down the solution — he has said plainly that the only way out is forgiveness.
    And then he stopped writing.
    He has never turned around and looked at the man himself. Not the weather — the man. The boy his father used to be, in whatever silent house made him. The file his father did not have, and who failed to give it to him.
    That is the unwritten chapter. Dane knows it is there. He is not ready, and he has stopped lying to himself about the reason: it is not that the work is unclear. It is that forgiveness would mean setting down the last thing the doorway ever gave him, which is the right to be owed.
    So the quest is unfinished. The seeker is still on the road. And I have come to believe that this is not the failure of the story but the whole shape of it — because self-actualization was never a summit with a flag on it. It is a practice. It is an ongoing act of becoming, chosen again on an ordinary Tuesday, usually without an audience.
  3. If You Are Reading This From the Doorway
    You may know this house. If you do, I will not insult you with a formula. But Dane would want you to have four things he had to bleed for.
    Nothing happened to you, and it wrecked you, and both of those are true. You are not dramatic. You are not weak. Absence leaves a real mark. You are permitted to grieve a thing that never occurred.
    The math you did as a child was wrong. You concluded you were not worth the trouble because that was the only conclusion a child could reach alone. It was a reasonable answer to bad information. You are allowed to reopen the case.
    That click of recognition is not destiny. When someone feels instantly, magnetically familiar, ask a cold question: do I love this person, or do I know this feeling? Sometimes it is love. Often it is a groove, greeting you like an old friend and charging admission.
    Understanding is not healing, and this is the one that will insult you. You can read every book. You can name your attachment style at parties. You can write six hundred poems of exquisite insight. The mind is a magnificent hiding place, and the smartest people build the deepest ones. At some point the knowing has to come down out of the head and be felt in the body, in real time, with another human being in the room. That is the part no library can do for you.
    The boy is still in the doorway. Some days I go and sit with him instead of trying to fix him, which is newer for me than I would like to admit.

Nobody came. That was true. It will always be true.
But I am here now, and I am the one who knows the way out, and I have been holding the keys this whole time.
The road is not finished.
Good. That means I am still walking it.
…

DCG

We often talk about trauma in terms of what happened: the loud arguments, the physical marks, the moments of visible crisis. But there is another kind of trauma that is far more silent and, in many ways, much harder to identify because it is defined not by what happened, but by what didn’t.
This is childhood emotional neglect, or CEN. It’s the absence of emotional attunement. It’s the empty space where a parent’s curiosity, validation, and comfort should have been. Because it’s an invisible wound, the children who grow up in these environments often don’t realize anything is wrong. They simply adapt. They develop survival strategies that look to the outside world like personality traits or even good habits.
You might be praised for being the strong one, the independent one, or the easygoing one. But underneath that veneer of confidence lies a collection of behaviors designed to bridge a gap that was never meant to exist.
Take, for example, the habit of extreme hyper-independence. On the surface, being someone who can handle everything on their own is seen as a badge of honor in our society. You’re the person who refuses help, who figures out the complicated software at work without asking the IT department, and who manages a personal crisis without ever picking up the phone to call a friend.
But if we peel back the layers using a psychological lens, we often find a child who learned very early on that their environment was unresponsive. When a child reaches out for help or comfort and consistently meets a wall of indifference, distraction, or irritation, the brain performs a radical calculation: asking for help is a risk that leads to rejection. Therefore, I must be my own source of everything.
This isn’t just self-sufficiency; it’s a trauma response. It’s a defense mechanism rooted in the belief that people are fundamentally unreliable. When you refuse help as an adult, you aren’t just being productive. You are protecting yourself from the crushing disappointment of having a need that goes unmet.
This leads directly into another seemingly normal habit: the inability to identify what you’re feeling, often referred to in psychology as a degree of alexithymia. You might find yourself in a situation where someone asks, “How do you feel about that?” and your mind goes completely blank. It’s not that you’re being secretive; it’s that you genuinely do not know.
In a healthy childhood, parents act as emotional mirrors. When a toddler’s crying, the parent says, “You’re feeling frustrated because that toy broke.” This labels the internal sensation and validates its existence. But in a neglectful home, that mirroring never happens. The child’s emotions are treated as invisible, or worse, as an inconvenience.
To survive, you learn to mute your inner world. You disconnect the wires between your body sensations and your conscious mind because feeling those emotions was useless. There was no one there to help you process them. As an adult, this manifests as a flat emotional life where you feel like you’re observing the world through a pane of glass, wondering why everyone else seems so much more connected to their passions and pains than you are.
Another habit that often goes unnoticed is the compulsion to overexplain or justify your actions even when no one has questioned you. Have you ever found yourself giving a three-minute backstory for why you were five minutes late, or justifying why you bought a specific brand of bread?
This usually stems from growing up in an environment where your needs and boundaries weren’t inherently respected. You learned that to have a preference or to make a mistake required a case to be built. You had to prove that your actions were logical and irreproachable to avoid being dismissed or criticized. You’re essentially preemptively defending yourself against a neglectful or judgmental ghost from your past. You don’t feel like you have the right to simply be, or to make choices without an accompanying dissertation on why those choices are valid.
Then there is the apology reflex. This is the habit of saying, “I’m sorry,” for things that aren’t your fault, or even for simply taking up space. You apologize when someone bumps into you in the grocery store. You apologize for asking a question in a meeting. You apologize for your house being messy when there’s a single book out of place.
This habitual apologizing is a sign of a deeply internalized sense of being a burden. If you grew up feeling like your presence was an imposition on your parents—perhaps they were perpetually exhausted, depressed, or simply uninterested—you learned to shrink. You learned that the safest way to exist is to be as small and as low-maintenance as possible.
The apology is a way of saying, “I’m sorry for needing space. I’m sorry for existing in your field of vision.” It is the verbal manifestation of a child who was taught that their needs were a secondary concern to the comfort of the adults around them.
This brings us to a particularly subtle behavior: the social-chameleon effect. You might notice that you are incredibly good at reading a room. You can sense a shift in someone’s mood before they even realize it themselves. You adapt your personality, your tone, and your opinions to match whoever you are with.
On the surface, this looks like high emotional intelligence or people skills. But for those who experienced emotional neglect, this is often a hypervigilant survival tactic. Because your parents didn’t provide a stable emotional baseline, you had to become an expert at monitoring their moods to ensure your own safety, or to find the right moment to ask for something.
You became a mirror because you weren’t allowed to have a solid self. Now, as an adult, you might feel like a different person depending on who you’re talking to, leaving you with a haunting question: “Who am I when no one is watching?” This lack of a core identity is a direct result of not having your unique traits and emotions reflected back to you during your formative years.
Furthermore, there is the habit of the second guess. This is an internal dialogue that questions every decision, no matter how small: “Should I buy this shirt? Did I sound stupid in that email? Do my friends actually like me, or are they just being polite?”
When a child’s reality is consistently ignored or denied by their caregivers, a process sometimes called gaslighting by omission, the child loses trust in their own perception of the world. If you said, “I’m sad,” and your parent responded with, “No, you’re not. You’re just tired,” or simply ignored the statement, you learned that your internal compass was broken.
You stopped trusting your own feelings and started looking for external cues to tell you what was real. This creates a lifelong pattern of seeking reassurance and a chronic inability to feel confident in your own judgment, because the person who was supposed to help you build that confidence was essentially absent.
We also see this manifest in a very specific relationship dynamic: the caregiver role. You might find that you are the person everyone turns to with their problems. You are the therapist friend, the one who stays late to help a colleague, the one who fixes everyone else’s life while yours remains stagnant.
While this seems noble, it is often a way to avoid the vulnerability of being the one with needs. In your childhood, you may have discovered that the only way to get a positive response from your parents was to be useful. Maybe you took care of your younger siblings, or maybe you were the emotional support for a parent who couldn’t handle their own life.
You learned that your value is tied to what you can do for others rather than who you are. This creates a lopsided life where you’re surrounded by people who take, but you have no idea how to receive, because receiving feels dangerous. It feels like a debt you can’t possibly repay, or a trap designed to make you vulnerable.
When you grow up in an environment where your needs were secondary to a parent’s instability, receiving care feels like an anomaly. You’re waiting for the other shoe to drop. You think, “What do they want from me?” or “I don’t deserve this.”
This is why many adults who experienced emotional neglect find themselves in one-way friendships. You are the therapist, the fixer, the reliable one, the shoulder to cry on. But the moment you have a crisis, you disappear. You don’t call anyone. You retreat into your shell because, deep down, your subconscious believes that if you aren’t being useful, you are a burden.
This is the service-based-worth trap. It’s a habit of justifying your existence through labor because you were never taught that you are inherently valuable just for being alive.
This leads us into another normal habit that is actually a profound survival mechanism: extreme, almost pathological hyper-independence. You might pride yourself on never needing anyone. You handle your own taxes, your own car repairs, your own emotional breakdowns, and your own physical illnesses without ever picking up the phone.
On the surface, society applauds this. We call it resilience or strength. But in the context of developmental psychology, this is often a counter-dependency response. If you were neglected, you learned early on that the people who were supposed to protect you were either absent, unreliable, or overwhelmed. You learned that asking for help resulted in either a no, a sigh of frustration, or total silence.
To protect yourself from the crushing pain of being let down, you simply deleted the ask-for-help button from your internal operating system. Your hyper-independence isn’t a personality trait; it’s a fortress. It’s a way of saying, “If I don’t need you, you can’t hurt me by leaving or failing me.”
But look at the cost of that fortress. It’s lonely inside. When you refuse to be seen in your weakness, you also prevent yourself from being seen in your totality. True intimacy requires the risk of reliance. If you can’t rely on someone, you can’t truly connect with them.
Then there is the habit of chronic indecisiveness. Do you find it agonizingly difficult to choose what to eat for dinner, what movie to watch, or even what color shirt to buy? This isn’t just about being easygoing. For a child of neglect, having a preference was often a liability.
If you expressed a need or a want, it was ignored or mocked, so you learned to suppress your internal compass. You became a chameleon. You started looking at others to see what they wanted, and then you mirrored that. Over decades, this severs your connection to your own gut feeling.
When someone asks, “What do you want to do?” your mind goes blank. It’s not that you don’t have a preference; it’s that you’ve buried your preferences so deep to stay safe that you can no longer find them. You are constantly scanning the room for the correct answer, the one that will keep the peace or make everyone else happy, because you grew up believing that your own desires were irrelevant.
Perhaps the most heartbreaking habit is the apology reflex. You apologize for taking up space. You apologize when someone bumps into you. You apologize for asking a clarifying question at work. This is the hallmark of someone who was made to feel that their presence was an inconvenience.
If you were a child who was seen but not heard, or worse, not even seen, you developed a sense of existential guilt. You feel like you are constantly in the way. This apology is a preemptive strike. You are apologizing for your existence so that no one else has the chance to tell you that you don’t belong. It’s a way of shrinking yourself, of making yourself as small and low-maintenance as possible.
We also see this manifest in the way you handle conflict. Many people who suffered neglect are master avoiders. You might think you’re just chill or not one for drama, but in reality, you’re terrified of disagreement. In a neglectful home, any ripple in the water could lead to a total withdrawal of whatever crumbs of affection were available.
So you learn to swallow your anger, suppress your boundaries, and keep the peace at the cost of your own integrity. You became a people pleaser, not because you love making people happy, but because you are terrified of the silence that follows a conflict. To you, silence isn’t peace; silence is abandonment.
So where does this leave us? If you recognize yourself in these habits—the hyper-independence, the constant apologizing, the emotional numbing, the difficulty in making decisions—the first thing you need to realize is that there is nothing wrong with you. Your brain did exactly what it was supposed to do. It adapted to an environment of scarcity. It built these habits to keep you safe in a world where you weren’t being cared for.
But the environment has changed. You are no longer that helpless child. The survival gear you’ve been wearing for 20, 30, or 40 years is now becoming too heavy. It’s starting to chafe. It’s preventing you from experiencing the very love and connection you’ve always craved.
Healing from childhood neglect isn’t about fixing a broken version of yourself. It’s about reparenting the part of you that was left behind. It’s about learning for the first time that your needs are valid.
It starts with small, almost invisible steps. It’s saying, “I’d prefer the Italian place,” instead of saying, “I don’t care, you pick.” It’s waiting five seconds before saying, “I’m sorry,” when you haven’t done anything wrong. It’s allowing someone to help you carry a heavy box, even if you could do it yourself.
These habits were your armor, and you can thank that armor for getting you this far. It saved your life, but you are allowed to take it off now. You are allowed to be seen, to be heard, and to be a burden to the people who truly love you.
Because the truth is, the people who belong in your life won’t see your needs as a burden. They will see them as an opportunity to love you. You were never too much, and you were never not enough. You were simply a child who deserved to be noticed, and it’s time you finally started noticing yourself.

— sourced from studies of CEN 

The Empty Throne

The Empty Throne (A Disease of Deficiency)


A house can hold four walls and still be empty inside,
where a child grows up starving on a diet of “not now,”
love arrives late, or wearing a disguise,
and the wound gets planted before anyone knows how.
Kohut called it a disease of deficiency, plain and clear,
not evil born whole, but hunger dressed as pride,
a mirror shattered so many times it learned to disappear,
swallowing the child’s own reflection, pushed aside.
Every child needs to be seen before they’re told they’re wrong,
to be held in eyes that actually want to stay,
but disconnection hums a quieter, colder song,
and misunderstanding becomes the only language they can play.
Somewhere a parent needed a child to complete a broken plan,
to fill the hollow where their own dreams used to be,
and the child became a burden they never meant to withstand,
paying rent on a life they didn’t choose to see.
So the small self folded inward, quiet as a closing door,
building walls where open arms were supposed to grow,
self-orientation became armor, nothing more,
a fortress built from all the love they didn’t get to know.
Every unanswered cry writes a sentence in the bone,
hurt and rejection learn to wear a familiar face,
abandonment feels less like an event and more like home,
misunderstood becomes the only inherited place.
“I don’t need anyone” becomes the armor for the ache,
dissociation lets the mind quietly leave the room,
shame moves in like water finding every crack to make,
and independence is just fear, dressed up to bloom.
The child concludes, in silence, with no one to correct the math,
that if they mattered more, they would’ve been held tight,
so they carry blame like a permanent, private path,
convinced their worth burned out before they saw the light.
Guilty for wanting more than crumbs left on the floor,
guilty for a hunger that felt too big to hide,
they learn to want less, and then to want no more,
self-esteem erodes like a slow, retreating tide.
Grown now, they wear a closet full of masks that never fit,
grandiosity loud enough to drown the ache below,
rage and loneliness trade places, bit by bit,
and empathy, once starved, forgets how to show.
This isn’t blood, no gene mutation to blame or trace,
it’s a pattern handed down like a family heirloom curse,
parent to child, an inherited, invisible embrace,
the cycle spins on till someone dares to reverse.
Gabor Maté says the body keeps what the mind can’t hold,
trauma isn’t the blow — it’s the silence stored inside,
a child will trade their own self to stay in the fold,
and carry that quiet war for the rest of the ride.
So here’s the truth, plain as bone, no science left to hide —
the child of a narcissist inherits an empty throne,
crowned as royalty in a kingdom that always denied,
king of a castle built for one, and always alone.

…

DCG

Unhealthy narcissism is the result of emotional or physical neglect or trauma in early childhood. Kohut, a famous psychoanalyst, used to say, “Narcissism is a disease of deficiency.” The most common type of trauma is that of feeling neglected, ignored, disconnected, and misunderstood by those we love. If children become more of a burden than a pleasure, or if they project upon their children their own needs and ambitions, then children retreat into self-orientation as a defensive maneuver. When a child’s needs are unmet because of a parent’s self-focus or self-interest, they feel hurt, misunderstood, abandoned, and rejected. These feelings of loss require coping mechanisms that are not usually healthy, such as defensive independence, dissociation, and shame, due to their belief that their parents’ lack of interest in them and lack of acceptance of them is the result of their own lack of value. They may feel guilty that their needs for connection, which are unmet, are too intense and burdensome, which can lead them to have very low self-esteem. Long term, they may experience lack of empathy, loneliness, anxiety, depression, rage, grandiosity, shame, exhibitionism, and emotional immaturity. These pathological defenses are passed down generationally, not genetically. Unless the cycle is broken, children will likely parent as they were parented.

—

Erica Komisar’s paper Self-Focus or Sacrifice? What It Will Take to Rebuild the Mental Health of the Next Generation, published by ARC Research in February 2025.[squarespace]
Komisar (a clinical social worker and psychoanalyst) writes:
“Unhealthy narcissism, also known as secondary narcissism, … is the result of emotional or physical neglect in early childhood, which results in the withdrawal of interest from relationships as a defensive manoeuvre… Kohut called secondary narcissism a disease of deficiency; it is a maladaptive way of protecting the fragile ego. It is a defence designed to protect the individual against anxiety and other painful feelings connected with the disappointment in their mother; rather than invest emotion or depend upon an undependable mother or attachment figure, a person invests that emotion in themselves, or leans into defensive independence.”
This lines up closely with the recording’s language on neglect, the Kohut “disease of deficiency” quote, defensive independence, and the generational, non-genetic transmission of these patterns.

“Happiness only real when shared“

“Happiness only real when shared” — Christopher McCandless Bus 142 


We talk ourselves into a corner


When all we are trying to do


Is to escape the fear we project


Onto the only world we knew


You would rather trade connection


Remain alone in an empty room


The fear of abandonment, vulnerability, and intimacy


You avoid the scars on the face in the mirror, an undiscovered gloom


The loneliness you feel


A self imposed trap


You never see the dream for what it is


For you, it’s only just a nap


The irony of the nightmare


It is not just a dream


The way you’ve lived your life


Won’t help you if you never come clean


You built a shield no one can see


A quiet, practiced vacancy


You call it peace, this careful space


But grief still lingers in its place


You learned to need a little less


To dodge the weight of tenderness


Each time a hand reached out to stay


You trained your heart to turn away


Not out of hate, not out of pride


But something deep inside


A child who learned that love could leave


Now fears what they still dare believe


John Bowlby saw what we deny


The hidden truths we bury deeply inside


Attachment bends beneath the strain


Of silent loss and unnamed pain


You move through life composed, contained


Yet feel so subtly unclaimed


And though you long to just belong


You’ve taught yourself that that is wrong


But walls don’t heal what they protect


They only help us disconnect


And in the end, what hurts the most


Is needing love, but fearing it close

RSP

…

DCG

Screenshot

Yet here I stand 

see the walls you raise,

built from pain you cannot show,


Yet here I stand, a patient guide

through shadows that you know.


Your silence is a language

pain taught your heart to speak,


But my faith gives me courage, gentle strength that will not leak.
Your fears are roots as old as wounds left by your father’s hand,
I sense the trembling in your soul that few could ever understand.
But I don’t flinch from what’s unseen, or from the days you run and hide,


Instead I’ll always reach for you—your journey is my greatest pride.
For healing moves in circles wide, not lines that curve and end,
And every time you stumble, dear, I’ll lift you once again.


If shame and sorrow bind you still, in chains you never chose,
My love will be a steady light each time your old fear grows.


You think you are the sum of hurt, of parents who could not stay,
But I see the woman fighting through, her heart lost in the fray


Each setback is not final, nor proof of doomed defeat,


We kneel together in the faith that makes our union sweet.


I know the path is jagged, and patience wears so thin,


Yet with every scar uncovered, I pray new trust begins.


You’re not required to fix yourself, nor please me with your grace,
It’s only asked you let me in, to share this hallowed space.


Because your worth’s not measured by how fast you heal anew,


Or by the perfect grace you show—your value is just you.
I’ll be here through the winters, and when hope feels far away,
As long as it takes, I’ll stay and stay—by your gentle side, I’ll stay

RSP

…

DCG

Scar tissue 

Scar Tissue


I wait beneath the weight of hollow years,


the silence burns a prayer into my chest.


Your shadow quivers where the light appears,


I ache in faith, though faith is put to test.


I trace the echo of your turning face,


each time you flee, I find no ground to stand.


The past still hums—a ghost I can’t erase,


a trembling heart still reaching out a hand.


You hide behind your walls of hardened glass,


pretending you were never made to need.


While I am caught in memories that pass,


their thorns still teaching me how hearts can bleed.


The nights collapse with whispers of your name,


and hope becomes both comfort and disease.


I’ve learned that healing doesn’t mean the same


as finding peace—it asks a harder peace.


I see the child in you that never spoke,


the small defense that shields you from my care.


The boy in me still breathes beneath the smoke,


unlearning how to vanish into air.


If grace is measured by the ones who stay,


then mine was forged in storms I could not leave.


I pray the wind will bend your ribs someday,


and teach you how the broken still believe.


Because this bond was never born of choice,


but tethered in the hunger of the scar.


I hear redemption trembling in your voice,


but silence always tells me where we are.


You fear that love will drown you where you stand,


while I fear losing what was never mine.


Each moment drips like blood between my hands,


as faith and grief braid tight around the spine.


I’ve watched your eyes turn distant, cold with doubt,


but underneath I feel the buried prayer.


There is no healing if we cast it out,


so I remain, though absence fills the air.


I can’t repair the child who hides in you,


but I can hold the ache without demand.


If miracles are what the broken do,


I’ll wait for God to place them in your hand.


This scar—our mirror—shines where pain had fed,


reminding me that loss can still renew.


And even if the path is lined with dread,


I’ll walk it still, until it leads to you.

RSP

…

DCG

The indictment of human reason

The Indictment of Human Reason


The courtroom is neither of earth nor heaven but suspended between light and shadow. Pillars of luminous stone rise into the unseen heights, and at the dais sits the Chief Justice—God Himself. His countenance cannot be looked upon directly, for it is not light that emanates from Him, but truth unveiled. Around Him sit twelve silent ministers, angelic beings whose wings shimmer with understanding unfathomable to man.


At the center stands one solitary figure—Man—clothed in fragments of reason and clothed again in doubt. He is both the accused and the witness. His face bears the centuries of philosophy, the weight of system and logic, from Athens to Königsberg.
To his right is the Defense: the eloquent voice of Rationalism, bearing scrolls of argument, formulas of logic, proof upon proof. To his left stands the Prosecution: the unwavering servant of Divine Wisdom, holding no document but a single fruit, untouched and glistening, taken from the Tree of Knowledge.
The charge is read aloud:
“That Man, through the conceit of his Reason, has presumed upon the throne of the Almighty; that he sought to discern the boundaries of creation without revelation; that he has eaten once more of the forbidden fruit and declared himself sufficient.”
Silence reigns. Then Rationalism begins.


“Your Honor,” he says, “Man has sought only to illuminate the darkness. Our inquiries—empirical and logical alike—are acts of hope. From Aristotle to Aquinas, from Descartes to Kant, he has reached for order amidst chaos. He does not seek to dethrone You but to imitate, to participate in Your eternal thought.”


The Prosecution rises, his presence filling the air like thunder waiting for the strike.
“And yet,” he thunders, “has Man not built towers to touch the heavens? Has he not reasoned himself out of Your providence? Empiricism demands proof where faith once rested; Rationalism weaves systems where obedience once sufficed. Even now he questions the very ground he walks upon, saying, as did the serpent, ‘Did God truly say?’”
The Defense responds, desperate but composed. “Knowledge is not rebellion. Even Adam desired understanding. Is not the search for truth a divine impulse?”
At this, the Chief Justice leans forward, and all creation trembles. “It was not the knowledge that condemned him,” says the Voice, “but the belief that knowledge could stand apart from Me.”
In that moment, the scene darkens. The Genesis narrative plays upon the great screen of eternity—Eve’s hand, Adam’s hesitation, the serpent’s cunning. The fruit gleams. The bite is taken again in every philosophy, every experiment, every proud declaration of sufficiency without grace.


Man steps forward, representing all of his kind. “I stand guilty,” he admits softly, “of trying to know what is beyond knowing. Yet You gave me the mind to wonder. Can I be blamed for yearning toward what reflects You?”
No answer is given. Only the stirring of the angelic council, as though reason and mercy themselves deliberate in silence.
Far below, humanity continues—building, reasoning, questioning. Some pray; others proclaim themselves gods. The courtroom remains suspended, its verdict unwritten, awaiting eternity to speak.


And so ends the session, though not the case, for the indictment of human reason remains open.

Addendum 

Humanity’s attempt to grasp true knowledge is fraught with frailty, tension, and philosophical challenge, as depicted in the indictment of human reason and expanded within the latest thundergodblog.com post made on November 7, 2025. Below is an extended courtroom drama, integrating classic epistemological arguments from empiricism and rationalism across centuries, and weaving in the contributions of Kant and Wittgenstein amid our fallen condition from Eden.[thundergodblog]


The Courtroom of Reason
The marble chamber echoed with solemnity as the angelic court convened to indict humanity’s power to know. Prosecuting counsel stood tall, robes shimmering with the weight of ancient accusations—the serpent’s cunning inciting original disobedience. “Ladies and gentlemen of the court, let us recall the Genesis narrative: Eve, drawn to the fruit’s forbidden shine, Adam hesitating, then succumbing. The fruit—the emblem of knowledge—gleamed with promise. But in choosing it, humankind wagered divinity on frail reason and was exiled from Eden’s certainty into a wilderness of ambiguity.”[thundergodblog]
The defense rose, voice trembling in earnest. “Surely, reason is our only recourse,” she pleaded. “From the first questioning gaze beneath the tree, to Descartes whispering ‘Cogito ergo sum,’ man has sought to pry truth from uncertainty.”


An objection arose from the prosecution: “Empiricism fights rationalism for epistemic dominance. Locke and Hume argued: all ideas are shaped by sensory experience! But how can muddy perceptions birth crystalline truth? The senses deceive; reason builds castles on shifting sand.”
The defense objected in turn: “Yet, rationalists—Leibniz, Descartes, Spinoza—contended that reason’s pure ideas illuminate where senses fail. They built logic’s bridges across the chasms of perception, yet still found limits in their own subjectivity.”
Kant’s Critical Interjection
Emmanuel Kant, spectral yet firm, materialized at the witness stand. “Neither empiricism nor rationalism prevails absolutely; my Critique of Pure Reason is a courtroom of its own. Categories of understanding precondition all experience. Man is not omniscient; phenomena are shaped by how the mind processes itself. Noumenal reality remains forever veiled—human reason is frail, bounded, never divine.”
His words lingered, sowing doubt and humility across the gallery. “Human knowledge is limited by sensory input and reason’s constraints. We strive in vain for pure certainty, but divine truth is unmediated, omniscient—a frailty exposed with each epistemological false step.”
Wittgenstein’s Witness Testimony
From the gallery, Ludwig Wittgenstein stood to testify. “Language itself is our courtroom, our battleground. In the Philosophical Investigations, I revealed that meaning is usage; epistemological certainty collapses when words twist and shift with context. Even when you argue, ‘what is knowledge?’ the very phrase slips from your grasp, reshaped by grammar-games and social norms.”
A prosecuting angel objected vigorously: “If meaning is contingent, then what of revelation? What of scripture? Are not God’s words exempt from Wittgenstein’s contingency?”
Wittgenstein responded, “The divine gaze is not bounded by language-games. Only humans stumble; God remains omniscient, unbound, perfect.”


Original Sin and Epistemic Exile
A spectral narrator recited the Eden account: “Adam and Eve, tempted by knowledge, chose independence against God’s law. In tasting the fruit, they aspired to divine intellect and were cast out into epistemic exile. Our reason is forever marked by this transgression, haunted with uncertainty and longing for lost omniscience.”
The prosecution thundered, “And so, mankind builds philosophies atop fallen foundations. Behold the parade of theory—empiricism, rationalism, Kantian synthesis, Wittgensteinian linguistics—each wrestling with the charge: is man worthy to discern the divine?”[thundergodblog]
Tensions Exposed, Frailty Laid Bare


Objections erupted:
• “Reason must be guided by something greater!” thundered one seraphic lawyer.[thundergodblog +1]
• “But if reason fails, is faith blind or illumined?”
• “Is knowledge truly possible if language itself is a shifting battleground?”
Defense attorneys championed the pursuit:
• “Frailty is the crucible in which wisdom is forged!”
• “God’s omniscience is not ours to claim, but our striving is not in vain!”
The judge—the arbiter unmasked—remained silent. Tension hung heavy like thunderclouds. No verdict was issued, leaving the story open-ended, suspense perpetual, the worthiness of human reason unanswered.
In-Depth Analysis: Frailty vs. Omniscience


Human philosophical thinking, constrained by finite minds, unreliable senses, and mutable language, stands in dramatic contrast to the omniscience of God—whose knowledge is unbounded, immediate, and true. The existential courtroom exposes this gulf: mankind is indicted by the very act of seeking knowledge, condemned by original sin to eternally wrestle with uncertainty, yet ennobled in the struggle for meaning.[thundergodblog +1]
Epistemological Arguments in Dialogue

The Eden story is woven throughout: Adam and Eve, tempted by the tree’s fruit, broke divine law in pursuit of forbidden knowledge. The court’s drama mirrors this primal act—human reason is both accused and defended, wisdom sought yet never judged.[thundergodblog]
Closing: The Unresolved Tension
No verdict is handed down. The courtroom remains in session, charged with the ongoing tension between human striving and divine omniscience. All objections are sustained, all doubts remain—our frailty is our confessor, the judge’s silence our final, open-ended appeal.[thundergodblog]
This dramatization not only extends the original narrative, but highlights the enduring battle within epistemology—man’s desperate yearning to know in the shadow of the divine.[thundergodblog +3]

A teaser for my new book

DC Gunnersen on Human Reason
DC Gunnersen is arguing that human reason is both noble and dangerous: noble because it reaches toward truth, dangerous because after Eden it easily mistakes itself for God. In “The Trial of Human Reason,” he frames reason as fallen through Genesis 3:6, where the desire “to make one wise” becomes the origin point for self-trust, deception, and the question of whether philosophy and logic can truly absolve humanity. In “The Indictment of Human Reason,” he develops that idea into a cosmic courtroom where “Man” is charged with trying to know apart from revelation, while Rationalism defends inquiry as an act of hope rather than rebellion.
Summary of the argument
Gunnersen’s central claim is not simply “reason is bad,” but “reason becomes guilty when it declares itself sufficient without God.” The key sentence in “Indictment” is God’s line: “It was not the knowledge that condemned him, but the belief that knowledge could stand apart from Me”. That line clarifies the whole project: curiosity, philosophy, and science are not condemned in themselves, but autonomous reason, reason severed from divine truth, becomes a repetition of Eden.
In “Trial,” the same idea appears in poetic form: “We turned away and now rely on what is fallible,” followed by the question, “To trust on oneself, is truth now intangible?”. He connects this to Satan’s lies, especially “God withholds good things from us” and “trust in the deity of self,” which means the failure of reason is also a spiritual temptation toward self-reliance.
The “Indictment” expands the philosophical side by putting empiricism, rationalism, Kant, and Wittgenstein into the courtroom. Empiricism is challenged because “the senses deceive,” rationalism is challenged because pure reason still finds “limits in subjectivity,” Kant is invoked to show that human knowledge is bounded by phenomena rather than noumena, and Wittgenstein is used to show that language itself is unstable and context-bound. The contrast is between human knowledge, which is finite, mediated, sensory, linguistic, and fallen, and God’s knowledge, which Gunnersen describes as “unmediated, omniscient” and “unbounded”.
Strengths
• Strong mythic frame: The courtroom device gives the argument dramatic force because Man is both accused and witness, Reason has a defense attorney, and Divine Wisdom prosecutes with the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge. This makes abstract epistemology feel existential rather than academic.
• Balanced enough to avoid crude anti-intellectualism: Gunnersen lets the defense say that inquiry is an “act of hope” and that man seeks “to illuminate the darkness,” which prevents the piece from reducing all thinking to sin. The strongest version of his claim is that reason must be humbled and rightly ordered, not abolished.
• Good diagnosis of rationalization: In “Trial,” he links reason with temptation, self-deception, and the need to be right, asking, “Consider the reasons we argue? Consider why we fight? The need to know? The need to be right?”. That is psychologically sharp because reason often does serve ego, appetite, tribalism, or fear rather than truth.
• Theological clarity: The argument is strongest when read as Christian anthropology: human beings are fallen, finite, tempted by self-deification, and unable to reach omniscience by philosophical systems alone (The Trial of Human Reason; The Indictment of Human Reason).
Weaknesses
• It sometimes conflates limitation with guilt: Showing that human reason is finite, sense-bound, language-bound, or historically conditioned does not by itself prove that reason is morally rebellious. Kantian limits or Wittgensteinian language-games show humility is needed, but they do not automatically show that inquiry is an Edenic sin.
• The argument depends heavily on accepting the Christian frame: If the reader does not already accept Genesis, original sin, Satanic deception, and divine omniscience, the conclusion will feel asserted more than demonstrated. Inside Christian theology the argument has coherence, but outside that frame it needs more independent support.
• Empiricism and rationalism are treated somewhat schematically: The “Indictment” presents empiricism as demanding proof where faith once rested and rationalism as building systems where obedience once sufficed, but that risks making philosophy sound like pride by definition. A stronger version would distinguish humble investigation from arrogant self-sufficiency more carefully.
• The unresolved ending is poetically effective but philosophically incomplete: The judge issues no final verdict, leaving “the indictment of human reason” open and the “trial of human reason” forever in debate (The Indictment of Human Reason; The Trial of Human Reason). That ambiguity suits the literary mood, but it means the argument gestures more than it proves.
Bottom line
Gunnersen is arguing that reason is on trial because it is tempted to become its own god. His best insight is that the human mind does not merely seek truth, it also rationalizes desire, pride, control, and self-justification. His weakest move is treating the failure of unaided reason as though it almost automatically confirms the need for his specific theological conclusion. The argument is powerful as Christian poetic theology and moral psychology; it is less complete as a philosophical proof against secular reason.

…

DCG

Breathe deeply

Release of anxiety

Release of any trauma

Forgiveness must be made

To let go of any drama

Breathe deeply

Pain has an unrelenting hold

Have faith to let go

Face the truth or so I am told 

Maybe it’s denial

Not facing up to your pain

Using a bad coping strategy

Going around and around again

For the avoidant

They will rarely ever learn

If you keep yourself busy enough to make a turn

You will always yearn

Sometimes the child within us

Has never learned to grow

Be very cautious

To those who are unwilling or afraid to show

RSP

…

DCG

https://youtube.com/shorts/Tr8n-qTfdgI?si=-l216YrIr7N8Kdsd

https://youtube.com/shorts/jOKZc3pu4Tw?si=wn8FzNP_kvjZtfL2

You won’t know until the silence hit you

The quickest path of victimhood

Is through the expression of passive-aggressive, dismissive-avoidant denial

The gauntlet is thrown in defeat

The indignation and sentence are exposed pre-trial

At attachment theory, dismissive-avoidant and anxiously attached

Both have triggers

Both have a 22 catch

You won’t know until the silence hits you

You have to experience it before you can see

 we have to prevent what triggers us

To face what is truly reality 

If you pull back far enough, the problem within you is evident but you are afraid to see

Your emotional paralysis is not mature

Your perpetual stagnation

Is all you endure

A self fulfilling prophecy

Meets a self sabotaging force

You’re not able to navigate

If you can’t chart a course

Take a snapshot

What do we know?

Severe emotional neglect

Stunted feelings, you never allow to grow

How do you deal if you don’t know how to heal?

What is wild?

You are part woman

No, you are part child

Survivors of emotional trauma

And childhood neglect

May Bond together

Attached to the trauma they connect

The perks of being a wallflower

When you see it, it hits a nerve

“Sometimes we accept the love

We think we deserve”

RSP

…

DCG

I self sabotage

When I have guilt

When I have shame

I self sabotage

That’s who I blame

I don’t feel worthy

I don’t feel sane

I self sabotage

That’s where I put my blame

Guilt is from choices I’ve made

Shame is from identifying with inadequacy

My father used to put me down

He put me down so masterfully

Abandonment issues

Little self-esteem

The child inside me

Has a diminishing dream

You see I’ve had difficulty in relationships

I had a difficult childhood

And with my low self-esteem

My cognitive dissonance stood

RSP

…

DCG

The questions one must ask

Suffering from the emotional abuse

When a young child is not allowed to cry

Wishing if only

His father would simply just Die!

Old wounds run silent and deep

When a memory of the past

Eclipses your present state

Just how long will this disruption last?

What is adversity?

Is it a certainty?

Maybe even a guarantee?

Does it define us by decree?

Deteriorate

Infuriate

Suffocate

Isolate

When indeed will we learn?

My own prison a captive of my own thought

Both the jailer and the inmate

Is this what my life has brought?

Given the stakes

What must we do?

Pardon the offences?

Follow a moral law that is true?

Where do we draw the line?

How do we measure autonomy?

The questions one must ask

To comport their philosophy

“ The swords of time will peirce our skin

It doesn’t hurt when it begins

But as it works its way on in

The pain grows stronger watch it grin “

The currency of knowledge is free

What we don’t squander

If we attend

Only then this wisdom we can ponder

Receptivity is crucial

I think the broken-hearted people would agree

A key will open a door

A light will allow us to see

Manifest change by perception

Attachment of pain from a dream

Is much harder to navigate

When it clearly cannot be seen

…

DCG