How People Accidentally Re-Strengthen Old Limbic Patterns

How People Accidentally Re-Strengthen Old Limbic Patterns (Even While Healing)

One of the most frustrating experiences during healing is this:

“I understand what’s happening.
I’m doing the work.
And yet it feels like the old reaction just got stronger.”

That moment often leads to self-doubt or discouragement.

But in many cases, what’s happening isn’t failure.

It’s accidental re-reinforcement.

A critical principle

The limbic system strengthens patterns based on what predicts outcomes, not on your intentions.

It doesn’t care whether you’re “working on yourself.”

It cares about:

  • what happens next
  • what state you end up in
  • whether danger or safety follows

That means certain well-intentioned behaviours can quietly feed the very patterns you’re trying to weaken.

1. Over-monitoring the old pattern

One of the most common mistakes is excessive checking:

  • “Is it gone yet?”
  • “Am I reacting again?”
  • “Why is this still here?”

This keeps attention locked on the old cue.

From the limbic system’s perspective:

Cue is present → attention intensifies → threat remains relevant

Even frustrated observation can act like reinforcement.

Correction:
Notice the pattern once — then redirect attention to what happens next, not back to the trigger.

2. Treating the old pattern as a problem to solve

Trying to fix, analyse, or argue with the old reaction in real time often backfires.

Why?

Because struggle itself becomes part of the cue.

The system learns:

“This reaction still requires emergency handling.”

Which keeps it classified as high-priority.

Correction:
Shift from problem-solving to allowing without response.
Let the signal pass without escalation or repair.

3. Rehearsing the threat without resolution

Revisiting painful memories or patterns without a completed outcome can unintentionally strengthen them.

This includes:

  • replaying scenarios that end in helplessness
  • rehearsing explanations that were never heard
  • imagining confrontation without protection or closure

The limbic system doesn’t hear insight — it records:

“This still ends badly.”

Correction:
If you revisit a scene internally, always include:

  • protection
  • dignity
  • continuity
  • an ending where nothing bad follows

No resolution = no update.

4. Using intensity instead of repetition

People often assume stronger emotion equals stronger healing.

In limbic terms, that’s usually wrong.

High intensity:

  • increases salience
  • increases arousal
  • strengthens whatever pattern is active

Even if the story is healthier.

Correction:
Prefer low-intensity, repeatable, boring success.
Repetition beats drama.

5. Expecting the old pattern to disappear

Ironically, this expectation itself can re-strengthen the pattern.

When the signal appears and you think:

“This shouldn’t be happening anymore”

The system registers:

  • surprise
  • alarm
  • renewed importance

Which boosts the old pattern’s weight.

Correction:
Expect flickers.
Treat them as background noise, not evidence.

6. Confusing feeling with danger

A subtle but powerful trap is equating sensation with threat.

For example:

  • tension = danger
  • fear = regression
  • sadness = collapse

The limbic system then learns:

“Feeling this state is unsafe.”

Which reinforces avoidance and vigilance.

Correction:
Let sensations exist without consequence.
Safety is proven when nothing bad happens next.

7. Withdrawing agency during discomfort

When an old pattern appears, people often stop acting:

  • pause life
  • cancel plans
  • disengage
  • wait to “feel better”

This teaches the system:

“This signal requires shutdown.”

Correction:
Continue small, ordinary actions while the signal is present.
Agency during discomfort is one of the strongest retraining signals available.

The quiet truth

Most re-strengthening doesn’t come from doing the wrong thing.

It comes from doing too much, too urgently, too intensely.

The limbic system updates best when:

  • signals appear
  • nothing dramatic happens
  • life continues
  • safety is boring

The line I use to re-orient

When I catch myself accidentally feeding the old pattern, this is the sentence I return to:

“I don’t need to fix this for it to lose relevance.”

Letting a pattern pass without response is not neglect.

It’s de-prioritisation.

And over time, that’s exactly how old patterns stand down.

​

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Validation vs. Valuation

Validation vs. Valuation I recently found myself reflecting on the difference between validation and valuation , and I realised that although the words are often used interchangeably, they point to very different things. Validation, at its simplest and most innocent, is a form of support in the moment. It says: you’re seen , you’re heard , you’re not alone right now . In practical terms, validation is important — we validate work to ensure it’s safe, correct, or fit for purpose. In relationships, it can be reassuring and kind. But validation has a shadow side. When validation becomes something I need in order to feel whole — when my sense of self depends on it — it quietly shifts from support into something corrosive. In its more sinister form, validation can become manipulation, or an inadvertent tapping into a core wound: without your approval, I don’t exist . At that point, validation no longer supports identity — it erodes it. Valuation is something else entirely. Valuation ...
Read more

AMS Guide Part 1 — Charter and Purpose

AMS Guide Part 1 — Charter and Purpose 1. What This Guide Is This document is a companion guide to the Aetheric Magnetic Substrate (AMS) Ontology . Its purpose is to: explain the ontology in plain but accurate language reduce cognitive load for readers encountering the ideas for the first time provide intuition, metaphors, and narrative scaffolding allow readers to grasp what the ontology is doing without needing to adopt its formal vocabulary immediately The guide is not the ontology itself. It does not replace formal definitions or axioms. It exists to make them understandable . 2. Intended Audience Primary Audience Readers with: a genuine interest in science and how the physical world works some familiarity with scientific ideas and language curiosity rather than professional obligation A good mental model is: A regular reader of a BBC science magazine, Scientific American–style articles, or long-form popular science writing. This reader: is not a practi...
Read more

Newton, Einstein, and Gravity Revisited Through the Aetheric Magnetic Substrate

Newton, Einstein, and Gravity Revisited Through the Aetheric Magnetic Substrate I recently watched a video titled “There Is Something Faster Than Light.” The specifics of the argument aren’t the point here. What caught my attention was the familiar framing that followed: Newton versus Einstein, non-local versus local gravity, classical intuition versus modern physics. This framing is common. It’s also misleading. What follows is not a critique of either Newton or Einstein, but an attempt to understand what they were actually observing , why their descriptions differed, and how those observations can be unified under a single, coherent ontology — the Aetheric Magnetic Substrate (AMS) . Newton: Gravity as Non-Local Action Newton’s law of gravitation is often caricatured as “action at a distance,” and historically, Newton himself was uneasy with that implication. From a modern perspective, Newtonian gravity is described as non-local : Two masses influence one another instantly N...
Read more