Personality is often referred to as a set of behavioral, cognitive, and emotional patterns in an individual that distinguishes them from others. Since thoughts and emotions (which I will examine in detail in the section on emotions) are part of our mental content, I redefine personality as a set of content patterns on the backdrop of a person’s mental context. This definition comprises two components: content and context, both of which have been thoroughly examined. Understanding this concept requires a complete grasp of mental content and mental context. By “pattern,” I mean how content is arranged on the backdrop of context.

With this definition, it becomes clear that categorizing an individual is not straightforward because, as previously explained, context resembles a multi-dimensional matrix where various factors play a role in multiple layers, continuously influencing the content of the mind. Contexts such as the books you’ve read, the people you’ve met, the stories you’ve heard from them, the movies you’ve watched, and the value systems you’ve been exposed to (which include a set of values, beliefs, and do’s and don’ts), all the human networks and communities you have spent time with, along with other contexts like genetics, environment, and climate—all these contribute to shaping what you currently refer to as personality. All these factors are constantly changing; none of them ever stops evolving for even a moment. So, how can we freeze a multi-dimensional set of constantly changing processes and content and label it as “personality”?

Given these explanations, it’s conceivable that many animal species, especially mammals and primates, also exhibit different behaviors in various situations because many factors like genetics and the environment (temperature, climate, threats, and environmental changes) are similar across most animals.

If, like me, you engage in daily self-conversations, have you ever wondered who these conversations are between? To answer this, we first need to define what a conversation is.

A conversation is a series of words arranged in coherent and meaningful sentences exchanged between two or more individuals. This means if I utter a series of words in a coherent and meaningful sentence, it does not qualify as a conversation in the absence of another person or persons. Now, let’s answer what distinguishes these individuals from each other? It is exactly what we are examining in this section: “personality.” And personality is also a collection of content on a backdrop of context. Given the multi-dimensional nature of context, if each individual can create infinite content patterns on the backdrop of their context, it means that not only do we possess multiple personalities, but we can also have dialogues between these personalities. A single thought placed simultaneously in multiple cells of the multi-dimensional context matrix can lead to a conversation between our different personalities. If, like me, you occasionally argue with yourself or experience hesitation in decision-making, this is entirely natural, and the above explanations clarify how this occurs in the mind.

These explanations indicate that a single, unchangeable “self” that can be pointed to and defined from a first-person perspective does not exist. Even from a third-person perspective, it is true that one might not observe a person’s internal dialogues, but the signs of changes are clearly visible. The reason we constantly exhibit different behavioral patterns and are always unpredictable is further evidence of this.

One crucial point that should not be overlooked is the harmony between each of these personalities. Just as an orchestra’s harmony depends on a pattern and the guidance of a conductor, the mental dialogues between our various personalities also require such harmony. If one of these players plays a note outside the pattern, the orchestra’s harmony will be disrupted. Similarly, what we call a mental or personality disorder may result from playing notes outside the harmonious pattern.

The definitions of trauma differ not only in psychology, psychiatry, neuroscience, social sciences, and philosophy but also among scholars and philosophers across different times and places. I will provide my own definition based on the content of this book.

Trauma is an experience of severe expectation error that leads to changes in the mental context and the pattern of content placement in the field of awareness, resulting in alterations in an individual’s personality.

You might wonder why I use the term “expectation error” instead of shock or severe psychological impact. The issue is that terms like shock or severe psychological impact do not describe the nature of what happens in the mind. Instead, these words attempt to explain what has occurred. From my perspective, the nature of what occurs in the mind is a form of expectation error, which was elaborated on with various examples in the previous section. If you still find it challenging to grasp this concept, consider why certain news is shocking to you or why some events surprise you.

As you might have guessed, my response to all these questions relates in some way to the brain’s predictions. This connection is undoubtedly complex and not a simple linear relationship.

One definition of a surprise is an unexpected event, which means you do not anticipate it. If I inform you a few minutes before your family surprises you for your birthday or while watching a shocking scene in a movie, what happens in your mind? By doing so, I am actually providing information that alters your brain’s prediction, significantly reducing the prediction error.

Imagine I push you into a cold pool without prior warning. In this situation, you would experience a surprise or even a shock, and it could lead to a heart attack. Now, imagine you willingly step into the cold pool. The likelihood of shock in this case would be much lower. What if you enter a warm pool instead? You would not only avoid surprise, but you would also feel comfortable.

What is the difference between these three scenarios?

You guessed it correctly. The degree of expectation error varies significantly across these three scenarios.

In the first case, you experience two expectation errors. First, you did not expect me to push you into the pool, and second, your nervous system did not anticipate a sudden drop in temperature, triggering an immediate full-body response.

In the second scenario, where you voluntarily jump into the cold pool, there is still an expectation error regarding body temperature, but you are mentally prepared.

In the third scenario, there is no expectation error because the water temperature is close to your body temperature.

If the concepts of surprise, shock, and the degree of expectation error are still unclear, feel free to contact me for a live demonstration.

When faced with a traumatic event, if the mind cannot restore the balance using conventional methods due to the high level of imbalance created, it may result in what is known as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). It is important to note that adverse childhood experiences (ACE) do not necessarily equate to trauma or lead to PTSD, and not all traumas occur during childhood. However, children have a higher potential for being traumatized during painful experiences for reasons I will explain. Let’s clarify this with some examples.

You might break a leg while playing ball with your peers. This injury could be quite painful and might require hospitalization and significant suffering. However, this experience is not necessarily traumatic in a way that would lead to PTSD. In contrast, if you experience a car accident where your vehicle overturns and falls into a ravine, surviving with a similar fracture, the likelihood of this being a traumatic event is much higher. And if the same fracture results from being beaten by your parents, the probability of it becoming a trauma that could lead to PTSD becomes even greater. The primary difference in these experiences lies in the nature of how they occur and the expectation error explained in the previous section.

When playing football, you might consider the possibility of injury or fracture. When you are on a road trip with your parents, you do not expect such a severe accident. Lastly, you never expect parents who show you love and are the most important figures in your life to beat you.

Children, besides being physically vulnerable, have a higher potential for being traumatized by painful events due to the lack of development in many areas of their brains. A lack of mental capacity for analyzing the event, insufficient language skills to balance the pain of the expectation error, and not having a solid value system to justify what happened can leave lasting impacts on children.

Children expect care and love from their parents, so how does a child interpret it when parents create painful experiences through physical punishment or psychological neglect? The child may conclude that the world is a dangerous place where anyone can harm you, and hence, I should trust no one. The child might believe they deserve punishment, making them attracted to those who harm them. They might also learn that it’s possible to love someone while punishing them, leading them to think it’s okay to hurt those they love.

Each of these narratives, along with thousands of other possible stories, can significantly impact a child’s future life and shape what we call personality. It is important to note that these examples make sense in a typical family where caring for children is part of the parents’ values. Certainly, exceptions exist for families and children raised outside this norm. If a child never develops an expectation of care, the potential for these painful experiences to become traumatic is different, and even punishment and neglect might become normalized. A child raised in such an environment will have a different understanding of care, parenting, and even relationships with others and the environment in the future, but that is beyond the scope of this book.

To better understand the complexity of PTSD, let’s return to the car accident example. Suppose you did not anticipate such an accident during your trip. In that case, you will likely develop a severe fear of getting into a car and traveling for a long time, but the issue is not so straightforward. Imagine 20 years later, you are now an adult living your own life. If you have not taken any action to reconcile the imbalance caused by the accident, your brain might have worked to make the memory as faint as possible or even completely inaccessible. However, you might still experience inexplicable anxiety characterized by stomach tightness, sweaty palms, and palpitations, even when everything seems calm and without problems in your life. You’ve visited doctors and psychiatrists several times, received numerous medications, but these only temporarily suppress the symptoms without addressing the root cause. Unbeknownst to you, every time you get into a car and drive to work, your mind triggers anxiety symptoms without any conscious memory of the painful accident. During road trips, you might experience nausea, headaches, and restlessness, which your doctor attributes to motion sickness and prescribes medication to alleviate.

If you were to encounter a wild animal in your home, the anxiety symptoms would be perfectly natural. From childhood, you have been taught about wild animals through countless hours of watching wildlife documentaries and zoo tours. You don’t need to recall a specific memory about wild animals to feel anxious upon seeing one. The sight of the animal itself is enough to trigger anxiety. Now, imagine the animal is a German Shepherd dog. How would you react? Your reaction depends on your context. If your brain associates dogs with being friendly pets, you’d likely rush to embrace the dog, thinking your spouse has surprised you. But if the dog has been portrayed as a trained guard animal, your anxiety would indeed be justified.

Returning to the car accident example, if your mind has created an association that getting into a moving vehicle equals danger and has discarded the painful memory that it couldn’t reconcile, you’d experience severe anxiety and physical symptoms every time you drive somewhere. This could lead to avoidant behavior, aggression, and chronic pain. Increasing medication use has not resolved the issue; it has only suppressed symptoms, worsening the situation.

Physical symptoms are like fire alarms that, when turned off, increase the likelihood of a fire spreading throughout the building. If the alarm sounds without the presence of fire, it’s a sign of a defect in the system that requires meticulous examination and repair. Simply turning off the alarm might seem to resolve the issue momentarily, but it poses even greater dangers.

Discussing what to do about traumas is beyond the scope of this book and my expertise, but the intention here is to provide a clear understanding of what happens in the mind.

The human mind does not operate like a video camera. Instead, it pieces together not entirely accurate snapshots and attempts to create a coherent story between them. This issue will be elaborated on in future sections. Now, if this constructed narrative contains statements like “the world is an unsafe place,” “no one can be trusted,” or “dogs are dangerous predators,” the individual will approach every situation with these contexts, which can become quite complex.

These explanations are not aimed at treating trauma or coping strategies. This book is unrelated to psychotherapy. The purpose of these discussions is to familiarize the reader with one of the most significant contexts—trauma—which can profoundly affect our personalities.