ACADEMIA Letters

The Psychologist, Saint George, and the Dragon

Lonny Douglas Meinecke

In pace requiescat, dilectæ

(Rest in peace, beloved wife)

When the average man loses his wife to cancer, 10,000 questions take her place. But when
a man of science loses his wife to cancer, 10,000 reasons take her place (Myrin & Redman,
2011). Why his wife? Will he ever see her again? What was here, which is no longer here?
A degreed psychologist, of all people, should be able to skip the first four stages of grief,
accept his loss stoically, and move on (Kübler-Ross & Kessler, 2005). Oddly, psychologists
and neurologists find such things unbearable . . . knowing all too well what challenges lie
ahead (Sacks, 2009). It is said that even Freud, famous at the time for sage advice on grief,
was himself inconsolable when his own beloved Sophie, and especially her 4-year old son
Heinele, died unexpectedly (Ellis, 2018; “Halberstadt-Freud, Sophie,” 2005).
This essay is about loss. It will attempt to describe what is no longer here, when someone
who must never die, dies. The first task is to figure out what was here. The second task is
to figure out what remains. The third and final task is to ask what wasn’t here before, so that
those who fight dragons like Cancer today, will not fight Regret in the looking glass tomorrow
(Bradbury, 2008; Meinecke, 2013; Numinous Games, 2019).

What was Here?

The first task is to figure out what was here. It isn’t easy to define what was here, because after
people lose someone they couldn’t imagine losing, remembering is very hard to do. Her pres-
ence, her face, and her influence on everyone, like so many things in life, seem to flee from

Academia Letters, March 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0

Corresponding Author: Lonny Douglas Meinecke, lonnymeinecke@gmail.com

Citation: Meinecke, L.D. (2021). The Psychologist, Saint George, and the Dragon. Academia Letters, Article
466. https://doi.org/10.20935/AL466.

1
the struggle to recall them. Jung, a noted collaborator of Freud’s, spoke of this tendency for
memories to fade (or resist coming to mind) if neglected for too long (Evans, 1957). Nearly
400 years ago, the religious predecessors of psychoanalysts were already wondering why ev-
erything precious flees (Marchant, 1646). They asked, Qui fuit?1 (who or what was here?).
The answer was and still is, that everything that mattered was here, and now it’s missing.
Spinoza (2012) once called that missing piece the complete idea of God. Everything except
the idea of God—a constant sense of comfort—seems to flee (Meinecke, 2019).
Researchers in the past have tried to weigh the soul before and after death, to see what was
here (Siegel, 1980). Psychologists today try to weigh the mind before and after its anomalies
have been exorcised scientifically, to see what was here (Wade et al., 2008). But the very idea
of here avoids definition, let alone the task of articulating what was here. For this author,
what’s missing is what he should have spent more time with before he lost it . . . like his
spouse, his daughter, and his world (Markey & Meinecke, 2020). Time grants people just
one chance to realize how priceless things really are, because every moment together matters
(Backus et al., 2014).
So, what was here? Whatever people felt a part of was here. Everything people knew was
here. Whatever made them feel complete is now missing.

What Remains?
The second task is to figure out what is still here. What survives is still here. What survives
may not know what was here, but it does understand what remains—that it will never be whole
again (Ellis, 2018). How different this is from the idea of survival. What’s missing is suddenly
“too absent to ignore” (O’Grady & Meinecke, 2015, p. 1). It’s like a limb abandoned by its
tree. It aches. It thirsts. It cries out (John 19:28, KJV).
But if less remains, where does this new grief come from? Perhaps grief seizes this oppor-
tunity to exist by filling the emptiness? Maybe painful memories start impersonating what-
ever was lost, accusing the survivor of losing them? Such mental simulacra, as Baudrillard
and Glaser (2014) called them, might even grow weary of waiting, and start impersonating
things before they are lost (Meinecke, 2017). This is not a new idea; Freud himself wrote of
a “special agency” that lets the ego take the place of forsaken objects (Freud, 1917, p. 249).
It seems equally feasible that verbal behavior (spoken thought) is more than just behavior
1
Qui fuit is Latin for “Who/what was?” The Renaissance author was asking the reader, what doesn’t stay? In
the author’s dissertation, he wrote: “Marchant (1646) put it so poignantly—with the words ‘Fugit infantia, fugit
pueritia, fugit adolescentia, fugit juvenius, fugit senectus’ (p. 129). These words, translated, remind the reader
that infancy flees, childhood flees, adolescence flees, youth flees, and old age flees” (Meinecke, 2017, p. 174).

Academia Letters, March 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0

Corresponding Author: Lonny Douglas Meinecke, lonnymeinecke@gmail.com

Citation: Meinecke, L.D. (2021). The Psychologist, Saint George, and the Dragon. Academia Letters, Article
466. https://doi.org/10.20935/AL466.

2
(Skinner, 1957). Perhaps a word or a story pretends to be what it symbolizes when people
lose what that symbol stood for—to safeguard its neuronal survival in the mind (Meinecke,
2017, 2018a, 2018b; Wiesel, 1982)? After all, scavenging is very common in Nature. Why
couldn’t something people mistake for mental or verbal phenomena have evolved to scavenge
common feelings like sorrow (to avoid neuronal pruning)? It could feed on existing physio-
logical processes in the guise of lasting thoughts like guilt, or lasting intentions like revenge
(Meinecke, 2017; O’Grady, 2012).
What remains? Perhaps the question isn’t what remains. Perhaps the question is what
wasn’t here before? What is pretending to have survived?

What Wasn’t Here Before?

It seems to follow from the prior that the task isn’t to figure out what was here, nor what
remains, but what is here now that wasn’t here before. Whatever that is, it hurts. It’s angry. It
was accustomed to being cared for.
Anguish wasn’t here before; a grave loss was not at stake. A scholar’s mind begins to
ask whether anguish is something people feel or whether anguish is the thing itself, trying to
bargain its way out of admitting loss (Kübler-Ross & Kessler, 2005). Maybe unremitting grief
is the defiant half of a broken covenant—like a severed limb that is expected to die but whose
cells are still alive? It is a cry for help that cannot speak. It is a demand for justice from a
martyred lamb (Meinecke, 2018a, 2018b).
Breakout scientists have shown that amputation is not the end of a lifelong attachment
(Ramachandran et al., 1995). The languishing neurons continue to search for their phantom
limb—while that severed limb must be screaming “Come back for me!” Like an abandoned
fetus watching its mother walk away, what survives depends on the definition of survival (R.
Delarose, personal communication, November 20, 2016). In some ways, it is the survivor who
is pruned away, and the lost limb which is finally at peace.
The widowed psychologist, like the widowed minister, weeps “Ubi es, vox dilecti mei?”
(where are you, voice of my beloved? Song of Solomon 6:1, KJV). After a long silence, his
spirit groans, “Kyrie eleison!” (Lord, have pity!). And finally, when no answer comes, ten
thousand voices whisper, “Don’t worry, we are still here, beloved husband” (what some call
Elohim).

Academia Letters, March 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0

Corresponding Author: Lonny Douglas Meinecke, lonnymeinecke@gmail.com

Citation: Meinecke, L.D. (2021). The Psychologist, Saint George, and the Dragon. Academia Letters, Article
466. https://doi.org/10.20935/AL466.

3
Conclusion
What is grief? What is here that wasn’t here before? Grief is a broken URL that once pointed
to the definition of sorrow; grief is a child crying “Marco!” who will never hear his lovely
playmate giggle “Polo!” again. Grief is only here because, around the age of two or so, hu-
mans are taught strange things, such as to pretend that things in the real world which are no
longer there, are still there (Rochat, 2003). This unfortunate learning is called object per-
manence (Munakata et al., 1997; Pepperberg et al., 1997). It lets people set things down and
expect them to stay there until they get back, which is what they do when they leave each other
for work each morning, only to discover that their partner isn’t there when they get back. It
lets people make-believe they are together while they spend most of their lives apart, which
is what they call a job. It’s also why they miss each other so terribly—when one of them dies
before the other, and the surviving spouse wails, “Come back for me!” (Zisook et al., 1998).
It is generally understood that grief arises from the collective anguish of many living
cells—whose unseen referent often dies before they do, just like a widower’s wife (Gündel et
al., 2003). That’s because objects in the real world do not live forever, whereas cognitions in
the make-believe world of the mind cannot grasp the idea of mortality (Meinecke, 2017). Like
valiant cowards in a kingdom of pure perseveration, thoughts taste death many times before
their host’s death (Shakespeare et al., 2011). And when the things those thoughts cherished
for so long stop replying, a new right arm or lifelong companion must be found, and grafted
in. The insensible cycle of hunting, holding, and losing associations goes on and on in each
thought people think inside, like a lonely woman who reads romance novels each night, to
imagine the many lovers she will never hold. This psychologist’s beloved did. Then she died.
So, when a psychologist loses his wife to cancer, in true scientific fashion he usually does
it again to make sure he is not simply having a bad dream. He loses a thousand wives to
a thousand reasons—to discover just one. He tilts at windmills and battles dragons like a
wizened Saint George on an exasperated steed. He loses to the dragon he nicknamed Cancer
every time (Numinous Games, 2019). But he never stops trying to save his beloved Dulcinea,
even though he only lives near Saint George, and is afraid to admit that the dragons he cannot
vanquish are those moments he did not spend with his Lady.

References
Backus, B., Smallbone, J., Smallbone, L., Mosley, S., & Tjornhom, T. (2014). Priceless. On
Run Wild. Live Free. Love Strong. New York, NY: Warner Chappell Music.

Academia Letters, March 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0

Corresponding Author: Lonny Douglas Meinecke, lonnymeinecke@gmail.com

Citation: Meinecke, L.D. (2021). The Psychologist, Saint George, and the Dragon. Academia Letters, Article
466. https://doi.org/10.20935/AL466.

4
Baudrillard, J., & Glaser, S. F. (2014). Simulacra and simulation. Ann Arbor: The University
of Michigan Press.

Bradbury, R. (2008). Something wicked this way comes. New York, NY: Avon.

Ellis, M. L. (2018). Mourning’s dissonance: Who am I who mourns and whom do I mourn?
Psychodynamic Practice, 24(1), 6–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/14753634.2017.1420487

Evans, R. I. (1957). Jung on Film – Interview with C. G. Jung by Dr. Richard I. Evans [Video
file]. Retrieved from http://e-jungian.com/jung-film-interview-c-g-jung-dr-richard-evans/

Freud, S. (1917). Mourning and melancholia. In The Standard Edition of the Complete
Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, Volume XIV (1914-1916): On the History of the
Psycho-Analytic Movement, Papers on Metapsychology and Other Works, 237-258. Re-
trieved from http://cidadeinseguranca.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/freud_-_mourning_and_
melancholia.pdf

Gündel, H., O’Connor, M. F., Littrell, L., Fort, C., & Lane, R. D. (2003). Functional neu-
roanatomy of grief: An FMRI study. American Journal of Psychiatry, 160(11), 1946-
1953. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.160.11.1946

Halberstadt-Freud, Sophie (1893-1920). (2005). In A. de Mijolla’s (Ed.). International

Dictionary of Psychoanalysis, Vol. 1. A–F. Farmington Hills, MI: Thomson Gale.

Kübler-Ross, E., & Kessler, D. (2005). On grief and grieving. New York, NY: Scribner.

Marchant, J. (1646). Rationale evangelizantium, sive doctrina et veritas evangelica, a sac-

erdotibus, pastoribus, concionatoribus, pectori appendenda, plebique per anni circu-
lum è Cathedris proponenda, exponenda: Duobus tomis comprehensa. Parisiis: Apud
Michaelem Soly.

Markey, M. A., & Meinecke, L. M. (2020). Examining biophilia and societal indifference to
environmental protection. Hershey, PA: IGI Global Publishing.

Meinecke, L. (2013). Fostering anticipation: Looking forward to looking glass therapy. Re-
trieved from https://www.academia.edu/4160782/Fostering_Anticipation_Looking_Forward_
to_Looking_Glass_Therapy

Meinecke, L. D. (2017). Neglected by assessment: Industry versus inferiority in the compe-

tition for scarce kidneys. (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations
and Theses database. (ProQuest No. 10689852)

Academia Letters, March 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0

Corresponding Author: Lonny Douglas Meinecke, lonnymeinecke@gmail.com

Citation: Meinecke, L.D. (2021). The Psychologist, Saint George, and the Dragon. Academia Letters, Article
466. https://doi.org/10.20935/AL466.

5
 Meinecke, L. D. (2018a). A theory of cognitive idolatry, or the human struggle to pre-
serve psychological certainty in a biological species - chapter 1 (Research proposal).
doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.16527.43684

Meinecke, L. D. (2018b). A theory of cognitive idolatry, or the human struggle to pre-

serve psychological certainty in a biological species - chapter 2 (Research proposal).
doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.31089.53601

Meinecke, L. D. (2019). An appeal for spontaneity (an essay on duration). Available at https:/
/www.academia.edu/40378148/An_Appeal_for_Spontaneity_An_Essay_on_Duration_

Munakata, Y., McClelland, J. L., Johnson, M. H., & Siegler, R. S. (1997). Rethinking
infant knowledge: Toward an adaptive process account of successes and failures in ob-
ject permanence tasks. Psychological Review, 104(4), 686. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-
295X.104.4.686

Myrin, J., & Redman, M. (2011). 10,000 reasons (Bless the Lord). On 10,000 Reasons [CD].
Brentwood, TN. Sparrow Records.

Numinous Games. (2019). That dragon, cancer. Retrieved from http://www.thatdragoncancer.com/

O’Grady, M. A. (2012). So what’s wrong with revenge? Exploring the Conundrum. Oxford-
shire, U.K: InterDisciplinary Press & Fisher Imprints.

O’Grady, M. A., & Meinecke, L. (2015). Silence: Because what’s missing is too absent to
ignore. Journal of Societal and Cultural Research, 1(1), 1-25. Retrieved from https://
lmeinecke.com/downloads/articles/OGradyMeinecke–SilenceTooAbsentToIgnore.pdf

Pepperberg, I. M., Willner, M. R., & Gravitz, L. B. (1997). Development of Piagetian ob-
ject permanence in grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus). Journal of Comparative Psychology,
111(1), 63. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7036.111.1.63

Ramachandran, V. S., Rogers-Ramachandran, D., & Cobb, S. (1995). Touching the phantom
limb. Nature, 377(6549), 489-490. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/377489a0

Rochat, P. (2003). Five levels of self-awareness as they unfold early in life. Consciousness
and Cognition, 12(4), 717–731. doi:10.1016/S1053-8100(03)00081-3

Sacks, O. (2009). What hallucination reveals about our minds [Video file]. Retrieved from
https://www.ted.com/talks/oliver_sacks_what_hallucination_reveals_about_our_minds

Academia Letters, March 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0

Corresponding Author: Lonny Douglas Meinecke, lonnymeinecke@gmail.com

Citation: Meinecke, L.D. (2021). The Psychologist, Saint George, and the Dragon. Academia Letters, Article
466. https://doi.org/10.20935/AL466.

6
Shakespeare, W., Mowat, B. A., & Werstine, P. (2011). The tragedy of Julius Caesar. New
York, NY: Simon & Schuster Paperbacks.

Siegel, R. K. (1980). The psychology of life after death. American Psychologist, 35(10), 911.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.35.10.911

Skinner, B. F. (1957). Verbal behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Spinoza, B. (2012). The ethics (R. H. M. Elwes, Trans.). United States: Start Publishing.

Wade, N. G., Vogel, D. L., Liao, K. Y. H., & Goldman, D. B. (2008). Measuring state-specific
rumination: Development of the rumination about an interpersonal offense scale. Journal
of Counseling Psychology, 55(3), 419. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.55.3.419

Wiesel, T. N. (1982). The postnatal development of the visual cortex and the influence of
environment. Bioscience Reports, 2(6), 351-377. doi:10.1007/BF01119299

Zisook, S., Chentsova-Dutton, Y., & Shuchter, S. R. (1998). PTSD following bereavement.
Annals of Clinical Psychiatry, 10(4), 157-163. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022342028750

Academia Letters, March 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0

Corresponding Author: Lonny Douglas Meinecke, lonnymeinecke@gmail.com

Citation: Meinecke, L.D. (2021). The Psychologist, Saint George, and the Dragon. Academia Letters, Article
466. https://doi.org/10.20935/AL466.