MIND MOVES: Life is punctuated by events. There is a predictable Irish annual rhythm to existence. We celebrate Christmas, New Year, St Patrick's Day, Easter and Hallowe'en, not to mention many multicultural religious rites and transnational traditions we now embrace.
The seasons sequence the year. There are also national holidays, State occasions, sports fixtures. We enjoy science expositions, art exhibitions, literary revelries and historical anniversaries of national pride and shame.
In a curious way, these seasonal celebrations and cultural events delineate our days and they are psychologically significant, regardless of the degree to which we participate or exempt ourselves from involvement in them. Perhaps this is because each occasion has its own images, collective interpretation, personal meaning and psychological import. Easter is no exception.
Our relationship with Easter is complex in this country because of the conjoining of Christian commemoration and political events such as The Easter Rising and The Good Friday Agreement.
Additionally, there is commercial Easter: the celebration of new life as represented by the egg, now transformed, for children at least, into a concentrated, consumer, chocolate fest.
Easter's religious images are psychologically potent. Dominant are those of suffering and sacrifice. Within Christian tradition, there is a kind of annual angst in the routine of remembrance throughout Easter week.
Easter is suffused with suffering, with the contradictions between cruelty and contrition, treachery and triumph, doubt and belief, and death and resurrection. Suffering precedes salvation. Sacrifice brings redemption.
But what place do messages of self-sacrifice have in the world today and what does a science of psychology have to say about sacrificing the self in the service of others?
Psychological discourses that focus on the individual as primary, self-sufficient, independent and unfettered by the dependence of other people, reject self-sacrifice as psychologically unhealthy. They relegate self-sacrifice to the category of self-defeating personality disorder. In this way of thinking, to help others excessively is to be helplessly dependent upon their affirmation or the respect of those who witness one's helpfulness.
From this perspective, self-sacrifice is perceived to be pathological and it is suggested that it be replaced by more self-serving, individual, utilitarian ideals. The implications of this individuality, rather than family and community-orientated altruistic behaviour, is of concern as social capital is depleted and the role of carer is denigrated.
Freud saw sexual urges and instincts as the driving force in human activity rather than altruism or self-sacrifice. Scientist Richard Dawkins in The Selfish Gene describes both selfishness and altruism as biologically determined. Although, as he says, they touch every aspect of our social lives, our "fighting and co-operating, our greed and our generosity", self-sacrifice serves personal genetic continuity rather than philanthropy.
But there are theoretical perspectives, which reject such pragmatism and embrace the philosophical. Austrian psychiatrist Victor Frankl asserts the importance of giving as the means by which the "true" self is found.
His approach, known as "Logotherapy", maintains that man's deepest desire is to search for meaning and purpose in life. Based on his own experiences as a survivor of the concentration camps, he proposes that from the experience of suffering, meaning may emerge.
Suffering, in his terms, while not sought, provides the sufferer with the unique opportunity to encounter himself or herself, to find personal strength of which they were previously unaware, and to gain insights only available to those who have endured those particular experiences.
It is not unusual for people who have, for example, gone through the dark night of the soul to emerge with an indefinable strength, which they harness in the service of others who are depressed. Survivors of suffering set up many voluntary organisations and bring their insights and support to others beginning that journey.
Professionals in any psychological domain have long been aware that the qualification they do not have and the gift they cannot give is the deep understanding of someone who has experienced what their client has suffered.
It is not possible to imagine the experience of the death of one's child, the vigil with a dying parent, the terror of rape, the decline in physical or mental capacity, the torture of trauma, the loss of a spouse, the isolation of separation, the burden of being a carer for years and years or the role of parenting a child with special needs.
Who but those who have experienced it can speak about the suicide of a family member, the disablement of domestic violence, the indignity of dependency, the wretchedness of rejection and the despondency of grief?
And consider the generosity with which staggering numbers of people arise from such personal suffering to dedicate that experience to others. Easter is, perhaps, a celebration of those who "watch one hour" with others and who give generously of themselves for other souls. Maybe we should tell them we appreciate and celebrate them this Easter?
Marie Murray is a director of psychology at St Vincent's Hospital Fairview.