Relationships, mental anguish, self-discovery and “mind-set”: what can we learn from Economics Nobel Laureate John Nash and Psychiatrist R.D Laing?

Adam Smith’s (2012) “invisible hand” theory posited that individual self-interest might result in positive overall outcomes. John Nash, a mathematician who received his PhD in mathematics at Princeton University in 1950, who taught at MIT and received the 1994 Nobel prize in economics, and R.D Laing (1964) in his time, the 1960ies, a prominent but controversial psychiatrist known for his anti-psychiatry stance, challenged this.

In the article below, I delve more into some of Nash’s and RD Laing’s findings extending them to the psychology of human interactions. I show how their findings can contribute to our understanding of “mindset”. Nash was portrayed by the great Russel Crow in “A Beautiful Mind” directed by Ron Howard (highly recommended).

From Division and Combat to Integration and Collaboration

I discovered in my doctoral studies that Nash and Laing have many things in common. In his seminal book, “The Divided Self”, Laing argued that psychotic behavior could be seen as a response to a dysfunctional (and oppressive/alienating) social environment and also as a result of a suppressed authentic self-expression. Nash’s Equilibrium theory could be seen similarly and as complementing, maybe even evolving, Adam Smith’s (2012) work. Nash effectively raised our consciousness by providing a more nuanced explanation of how self-interest interacts with cooperation in strategic situations. He suggested (and then over decades of his theories’ applications in a variety of fields) that in situations where self-interest might seem to dictate a specific outcome, cooperation can be the more superior approach leading to a better collective result.

Interestingly Laing might have viewed John Nash’s experiences with schizophrenia through a lens that emphasized the social and existential aspects of life, and therefore our wellbeing, rather than just a result of brain chemistry. This is something that the film “Beautiful Mind” highlights but also could have delved to more with today’s understanding of relational psychotherapy.

Here’s how both Nash’s and Laing’s theories might contribute to mindset:

1. The importance of Interdependence:

Nash:

• Nash’s findings show that individual outcomes are not solely determined by one’s own actions, but also by the actions of others.
• Positive outcomes, success therefore necessitate collaboration and understanding the needs and goals of others.
• Nash’s work takes us beyond a purely individualistic mindset to a more interconnected one.

RD Laing:

• Focus on Social and Existential Factors:
• Laing might have also emphasized the social and interpersonal factors that contributed to Nash’s mental illness, rather than solely focusing on biological factors.
• Laing might have explored the dynamics of Nash’s family, his social relationships, and how these may have contributed to his experiences of unease, isolation and self-esteem.

2. Strategic Thinking:
   

Nash:

• Nash’s equilibrium demonstrates the need to anticipate the reactions of others and choose strategies that are resilient to potential countermoves.
• This fosters a more proactive and strategic mindset, where one actively considers the potential consequences of different actions.
• It encourages a focus on long-term goals and the ability to adapt to changing circumstances.

Laing:

• Laing might have emphasized the importance of open communication and healthy relationships in helping individuals cope with mental illness.

3. Relationality, Collaboration and Trust:

Nash:

• Nash’s framework helps us understand how cooperation can lead to better outcomes for all involved.
• He challenges the adoption of purely competitive mindsets encouraging a collaborative approach with shared goals leading to mutual benefits

RD Laing:

• Laing also focused on communication and relationships. He might have encouraged Nash to explore his experiences and express his feelings in a supportive environment.

4. Strengthened Problem-Solving Skills:
   

Nash

• More effective problem-solving strategies are fostered as a result of ongoing exploration of his “game-theoretic perspectives”.
• Nash invites us to look at things from multiple angles, developing our mental gym resources by considering alternative strategies, and adapting to changing conditions.
• Nash encourages the adoption of a more systematic and analytical approach to decision-making resulting in more effective solutions

Laing:

• Laing would have viewed Nash’s psychotic experiences as a reaction to a “Divided Self”. More specifically Laing believed that individuals with schizophrenia were often “fragmented” internally. He observed that they often struggled to integrate or relate to their own many inner parts (their “divided self”).
• He saw their psychotic experiences as a way to cope with this internal overwhelm and conflict. Today, with the work of Dr Schwartz, Dr Paul, Janina Fisher, Courtois & Ford, and many others, focusing on internal dialogue is possible.
• This work leads to inner and outer restoration of a cohesive whole. Their work today would have helped Nash and others re-establishing internal “order”. This is done by developing a connection to self, internal dialogues, challenging assumptions and beliefs and giving each internal fragmented part a voice leading to clearer and more effective psychological solutions – relationally.

5. Promoting a Growth Mindset:

Nash

Nash’s work can be seen as encouraging a continuous learning process, where individuals are constantly refining their strategies and adapting to new information. This is in turn fosters a growth mindset, where challenges are seen as opportunities for learning and improvement rather than as threats.

RD Laing:

• Laing challenges the Medical Model at the time incorporating the relational and the whole person.
  In Laing’s time in the 1960ies the medical model of mental illness, which has tended to focus on biological causes and treatments was reductionist and objectifying of patients.
• Today I believe that Laing would have first listened to all his patients, invited all to question situations, opened up dialogue and invited a relational approach (Mitchell, 2000). For him focusing solely on the use of antipsychotic medications might suppress rather than address the underlying issues. I believe that today Laing might have seen Nash’s hallucinations and delusions as a way to cope with a “divided self”, his loneliness, isolation and a world that was perceived as “insane”.
• Nash also suffered from schizophrenia and displayed potential traits of undiagnosed autism spectrum disorder. He might have incorporated a both rather than either/ or approach to medication and psychotherapy. Both Laing’s and Nash’s work can lead to greater resilience and adaptability in the face of uncertainty and change

In sum,

• Taking into account, understanding and adapting to the strategies of others/the Group and the relational was a paradigm shift. Both Nash and Laing suggested this is critical for achieving optimal outcomes in cooperative and competitive scenarios.
• As such, Nash and Laing, also changed our paradigm in psychology, very much along the lines of relational practitioners. Nash’s game theory and Laing’s relational approach to a divided sense of self, provide a framework for understanding the complexities of human interaction and making more informed decisions that lead to better outcomes seeing all human endeavours as interactions as relational in nature.
• Laing would have seen Nash’s recovery as a process of self-discovery and healing, rather than simply a matter of medication. We can apply their findings by encouraging curiosity, exploration of creativity in the pursuit of any endeavour, including one’s own intellectual or other interests, which become evident when working and dialoguing with people.
• The main contribution of both is increased trust and stronger relationships due to the benefits of a win-win of working together. This is also the findings of almost seven decades of research in psychotherapy namely that it is believed that it is the relationship that heals.

About Schizophrenia

It is beyond the scope of this article to provide detailed definitions of schizophrenia. For the purpose of this piece, the NHS defines schizophrenia as “as a type of psychosis where individuals may not always be able to distinguish their own thoughts and ideas from reality.” Psychologists (Mearns & Cooper, 2018; Charura & Paul, 2015), psychotherapist psychiatrists ( Laing, 1964; Trub, 1964) and medical doctors ( Allouche, 2022) define human beings, the Homo-sapiens, as inherently social with needs to inter-relate. They posited that if they lacked ( especially nourishing) connected encounters in their external environment, on the internal level, the individual creates inner “splits” and fragmentations so they can relate to themselves.
Psychotherapists like Dr Richard Schwartz (2013) creator of the internal family system (IFS) modality of psychotherapy and a host of object relational theorists ( see Mitchell, 2020) conceptualise schizophrenia as a complex interplay of internal parts or “parts” and/or “subpersonalities” within a person’s mind. IFS posits that individuals have an inner system of diverse parts, each with its own perspectives and roles, and underlying them is a core self. In the context of schizophrenia, some parts might take on more extreme roles or become distressed, leading to symptoms like delusions and hallucinations This is shown well in “The Beautiful Mind” film.

Do you want to experience ways of working with your “inner parts” with safe and evidence-based modalities?

After struggling myself for many decades, I understand inner fragmentation quite well. I have over a decade of experience in working with inner parts/inner child work and can help you regain a sense of cohesive self, peace and freedom from internal anguish. I have researched this at Master and doctoral level in great depth and have also worked in my own personal therapy for over twelve years. Feel free to contact with me here. I offer a complimentary 20min call/zoom.

References

Courtois & Ford (2013) Courtois, A. & Ford, J.D. (2013). Treatment of Complex Trauma : A Sequenced, Relationship-Based Approach. The Guildford Press. New York, London.

Howard, R. (2001). A Beautiful Mind. United States: Universal Pictures.

Laing, R. D. (1964). The divided self: An existential study in sanity and madness. Penguin Books.

Mearns, D., & Cooper, M. (2018). Working at Relational Depth in Counselling and Psychotherapy. Sage Publications Ltd.

Mitchell, S. A. (2000). Relationality: From attachment to intersubjectivity. Analytic Press.

Nash, J. F. (1950). Equilibrium points in n-person games. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 36(1), 48–49.

Paul, S. & Charura, D. (2015). An Introduction to the Therapeutic Relationship in Counselling and Psychotherapy. 10.4135/9781473909854.

Schwartz. R. (2013). Internal Family systems therapy (IFS). Journal of Clinical Psychology, 69(8), 805–816. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22016

Smith, A. (2012). Wealth of Nations. Wordsworth Editions.