शुक्रवार, 19 दिसंबर 2025

A Multilevel Genetic and Psychosomatic Framework for Understanding Problems


Chapter Title (APA Style)

A Multilevel Genetic and Psychosomatic Framework for Understanding Problems

Author:
Awadhesh Kumar Shailaj, M.A. (Psychology)
Independent Scholar in Psychology, Integrative Medicine, and Holistic Sciences
Pachamba, Begusarai, Bihar, India


---

Abstract

A problem is commonly perceived as a situational or external difficulty; however, such a view remains reductionist and insufficient for holistic understanding. This chapter proposes two complementary theoretical models: (a) the Multi-Level Genetic Influence Model and (b) the Genetic–Psychological–Psychosomatic Flow Model. These models conceptualize problems as multilevel, dynamic processes influenced by genetic predispositions, psychological structuring, psychosomatic expression, and subtle or parapsychological dimensions. Together, they offer an integrative framework applicable to psychology, homeopathy, psychosomatic medicine, and holistic health sciences.

Keywords: Problem, heredity, genetics, psychology, psychosomatic model, integrative medicine


---

1. Introduction

In psychology and medical sciences, the concept of a problem is often confined to observable symptoms, environmental stressors, or behavioral maladjustments. Such compartmentalized approaches fail to explain why similar conditions produce different outcomes in different individuals. This chapter argues that problems must be understood through a multilevel and process-oriented framework, integrating genetic, psychological, psychosomatic, and subtle dimensions.


---

2. Option One: Multi-Level Genetic Influence Model

2.1 Conceptual Foundation

The Multi-Level Genetic Influence Model proposes that heredity is not restricted to physical or biological traits but operates simultaneously across multiple domains of human functioning. Genetic influence is therefore conceptualized as a multidimensional determinant, rather than a single-domain causal factor.

Importantly, the repeated use of the term genetic is intentional and theoretically justified, as heredity exerts differentiated influences at different levels of human existence.


---

2.2 Genetic Influence at the Physical Level

At the physical level, genetic factors influence:

Bodily constitution and structural formation

Organ-system sensitivity or vulnerability

Biochemical and hormonal response patterns

Disease predisposition (diathesis)


At this level, a problem exists primarily as latent potential, not as an inevitable outcome.


---

2.3 Genetic Influence at the Psychological Level

Genetic influence extends into psychological functioning by shaping:

Temperament and emotional reactivity

Stress tolerance and resilience

Dominant emotional patterns (e.g., anxiety, anger, inhibition)

Adaptive and coping styles


Many psychological tendencies are not merely learned but inherited, making problems emerge as personality-based conflicts or emotional dysregulation.


---

2.4 Genetic Influence at the Psychosomatic Level

The psychosomatic level represents the interface between mind and body. Here, genetically influenced psychological traits interact with prolonged emotional stress, leading to:

Autonomic nervous system imbalance

Endocrine dysregulation

Organ-specific vulnerability and symptom formation


At this stage, problems become clinically visible through bodily symptoms.


---

2.5 Genetic Influence at the Subtle or Parapsychological Level

Beyond conventional biomedical models, genetic influence may manifest as:

Deep-seated subconscious patterns

Transgenerational impressions (sanskaras)

Spiritual or intuitive inclinations

Heightened sensitivity to subtle experiences


This dimension aligns with Eastern philosophical concepts and depth psychology, expanding heredity into the realm of consciousness inheritance.


---

2.6 Conclusion of Option One

> Genetic influence operates simultaneously at physical, psychological, psychosomatic, and subtle levels. Therefore, understanding a problem requires a multilevel genetic perspective rather than a reductionist biological view.




---

3. Option Two: Genetic–Psychological–Psychosomatic Flow Model

3.1 Conceptual Foundation

The second model addresses a different question: How does a problem develop over time?
This model conceptualizes problems as dynamic processes, not static conditions.


---

3.2 Stage One: Genetic Predisposition

The process begins with genetic predispositions, including:

Neural sensitivity

Hormonal response tendencies

Emotional baseline patterns


This stage provides probability, not determinism.


---

3.3 Stage Two: Psychological Structuring

Genetic predispositions are shaped by:

Family environment

Sociocultural context

Personal experiences


This interaction produces:

Cognitive styles

Emotional response patterns

Self-concept and coping mechanisms


At this stage, problems manifest as internal psychological conflicts.


---

3.4 Stage Three: Psychosomatic Expression

When psychological stress persists:

Stress hormones remain chronically activated

Specific organ systems become overloaded

Bodily symptoms emerge as expressions of unresolved psychological tension


Here, the problem becomes somatically expressed.


---

3.5 Stage Four: Experiential Manifestation of the Problem

Finally, the individual consciously experiences the problem as:

Physical illness

Behavioral dysfunction

Social or occupational impairment


This is the stage at which the problem is usually recognized and labeled.


---

3.6 Conclusion of Option Two

> A problem evolves from genetic predisposition through psychological structuring and culminates in psychosomatic manifestation, making it a developmental rather than incidental phenomenon.




---

4. Integrated Discussion

The two models are complementary rather than competing:

Option One explains where genetic influence operates (structural levels).

Option Two explains how a problem unfolds over time (developmental flow).


Together, they provide a comprehensive, integrative understanding of problems across psychology, homeopathy, psychosomatic medicine, and holistic health sciences.


---

5. Implications for Clinical and Academic Practice

Encourages root-level understanding rather than symptom suppression

Supports individualized, person-centered therapeutic approaches

Provides a strong theoretical base for integrative and holistic medicine

Aligns with biopsychosocial and consciousness-based models



---

References (APA Style – Sample)

Engel, G. L. (1977). The need for a new medical model: A challenge for biomedicine. Science, 196(4286), 129–136.

Hahnemann, S. (1849). Organon of medicine (6th ed.).

Jung, C. G. (1968). The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Princeton University Press.

Selye, H. (1976). The stress of life. McGraw-Hill.

Shailaj, A. K. (2025). General definition of problem and multilevel genetic influence (Unpublished manuscript).


---

Author’s Note (APA-Compliant)

The concepts presented in this chapter represent the original integrative framework of the author and are intended for academic, clinical, and research-oriented applications.


---

कोई टिप्पणी नहीं:

एक टिप्पणी भेजें