Webinar: Peace through Perspective

Find Peace Through Perspective: A Webinar for Finding Calm in Conflict

Do you ever feel frustrated when someone just doesn’t see things the way you do? Maybe you’ve found yourself desperately trying to get others to agree with you, or you walk away from conversations feeling misunderstood and invalidated. These moments can be exhausting, leading to stress, anxiety, and even a sense of isolation. If you’ve ever wished for a way to navigate these challenges with more ease, Peace through Perspective is for you.

The Struggle: Feeling Stressed, Misunderstood, and Drained

When we experience conflict—whether in our relationships, at work, or even with ourselves—it can take a toll on our emotional and physical well-being. Stress, frustration, and anxiety become constant companions, making it harder to stay motivated, engage with others, or even complete daily tasks. Over time, these emotions can impact our health, leading to fatigue, tension, and a sense of helplessness.

The good news? There’s a way to shift how we see these challenges and find peace in the process.

The Solution: Expanding Your Perspective for Greater Emotional Balance

Peace through Perspective, facilitated by Ron DonLevy, offers simple yet powerful tools to help you reframe your understanding of conflicts and emotional reactions. Drawing from Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT), this webinar will introduce strategies from mindfulness, emotional regulation, and interpersonal effectiveness. One key concept—embracing a both/and perspective rather than either/or thinking—can help you navigate disagreements with greater calm and clarity.

By making small shifts in the way you see and interpret situations, you can improve your emotional regulation, reduce stress, and create more meaningful connections in all areas of life—whether at work, home, or in your closest relationships.

Imagine a Life with Less Stress and More Peace

What would it feel like to move through life with a greater sense of calm, even when faced with conflict? Imagine engaging in conversations without the weight of frustration, handling disagreements with confidence, and feeling more understood and at ease. These are the real, measurable outcomes of learning to shift your perspective. With practice, you can experience a more balanced emotional state throughout the day, allowing you to show up more effectively in every area of your life.

Watch a replay of the presentation here.

This webinar, titled “Peace Through Perspective”, focuses on various ways individuals can utilize their vantage point and perception of the world to enhance mood, alleviate anxiety or depression, and cultivate greater calm and perspective.

This webinar is conducted monthly and covers a range of topics. In this session, the focus is on Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) and specific DBT skills that support the cultivation of wellness and a broader perspective.

The concept of “Peace through Perspective” is introduced, illustrated by the example of rose-tinted glasses. It is emphasized that perspective has the power to transform obstacles into opportunities and that adopting different viewpoints can significantly alter one’s outlook.

Both of these perspectives represent ways of viewing situations through a positive frame. However, it is acknowledged that if one pushes positivity too far, it can lead to toxic positivity, which is not the intended focus of this session. Instead, the discussion centers on the realistic benefits that perspective can provide.

Additional examples are presented, such as the classic “glass half empty, half full” analogy. Another perspective shown is somewhat more unique and requires a moment to understand, further illustrating how perspectives can vary. The question is posed whether one is viewing situations through rose-colored glasses, and whether such a viewpoint might sometimes obscure reality or hinder an honest confrontation with the truth. This serves as a lighthearted introduction to the concept of perspective.

Agenda

• Perspective
• DBT as a resource
  • What is DBT
  • Dialectics
  • Assumptions
  • Biosocial Theory
  • Midnfulness
    • Wise mind and activity
• Questions

The discussion then moves to Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) as a valuable resource. The webinar covers what DBT entails, explores the concept of dialectics—its meaning and application—and examines key DBT assumptions alongside the Biosocial Theory.

These concepts are drawn from the introductory materials found in the general handouts of the DBT workbook. They are described as forming the foundational thread that connects all of the DBT skills training sections. Each of these elements will be discussed in greater detail throughout the session.

Toward the conclusion of the webinar, there will be a brief exploration of mindfulness, an introduction to the concept of Wise Mind, and a short mindfulness activity. The session will end with a Q&A segment, during which participant questions submitted in the chat will be addressed. Attendees are encouraged to enter their questions as the presentation progresses. The goal is to leave participants with a clear and useful framework.

What is DBT?

Understanding Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT)

At its core, “dialectical” refers to the idea that more than one thing can be true at the same time. This principle underlies the therapy’s emphasis on expanding one’s ability to see situations from multiple viewpoints and to hold space for different perspectives.

The therapy was developed by Marsha Linehan. Linehan herself experienced the challenges of living with borderline personality disorder. Her personal journey through education and treatment led her to identify and create the specific skills that ultimately became the foundation of DBT.

By the time Marsha Linehan became a psychologist, she had conducted additional research and formally developed Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT). The treatment model was published in the late 1980s and early 1990s, supported by extensive research. Many of the skills included in DBT were grounded in techniques Linehan had developed through her own lived experience and academic work. She ultimately organized them into a structured and cohesive therapeutic approach.

Today, a search for DBT yields hundreds of written resources, including individual workbooks and guides. While the formats vary, they all draw upon the foundational skills and principles originally outlined by Linehan.

As the session progresses, several of the core concepts that underpin DBT are introduced. The primary modules include mindfulness, interpersonal effectiveness, emotion regulation, and distress tolerance. Each section provides practical tools designed to support mental and emotional well-being.

Of particular note is the mindfulness component, heavily influenced by Linehan’s own evolution—she eventually became a Zen master. Her approach incorporates meditation, presence, and perspective, which deeply inform the framework of DBT.

While each module contains valuable material, the focus of this session is on the foundational structure and selected key skills—specifically those that are especially transformative in helping individuals shift their perspective and cultivate a greater sense of internal peace.

The primary concepts that guide DBT include dialectical thinking, acceptance, change, and validation.

Each of these themes will be explored in the session. 

Change, in particular, is emphasized as a constant and is addressed within the DBT assumptions that will be reviewed.

Radical acceptance is a central component of the distress tolerance module and serves as one of the foundational principles of the DBT approach. It involves fully acknowledging reality as it is, without resistance—an essential step toward reducing emotional suffering.

Validation is another key concept. It involves recognizing and affirming another person’s perspective, thoughts, or beliefs—even when one does not necessarily agree or view them as objectively correct. The act of saying, “I can understand why you might feel that way,” or “I see where you’re coming from,” is at the heart of validation. This practice helps build empathy, understanding, and connection.

With those foundational ideas introduced, the session moves into the first concept through a visual example. A picture of an elephant is shown, surrounded by blindfolded individuals—an image referencing the ancient parable of the blind monks and the elephant, believed to originate around 500 BCE. The story illustrates how each individual touches only one part of the elephant and thus perceives it differently, emphasizing the importance of multiple perspectives in understanding the whole.

In the parable, a group of blind monks encounters an elephant for the first time and attempts to understand what it is by relying solely on their sense of touch. Each monk approaches a different part of the elephant due to its size and, as a result, forms a unique impression. One touches the side and perceives it as a solid wall. Another, holding the leg, likens it to the trunk of a tree. The tusk is experienced as hard, smooth, and pointed—similar to a spear—while the tail is compared to a rope.

Each monk describes the elephant based on limited personal experience, and while none of them are technically wrong, each interpretation is incomplete. The parable illustrates how individual perspectives, shaped by limited information and vantage points, can lead to both valid yet partial understandings. It reinforces the idea that perspective is not a matter of absolute right or wrong. Rather, it shapes the details one is able to perceive and the angle from which one sees them. This metaphor lays the foundation for understanding the importance of holding space for multiple truths.

At its core, dialectical thinking involves recognizing that more than one thing can be true at the same time.

A visual aid helps illustrate this concept, but an additional example is offered for clarity: a best friend may be incredibly generous, kind, and helpful, yet also moody and at times difficult to interact with. These qualities may seem contradictory, yet both can coexist as equally valid parts of the whole.

This dialectical framework challenges all-or-nothing thinking, encouraging individuals to step away from extremes. It emphasizes the importance of nuance and complexity in understanding human behavior and relationships. The idea is especially relevant in today’s polarized society, where issues such as political discourse and interpersonal disagreements often reflect rigid, black-and-white thinking. DBT offers tools to help navigate these complexities with greater flexibility and openness.

When individuals operate from the extremes of any spectrum, it often leads to a sense of ongoing controversy and disagreement. The reality is that these polar ends tend to be deeply opposed, yet most people share significant common ground within the middle space. It is in this balanced, more nuanced area that agreement and mutual understanding are more likely to be found.

An example is offered through the topic of spirituality—a potentially sensitive subject. Some individuals may view spirituality strictly through the lens of organized religion, while others may define it as a deep connection to nature, or as a belief in fate or universal energy. Though these interpretations differ widely, the underlying belief that spirituality can be beneficial is a point of convergence. This illustrates how opposing views can still lead to shared understanding when approached from a dialectical perspective.

DBT Resources

There are DBT resources that further support these ideas. Central among them are the Skills Training Assumptions, which serve as a guiding framework for DBT practice. These are found in the general handouts of the DBT workbook, specifically General Handout 4 and General Handout 5, which also include the Biosocial Theory. These resources are presented as particularly impactful and serve as a basis for the next part of the discussion.

Seven Basic Assumptions in DBT

The discussion now shifts to the seven basic assumptions in DBT. These assumptions are not presented as absolute truths, but rather as guiding beliefs adopted for the purpose of gaining insight and developing skill. By accepting them as a framework, individuals are better equipped to reflect on how they engage with themselves and others in the world.

The first DBT skills training assumption is the belief that people are doing the best they can. Importantly, the term “people” refers not only to others, but to everyone—including oneself. This assumption encourages individuals to extend grace and compassion both inward and outward. The belief is that, at any given moment, individuals are functioning to the best of their ability within their current circumstances.

For example, if a person has not slept well or is feeling unwell, their “best” on that day may look very different from what they are capable of under optimal conditions. Circumstances such as physical health, emotional state, and environmental factors all play a role in shaping what one’s best effort looks like. Recognizing this helps create a more empathetic and less judgmental perspective toward others and oneself.

The second assumption is that people want to improve. Even while doing their best in the present moment, most individuals possess an intrinsic desire to grow, develop, or enhance some aspect of their lives. This belief reinforces the notion that striving for progress does not negate one’s current efforts, but rather acknowledges the human capacity for both acceptance and change—core tenets of dialectical thinking.

It is a common human desire to improve one’s life, to experience happiness, and to find contentment. This aspiration applies universally—to the individual, to others, and to the collective human experience.

The third DBT assumption builds on this premise: people need to do better, try harder, and be more motivated to change. This reflects DBT’s emphasis on change as a core element of emotional growth and personal development. The assumption encourages individuals to assess what is not working in their lives and to take meaningful steps toward positive transformation. Being open to identifying necessary changes—rather than remaining stuck in unhelpful patterns—is central to this approach.

However, it is acknowledged that doing better and trying harder are not always sufficient to resolve every problem. In cases where change is not possible or external factors remain fixed, acceptance becomes the alternative path. DBT holds both change and acceptance as vital tools, each serving a distinct yet complementary purpose.

The next assumption states: people may not have caused all of our own problems. The phrasing deliberately shifts from “people” to “our,” underscoring that this principle applies universally—to oneself, to others, and to everyone.

While people may not be responsible for the origin of their difficulties, they are still responsible for solving them. This principle reinforces personal agency and resilience, while acknowledging the reality of circumstances beyond one’s control. It serves as a compassionate yet empowering reminder that healing and progress are within reach, even when the starting point is shaped by forces outside of one’s choosing.

While the previous three assumptions are relatively straightforward, this next one benefits from a more illustrative example. The assumption, again, is that people may not have caused all of their own problems, but they are still responsible for solving them.

To help convey this idea, an analogy is offered: Imagine someone is driving a car with a broken fuel gauge. The gauge provides inaccurate information, so when the car runs out of gas, it is not necessarily the driver’s fault—they were misled by faulty data. However, if the vehicle stalls in the second lane from the right on a busy highway and cannot make it to the shoulder, it becomes an obstacle to other drivers and a potential safety hazard.

In that moment, it is irrelevant who is to blame for the broken gauge. What matters is that the vehicle needs to be moved, gas needs to be obtained, and the immediate situation must be resolved. Focusing on who is at fault or why the problem occurred will not move the car or keep others safe. The responsibility for solving the issue lies with the person who is present in the problem—regardless of whether they caused it.

This example illustrates the essential principle behind the assumption: acknowledging one’s circumstances without blame, while still taking responsibility for finding a solution. It is a mindset that empowers action and reduces stagnation, even in situations shaped by external causes.

You are the one behind the wheel of the car, so you are the one responsible for moving the vehicle off the road. That said, you can immediately take action by calling Harris County’s “Steer and Clear” service. They will come to provide gas or assist in removing your car from the road and take you to the nearest gas station—at no cost. If you are unfamiliar with this service, you can dial 311 to inquire about it. While this specific resource is limited to Houston, similar services exist elsewhere. The point here is that even when we are not the cause of a problem, we must determine how to respond when we are affected by it. 

New behavior has to be learned in all relevant contexts.

If we acquire certain skills—whether from Dialectical Behavior Therapy or daily life—but do not know how to adapt and apply them in various situations, those skills lose their practical value. It is akin to understanding math concepts without being able to apply them in different real-world scenarios.

You can apply these skills in practical situations, like when you’re grocery shopping. For example, understanding percentages helps you make sense of interest rates when buying a car—not just for counting items or solving abstract math problems that don’t have real-world relevance. Similarly, if we learn mindfulness techniques to be more focused, present, or relaxed, but can only practice them during a dedicated mindfulness exercise, then they don’t fully benefit us.

For instance, if you find it difficult to stay present at a ballet recital for your daughter, granddaughter, or niece because you’re worried about the costume you helped with, or trying to get the perfect picture for the grandparents, or focused on recording instead of simply watching, you’re not really practicing mindfulness in that moment. These examples show how important it is to apply mindfulness in real-life situations, not just in set-aside practice times.

And here’s one of our favorite assumptions: all behaviors—actions, thoughts, and emotions—are caused. This assumption is really important because it reminds us that everything has a cause. Sometimes when people first read it, they think it means “everything happens for a reason.” That’s a different idea — more of a philosophical belief about why things happen. What we’re talking about here is more specific: all behaviors, whether actions, thoughts, or emotions, have causes.

For example, consider the highway situation. Imagine someone suddenly cuts off another driver while they’re driving. The immediate reaction might be shock and anger — “What the heck?!” That’s completely normal. Initially, part of that reaction is the body’s way of checking for danger, making sure there was no collision or forced detour off the road. But once that immediate anxiety passes — which usually happens rather quickly — behavior is adjusted to stay safe.

If someone finds themselves still feeling upset afterward, that presents a great opportunity to apply the following assumption: since everything is caused, one can ask, What caused the other driver to cut me off?

Now, there’s a small chance the other driver was simply a jerk — someone who enjoys making others uncomfortable on the road, who wants people to be scared, dysregulated, aggressive, and doesn’t care about others, or even wants to annoy them on purpose. While possible, that isn’t believed to be very common. 

So, assuming nine out of ten — or perhaps even more — instances involve other causes, here are some alternative possibilities: perhaps they were rushing to the hospital because someone in the car was about to have a baby. Maybe they were experiencing chest pain and trying to pull off the road to avoid causing a bigger problem. It’s possible their driving instructor didn’t adequately teach them to plan ahead, stay in the correct lane, or pull over at the right time — or perhaps they didn’t have a teacher at all due to lack of resources or parental support. 

Maybe they received a distressing phone call just before entering the highway — a sibling in the hospital, for example — and they were rushing in response. It’s also possible they simply didn’t see the other car because they failed to check their blind spot before merging.

The reality is, most likely, the situation was corrected, everyone remained safe, and continuing to feel dysregulated or upset doesn’t contribute to safety. The only circumstance where intense anger might feel justified is if the other driver acted malevolently — on purpose, or with total disregard for others. That might seem like the time to honk, chase them down, or yell. But if the other person truly is that malevolent, that could actually be the worst possible time to pursue them or react aggressively — they might be exactly the kind of person it’s unsafe to follow. And in reacting that way, one might become the wrong person too.

It may be best to simply let bygones be bygones. If safety was maintained, perhaps that’s enough. That said, this is just one example of the idea that everything has a cause. For instance, one possible cause of someone being very defensive could be rooted in how they interacted with their family — a family environment where people were constantly accusing one another and approaching interactions in an aggressive way. In that kind of setting, defensiveness—both in attitude and communication—often becomes the norm.

When it comes to thoughts and emotions, there will be more discussion on emotions, particularly in relation to the biosocial theory, which is the next topic to be explored. But thoughts are important too. Thoughts can sometimes be viewed as “big T” thoughts — not all thoughts fall into this category, but the “big T” ones represent values. They function almost like a perspective or a lens through which situations are viewed.

These “big T” thoughts can be helpful. They shape how one sees the world. If that lens can be adjusted to resemble something like rose-colored glasses — for example, by thinking, Well, they probably acted that way for any number of reasons that aren’t necessarily mean, nasty, or vicious — then the impact of those thoughts can be minimized. That shift in perspective can soften the emotional response to a situation.

So that’s just an example. There was a brief tangent into thoughts for a moment, but emotions are coming up next, and that will bring more clarity.

This is a big concept: figuring out and changing the causes of behavior tends to work better than judging and blaming.

Judging and blaming are easy — easy in the sense that it shifts responsibility away from oneself. It can offer a sense of relief, making it feel like no mistake was made or that one isn’t at fault. But at the same time, it doesn’t offer solutions. It doesn’t lead to meaningful change. If better outcomes are desired, then making some of the necessary changes may be required to achieve those results.

Judging and blaming often throws out a lot of why — why something happened, why someone behaved a certain way — without offering how to fix it, how to approach it differently, or even just how to do it better next time, if that’s all that’s possible.

There’s a concept here that overlaps with 12-step philosophy — something that resonates with those who have experience in that space. The 12-step approach and DBT share some common ground in this area of perspective, particularly around the idea that not everything can be changed — but some things can.

It’s important to approach the world with the intention of figuring out what can be changed, what cannot be changed, and how to tell the difference. This concept is echoed in the Serenity Prayer, often referenced in 12-step programs: Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference. The idea is to maintain a broad perspective, recognizing that a situation may fall into any of those three categories — and sometimes even more than one at once.

Biosocial Theory

Discussing skills training is often more engaging when there’s a high level of interaction, but moving forward to the topic of biosocial theory — another core element of DBT — the focus shifts to understanding emotions, both one’s own and those of others.

DBT emphasizes the awareness that everyone is wired differently. Emotion regulation is a key part of this, involving openness to the idea that people have unique emotional responses shaped by many factors — their “big T” thoughts, their belief systems, their past experiences, and, as will be explored next, how they’re biologically wired.

But the central point here is that, regardless of the situation, emotions are information. Even though emotions often come with urges — sometimes strong ones — they are not directives. They’re not instructions to act. Emotions provide insight into what might be needed or offer a quick, surface-level evaluation of a circumstance. However, they don’t always give the full picture. This concept will come up again when exploring the idea of a wise mind.

Emotional vulnerability is biological. It’s simply how some people are born. 

Some individuals are more sensitive, more reactive, or experience internal emotional states more intensely than others. When this concept is explained, it’s often helpful to visualize it as a graph: everyone has different levels of emotional reactivity that fluctuate throughout the day.

For example, if a person’s emotional baseline lingers around a “2” on the graph — relatively low and stable — their emotions stay around that level most of the time. Even when something mildly frustrating happens, like struggling to get out of the house, misplacing keys, or forgetting glasses upstairs and needing to run back for them, the emotional response may still remain manageable. In contrast, someone with a naturally higher baseline might experience those same events with much greater intensity.

Then, they come down the stairs or whatever it might be, and they stub their toe. Normally, their emotional level is at a two, but by the time they almost get to the car, they’re at a four. They’re frustrated, a little anxious, and worried that they’re going to be late. But they sit in the car, get it started, get on their way, and realize the traffic isn’t so bad. They look at the clock and realize they’re not quite as late as they thought, and their emotional level drops back down to a three — and they just linger there.

So, going from a two to a four isn’t all that much. It’s a bit of an increase. If they get really upset — depending on how they’re wired — maybe they go up to a five or even a six at some point during the day. But if they linger from a two to a six, and six is considered extreme for them, then that’s just how it is.

Another person could have a completely different experience. They might be more intense emotionally. They could start out the day lingering around a five most of the time — that’s just where they begin.

They’re not a morning person. They’re running around like a crazy person, trying to get everything done and get out the door because they slept 10 minutes too long — kept hitting the snooze button. They just live at a five. They talk faster, move faster, and always seem uptight. That might be the way this person functions. They’re sitting at a five or a six.

But then, when they get upset or when something big or overwhelming happens, their six jumps up to an eight or a nine pretty easily. And their nine might look like other people’s: “Oh my gosh, the world is coming apart.” So if their baseline is more like a five, then their emotional spikes are going to be considerably higher than those of someone whose baseline is a two.

And that’s the point — everyone is wired a little bit differently. Biology isn’t the only thing that plays a role. Some people may experience emotions more often and more intensely. And sometimes, they might have an emotional response that seems to come out of nowhere — like being suddenly hit with a wave of emotion — and they might not even be able to tell if it’s related to something simple, like the weather.

Is it related to what happened 10 minutes ago? Is it related to something that happened three days ago that hadn’t been fully processed yet? That can also be a factor.

Impulsivity also has a biological basis: regulating action is harder for some than others

Moving on, another biological aspect is impulsivity. Regulating actions is harder for some people than for others. When someone has an emotional response and then an action urge from that emotion, sometimes they act without thinking. Whether that means being more reactive in how they respond to someone—or react rather than respond—being defensive first instead of holding space and checking for understanding.

For example, instead of asking questions about what the other person just said, some might assume negative intent behind a question or statement, thinking, “Oh, I’m being attacked, so I need to be defensive.” Some people have that perception because they are more reactive. That might be part of their response, because it is biological — it’s just the way they’re wired.

Sometimes, their responses might seem to come out of nowhere. It can be really hard for people with biologically heightened impulsivity. It’s almost like they feel they can’t control behaviors that come directly from an emotional response.

It’s almost like they’re overwhelmed and don’t have a choice. Everyone knows it’s possible to take a perspective and develop the skill of understanding that even when there is a very strong action urge based on an emotion, it is possible to teach oneself to slow that process down a little and to think about how to respond instead of reacting. But part of that comes through learning skills and building awareness.

Understanding that some people, before they fully engage in that awareness and the skill-building to improve, might simply be wired that way. That said, there are these biological ways people are wired, and then there is the social aspect, which is the other part of the biosocial theory. 

An invalidating social environment can make it very hard to regulate emotions

The biosocial theory basically states that if someone is very reactive but grew up in an environment where the people around them were much less reactive — calm and mellow — and didn’t understand why that person was more reactive, it can feel very invalidating to be told things like, “You’re overreacting,” or “What’s the big deal? Calm down.” Such responses can be deeply invalidating.

On the other hand, some people’s circumstances are validating, meaning their environment acknowledges and understands their overwhelming emotions or higher reactivity.

The example often used is of a child in a grocery store who grabs for a chocolate bar. The mother tries to take it away, and the child starts screaming and throwing a tantrum. The mother says, “No, we can have a treat when we get home, but not right now. We have to put it back.” The child gets louder and more overwhelmed, and finally, the mother gives in because she’s embarrassed and doesn’t want to deal with the situation.

The lesson or validation the child receives from this is that if they throw a big enough fit, they will get their way. If this happens consistently, that validation pushes the child’s more reactive behavior.

This interaction can be invalidating to the child’s natural biological response, or the opposite could happen. Either way, these circumstances can make interactions difficult. Sometimes the people around someone don’t know how to validate their experience because it’s so different, or because they themselves are under high stress and lack the resources to know how to interact effectively. One of the points mentioned is that there may simply be a poor fit between the individual and their social environment. Maybe someone is a tulip in a rose garden rather than a rose in a rose garden, or the other way around. 

An ineffective social environment is a problem when you want to learn to regulate emotions and actions

Even if the environment has been validating—like a family where everyone is emotionally reactive, loud, and solves problems by arguing, yelling, and screaming—that might seem normal. But when the person moves to another environment where that behavior doesn’t work—like at school or at work—it becomes difficult. The emotional style that fits at home might not fit elsewhere, or vice versa. This makes it hard for someone to learn to regulate their emotions if their interactions don’t support or model that regulation.

It’s the transaction between the person and the social environment

In other words, biology and social environment influence each other, shaping the individual. If a person is validated by others in their reactive behavior, they may believe it is working for them and that it is normal. Conversely, if a person is very reactive but invalidated by their environment, they might shut down or come to believe their emotions are wrong or shouldn’t be expressed.

Then a person might come to believe that their internal experience is wrong, which makes them feel wrong, and that creates a sense of shame. Knowing this about oneself—that biology is part of who we are—helps us understand that while we can make some adaptations and changes to be more effective in certain environments, we also have to consider those environments.

It’s a back-and-forth process. The social environment impacts who we are and how we try to change. It influences us, and then our reactions influence our social environment, and it goes back and forth repeatedly. That’s the core of the biosocial theory.

Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) is about dialectics—avoiding all-or-nothing thinking, finding middle ground, and considering other people’s perspectives. 

It’s knowing that it’s not just one or the other, this or that, black or white, but also—and this may not have been said earlier—both/and. That’s the reframe. Seeing both sides makes it easier to interact and understand where others are coming from.

The Concept of the Logical/Wise/Emotional Mind

The “both/and” approach is really the culmination of how we apply this perspective. Moving on, the next concept is the wise mind, followed by a quick mindfulness technique.

This Venn diagram illustrates the concept of the logical mind, sometimes also called the reasonable mind. Just as with emotional reactivity and impulsivity, everyone experiences emotion mind. When the emotional mind is fully in control, a person is hot-tempered, mood-dependent, and focused mainly on emotions. People who are biologically wired that way may tend to operate more from their emotional mind.

On the other hand, someone who is more laid-back or analytical might be described as cool, rational, or task-focused. This is the domain of logical mind or reasonable mind—where facts, logic, and pragmatics rule. In a logical or reasonable mind, values and feelings are less important.

The problem with being entirely in a logical mind is that decisions made without considering values or feelings may neglect how others might be affected emotionally.

It might be efficient for getting a specific task done, but the question is whether it could push people away or upset them in the process because of how it was done, or because certain people weren’t considered in the decision-making.

Emotion mind, on the other hand, is driven by moods, feelings, and urges to say or do things. When someone is primarily operating from their emotional mind, they may not always make sound decisions because they might overlook important details. While the emotional mind may lead to considering how people will react, it doesn’t always ensure the desired outcome is achieved.

The goal is to find the middle path—wise mind. 

A wise mind is where logic and emotion are both used. A person in a wise mind considers people’s feelings in their decisions, but also looks at the facts and the necessary outcomes. It’s about being both logical and emotionally aware—focused on the results while still taking into account emotions (both their own and others’).

This balance—between logic, emotion, and outcomes—is what’s referred to as finding the middle path or using wise mind.

Mindfulness practice

A lot has been covered so far. That first section of DBT, after exploring things like the biosocial model and the core assumptions, usually begins with creating a practice of mindfulness. A mindfulness practice often includes exercises like breathing techniques, focusing on the breath, or using a five-senses grounding method. There are many different ways to approach it.

Just to ensure that everyone has at least one opportunity, a link has been provided to demonstrate one example of a breathing technique. Typically, with breathing exercises, the recommendation is to sit tall and relaxed, with feet on the floor. Lying down is also an option, but if someone is already seated, sitting up a bit is usually best.

The focus is on deep belly breathing. There’s a full explanation of how to do that, but this particular example is just one way to help regulate the nervous system.

There are many options for breathing activities available on YouTube and other online platforms. The Calm app is a particularly helpful resource for starting a mindfulness practice. This specific technique is beneficial because it doesn’t require excessively long inhales or exhales, nor does it call for holding the breath for an uncomfortable amount of time. It includes gentle pauses between the in-breath and out-breath or between exhaling and inhaling again. If any aspect feels awkward or uncomfortable, it can always be adapted to fit the individual’s needs. Still, this technique tends to work well for most people.

Another advantage is that it can be used with the sound turned off while still watching the visual guidance. This makes it convenient for use in various settings—such as while sitting at a desk or relaxing outdoors—helping to regulate the nervous system in a quiet, unobtrusive way.

Wise Mind Practice

Imagine that you are by a clear blue lake on a beautiful sunny day. Then imagine that you are a small flake of stone, flat and light. Imagine that you’ve been tossed out onto this beautiful lake and are now gently, slowly floating through the calm, clear blue water to the lake’s smooth, sandy bottom. Notice what you see, what you feel as you float down, perhaps in slow circles, gently floating toward the bottom. 

As you reach the bottom of the lake, settle your attention there within yourself. Notice the serenity of the lake. Become aware of the calmness and quiet, both at the bottom of the and deep within. As you reach the center of yourself, settle your attention there. 

The exercise served as a quick mindfulness reflection—a simple but powerful example of grounding. 

Such resources are widely available online. The Calm app, in particular, is a strong starting point, and searching for it often leads to other helpful apps as well. For additional information or resources, here are the speaker’s contact details: 

https://eddinscounseling.com/therapist/ron-donlevy 

How would we communicate with someone who reacts right away and possibly be at level five when you yourself are communicating at a level two, if it makes sense?

Often, people react strongly because they misinterpret what’s being said, even if it’s expressed thoughtfully. Using “I statements” can help in these situations—for example, saying, “I feel sad when we don’t have time to talk before bed,” instead of “We never talk before bed,” or “You never make time to talk to me.” The latter tends to sound accusatory and can trigger defensiveness.

If a person still reacts intensely despite calm communication, it might be a boundary issue. In such cases, a gentle response could be something like, “Wow, I didn’t mean for you to have such a strong reaction—maybe I didn’t say that right,” or “With that stronger reaction, maybe we need to take a break.” Setting boundaries is an important tool, especially when people’s emotional levels don’t match. It helps to validate the other person’s perspective while maintaining emotional balance.

For more information, you can call or text the Eddins Counseling & Therapy Group to schedule a free consultation or book a session. Thank you for joining, and if you’re here, please feel free to fill out the questionnaire in the feedback form in the chat box. Thank you so much!

Feel free to visit additional resources:

1. Articles on specific topics on our blog.
2. RSVP for one of our free monthly webinars (or view past webinars)
3. Follow us on Facebook and Instagram for additional interviews and tips
4. Take another one of our self-test quizzes
5. Schedule a consult and find out how we can support you.

Whether you’re working on building self-love or addressing deeper emotional barriers, you can start to experience more peace and confidence in your life.

Contact our therapists to learn more about how we can help you reframe your understanding of conflicts and emotional reactions. To get started now, give us a call to schedule an appointment at 832-559-2622 or schedule an appointment online. We also offer online therapy for convenience and flexibility.