Why Old Limbic Patterns Don’t Disappear — and Why That’s Not a Failure

Why Old Limbic Patterns Don’t Disappear — and Why That’s Not a Failure

One of the most confusing experiences during healing is this:

“I understand what’s happening.
I’ve done the work.
And yet the old reaction still shows up.”

That moment often triggers a quiet fear:

“Does this mean nothing has really changed?”

The answer is no.

What it means is that you’re now encountering how the limbic system actually updates — not how we wish it would.

The key misunderstanding

Most people assume healing means replacement:

  • old pattern gone
  • new pattern installed
  • trigger no longer exists

That’s not how the limbic system works.

The limbic system doesn’t delete survival patterns.

It de-prioritises them.

How limbic patterns really work

The limbic system stores multiple overlapping pattern bundles, not a single rule.

Each pattern includes:

  • a cue (sensation, context, authority, internal state)
  • an expected outcome (danger, safety, punishment, continuity)
  • a response bias (approach, avoid, freeze, appease)

At any given moment, several patterns may partially activate at once.

What determines your experience is not which patterns exist —
but which one wins the competition.

Pattern competition, not pattern replacement

Healing does not look like:

Old pattern → replaced by new pattern

It looks like:

Old pattern + new pattern → compete → one gradually dominates

Early on:

  • the old pattern fires first
  • it fires hard
  • it controls action

Later:

  • the old pattern may still fire
  • but a second pattern activates
  • action becomes less compelled

Eventually:

  • the new pattern fires earlier
  • holds longer
  • recovers faster
  • and becomes default

The old pattern hasn’t vanished — it’s just lost authority.

Why overlapping patterns feel uncomfortable

When two patterns are active at once, people often report:

  • inner conflict
  • wobble
  • hesitation
  • fear mixed with clarity
  • calm mixed with tension

This is often misread as:

“I’m stuck.”
or
“I’m regressing.”

In reality, it means:

The system is transitioning.

If only one pattern were active, you’d feel certain — even if miserable.

Ambivalence is a sign of competition, not confusion.

Why the old pattern often fires first

Older patterns usually have:

  • higher salience
  • stronger authority involvement
  • deeper reinforcement
  • catastrophic loss weighting

The limbic system is biased toward:

early detection of possible danger
over
late confirmation of safety

This bias is protective — but it also means old patterns get a head start.

Rewiring doesn’t stop the first reaction.

It shortens its reign.

Timing: when the second pattern appears

A useful rule of thumb:

  • Early in healing:
    the second pattern may appear minutes later
  • With progress:
    seconds later
  • Later still:
    almost simultaneously
  • Eventually:
    the newer pattern may fire first

This change in timing is one of the clearest indicators of real limbic rewiring.

Speed matters less than recovery.

What actually changes over time

Three things shift reliably:

  1. Intensity
    The old pattern fires with less force.

  2. Duration
    It doesn’t last as long.

  3. Action bias
    Freeze, collapse, or compulsion no longer lock in.

This is what healing looks like in practice.

Why the old pattern never fully disappears

From an evolutionary perspective, deleting a high-salience survival pattern would be reckless.

So the nervous system keeps it — but reclassifies it as historical data.

Originally:

“This predicts danger.”

Later:

“This used to predict danger.”

That distinction is everything.

The signal may still appear.
But it no longer commands action.

A crucial reframe

Here’s the sentence that often brings the most relief:

Healing is not the absence of old signals — it’s the absence of compulsion.

Feeling something is not the same as being ruled by it.

What progress actually feels like

People often describe later-stage healing as:

  • “It came and went.”
  • “I noticed it, but it didn’t take over.”
  • “I didn’t have to do anything about it.”

That’s not avoidance.

That’s loss of dominance.

The real endpoint

The goal is not:

“I never feel this again.”

The goal is:

“Even if this shows up, it doesn’t define my reality or my choices.”

At that point:

  • the new pattern is default
  • the old pattern is background noise
  • and your nervous system trusts the present more than the past

The line I come back to

When doubt creeps in, this is the sentence that reorients me:

The old pattern hasn’t failed to disappear — it’s succeeded in standing down.

That’s not a compromise.

That’s what durable change actually looks like.

​

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