Based in the knowledge derived from Interpersonal Neurobiology, Attachment Theory, as well as hemispheric asymmetry and orientation, the notion of “interpretation”, as I am defining it here, can be seen an adaptive asset of our biopsychosocial nature that, with more explicitness (though paradoxically often non-consciously), conceives and transforms the perceived patterns of energy and information flow retrieved from the right hemisphere.  This conception and transformation may alter, reorganise, and interconnect perceptions with discernible symbolic value and emergent dichroitic meaning; such may be a level of processing by which “selecting, sorting, segmenting, shifting, grouping, categorizing, comparing, contrasting, coalescing, transfiguring, labelling, associating, and recombining” occurs (Siegel, 2012).  This is the capacity of the mind-body that, when integrated, feeds this information back to the right hemisphere which in turn enables the Self to discerningly and coherently make sense of its Self as it exists alongside Other(s) in the World (McGilchrist, 2009; Panksepp & Biven, 2012; Siegel, 2012). 

As can be alluded, such may be a structure and a function predominant (albeit not exclusively) of the left hemisphere that focusses attention whilst abstracting an understanding of what has been “perceived” as it relates to practice, predictability, and prioritising what is already known and expected (McGilchrist, 2009); this is an understanding that takes the past and distillates it in relation to the immediate future (McGilchrist, 2009). 

Interpretation as a left hemispheric function is one wherein locally organised representations of energy and information are explicitly conceptualised and encoded – this is a function by which experience is clarified and shaped with detail and language (McGilchrist, 2009).  Moreso, interpretation is a process of synthesis that expresses these representations in analytical, directive, declarative, logical, lineal, literal, segregated, rational, and utilitarian manners (McGilchrist, 2009; Siegel, 2012). 

This is a seemingly objective evaluation that orientates the Self toward the known aspects of the World that assists in creating a sense of stability through narrative (Siegel, 2012).  Indeed, what I am here attributing to interpretation are the neurobiological structures that reinforce the uniquely human capacity for a conscious coordination of knowledge and memory – factually and autobiographically (Siegel, 2012).  This is a process derived from our fundamental need for stable knowledge structures: a coherence that provides us with the equilibrium to function with purpose and action (Janoff-Bulma, 1989; Panksepp & Biven, 2012). 

Notably, interpretation can be seen as a structural growth process that only begins in the second year of life when the Self beings to fathom Others and the World as separate and different (Siegel, 2012).  With this in mind, one can begin to conceptualise this structure-function connexion as that which adaptively allows the Self to interpret and conceive a syllogistically reasoned schematic understanding of the World as it pertains to a syntactical and action-orientated Self or Other(s) (McGilchrist, 2009; Siegel, 2012).

To this end I finally define and enumerate interpretation as a notable faculty that, as it represents an explicit regulatory means to meet the embedded energy and information of the right hemisphere, is an assumptive form of operational knowledge which can, in times of stress, serve defensive and self-protective functions.  Indeed, if over the course of life the Self has emerged in disintegrated and dysregulated manners and become reliant on protective forms of regulation, the Self will begin to make sense of what it senses (Thompson, 2021) through components of cognitive organisation predisposed toward individualistic, impersonalised, diagnostic, comparative, competitive, strategic, imitative, measured, bound, and decontextualised assemblages (McGilchrist, 2009; Siegel, 2012; Teyber & Teyber, 2017). 

That is, the left hemisphere becomes dominant and begins to develop linguistical schematic suppositions that may reflect and perpetuate patterned ways of re-presenting, categorising, and evaluating experience with maladaptive bias (McGilchrist, 2009; Teyber & Teyber, 2017). 

Conversely, if over the course of life Self has emerged in integrated and regulated manners – if the Self has become aware that one can trust an Other for a felt sense of security, the Self will begin to make sense of what it senses through components of cognitive organisation predisposed toward creating coherent narratives: the linear telling of a sequence of events that entails a focus on awareness, intention-to-act, verbal communication, meaning, and engagement of the individuals of the story, including the Self as narrator (Panksepp & Biven, 2012; Siegel, 2012).  This is a rich base for resilience and the capacity of the Self to create contextual expressions of identity – an integrated sense of Self that is connected spatiotemporally (Badenoch, 2018; Siegel, 2012).  That is, throughout the lifespan the Self can continue to surmise and re-present an understanding of the here-and-now (present) as it relates to the then-and-there (past) and the new-and-next (future) in compassionate, engaged, discerned manners.

And, as aforementioned, whilst this notion may be complex, it is with a nuanced understanding of this innate, interacting physiology that we become more able to attune to the subtle aspects of sensation (in Self and of Other), linking them to our perceptions and interpretations (of Self, Other, and World), and to respond to such with connected awareness, intention, and meaning.