Discussion:
therapy porn
(too old to reply)
b***@my-deja.com
2007-07-08 14:32:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Mary Poppins returned my notes. They are very thin. The content of the
course was basically nothing beyond what I gleaned from the free
introduction, which I already covered, but I will repeat it here
because I paid a couple hundred dollars for it.

Now please don't post I never gave you anything.

Communication is speaking and listening. The mechanics of both actions
rely on you being with the other person as much as possible. When they
are speaking, you listen to them with as much attention as you can
allocate. Thinking of what clever thing you are going to say next,
calculating the implications of what they are saying, verifying their
premises to what extent you agree with them are all human, but they
are not listening. When you are speaking, you take time to restate,
recapitulate, and rephrase; they never get you are saying on the first
run. You have to look at them while you are speaking and stay with
them and stay on the message until you see they got it.

That is all.

We talked about the course and how I didn't really seem to be into it,
and I told her that I am very selective when I dump about people I
know. Story about getting creeped out at my Jung T group by this woman
going on and on about the inadequacies of her son's character and he
ain't there to defend himself and the customary confidentiality
conditions of the environment are worthless. You pour your heart out
on your sleeve in a T group one day, and the next day some creep is
blabbing about your personal life all across the damn internet. Mary
Poppins thinks I over analyze.

We had a woman in the course who just kicked her husband out of the
house for molesting their ten-year old daughter. Now on the one hand
that's fascinating. On the other hand her telling thirty strangers
about the situation is a little sticky. Let me rephrase that. Me
telling you about it is a little sticky. If it's my own daughter and I
am talking about it with thirty strangers, that is depraved. I am such
a stick ass I can't even imagine having this conversation with Mary
Poppins.

The other thing which you missed is the multi level marketing vibe.
This came to a climax in the Thursday night session. There was one of
my fellow students, with six of his family members he is recruiting to
take the landmark forum. That is a 2550 dollar sale if you want to
crunch numbers. He was proud to tell the room that he was going to
foot the bill in an act of vainglorious patriarchal ego masturbation.
And you thought you were pathetic. Example number two of a
conversation I cannot even imagine having with Mary Poppins.

But I did learn something from the course and I am fully satisfied
with the not-entirely-positive experience. At my Jung T group on
Thursday night I communicated with them. This woman asked about faith.
And this other woman gave a rote mechanical recitation on her
understanding of this concept. This is one of those things that begat
900 page eye glazing medieval controversies. Fortunately for them, I
was there to save the day! I explained Luther's tower revelation, from
the crapper as revealed by Erik Erikson and Anne Rice. (I left out the
part about the crapper.) And I gave it everything I got. Heart on
sleeve. They seemed to appreciate it. Then after, the group leader was
commenting on my comment and I was sitting there for about thirty
seconds thinking about the implications of what he was saying, taking
issue with his premises, and I stopped myself. I just listened to what
he was saying as attentively as I could. He seemed to appreciate it.

The most interesting thing out of that workshop is group leader admits
to being an Osho disciple. If you haven't read that story, it's like
Stephen King fiction. When Osho croaked, it was on the front page of
the Wall Street Journal and the man supposedly owned twenty Rolls
Royces and a private jet. Crimes and sex crimes.

There's sticky and then there's decomposing corpses is what I'm
saying.

Bukvich
Mica
2007-07-08 17:59:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
***@my-deja.com wrote:

> Communication is speaking and listening.

I'm sorry what were you saying? I was busy thinking about shoes.

> We talked about the course and how I didn't really seem to be into it,
> and I told her that I am very selective when I dump about people I
> know.

Did the course require dumping about people you know?

> Story about getting creeped out at my Jung T group by this woman
> going on and on about the inadequacies of her son's character and he
> ain't there to defend himself

Hm. I'm suddenly feeling a little guilty. Well, ok, no I'm not,
but I'm suddenly thinking my posts may have creeped you out a lot
over the years.

> Thursday night I communicated with them. This woman asked about faith.
> And this other woman gave a rote mechanical recitation on her
> understanding of this concept. This is one of those things that begat
> 900 page eye glazing medieval controversies. Fortunately for them, I
> was there to save the day! I explained Luther's tower revelation, from
> the crapper as revealed by Erik Erikson and Anne Rice. (I left out the
> part about the crapper.) And I gave it everything I got. Heart on
> sleeve. They seemed to appreciate it.

I have such issues with faith. In other people, in a higher
power, in any sort of point to life.

> The most interesting thing out of that workshop is group leader admits
> to being an Osho disciple. If you haven't read that story, it's like
> Stephen King fiction. When Osho croaked, it was on the front page of
> the Wall Street Journal and the man supposedly owned twenty Rolls
> Royces and a private jet. Crimes and sex crimes.

Never heard of him, but google is my friend. I especially like
the bit where his followers are accused of spreading salmonella
on a local restaurant's salad bar in order to reduce voter
turnout on a measure that would have restricted the group's
activities. Good stuff. You are not helping with my issues with
faith.

M
b***@my-deja.com
2007-07-08 19:12:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Jul 8, 12:59 pm, Mica <***@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> Did the course require dumping about people you know?

There is a minimum quotient of dumping on others involved in any
discussion of the topic of relationships. When I tell you (again)
Sarah Not is 35 and she is still mooching off her parents, I am
dumping on her.

The great thing about alt.angst (sort of like boasting at the family
dining table) is it's the secret room where everybody gets to dump.

> Hm. I'm suddenly feeling a little guilty. Well, ok, no I'm not,
> but I'm suddenly thinking my posts may have creeped you out a lot
> over the years.

Are you familiar with the character of Clamence in Camus' "The Fall"?
The great thing about Clamence is you hang out with him and all your
guilt just drips away. Nothing creeps you out. We got child molesters
posting here. You could call this newsgroup
alt.fan.jean.baptiste.clamence.

> I have such issues with faith. In other people, in a higher
> power, in any sort of point to life.

The key from Luther (Tillich explains this better than Luther does,
but it is simple): faith ain't a noun. It isn't "you know he is
faithful" or "you trust he is faithful". These are nonsensical
sentences. Faith is a verb. It is an action which you do. What you
must do is *accept*.

You accept God loves you.

You accept the universe as nurturing bringing you forth.

You accept your lover is true.

You don't accept, no faith. So if you want it, what you have to do is
accept it. That is all there is to it. What's the issue? You want it
or you don't. If you don't know whether or not you want it, break it
down again: what do you want? And if all you can say is you want to
know what you want, then that is where you must begin.

Suddenly I feel I must sound like Jonah. But this ain't Jonah; it's
Luther / Tillich. Supposedly in one of Luther's letters he writes that
he received this revelation sitting on the crapper during one of his
bouts of chronic constipation. This last "fact" is a great way to
segue to another topic if you are explaining the theology of faith to
somebody and they zone out on you.

> Never heard of him, but google is my friend. I especially like
> the bit where his followers are accused of spreading salmonella
> on a local restaurant's salad bar in order to reduce voter
> turnout on a measure that would have restricted the group's
> activities. Good stuff. You are not helping with my issues with
> faith.

There is no such thing as "issues with faith" my friend.

B.
Anton Vredegoor
2007-07-09 14:32:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <***@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,
***@my-deja.com says...
> You don't accept, no faith. So if you want it, what you have to do is
> accept it. That is all there is to it. What's the issue? You want it
> or you don't. If you don't know whether or not you want it, break it
> down again: what do you want? And if all you can say is you want to
> know what you want, then that is where you must begin.

So now you're pimping faith, eh? The problem is we are hardwired to want
all kinds of things. The first thing we must do is to become free of
want, so that we can see clearly.

A.
b***@my-deja.com
2007-07-09 14:46:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Jul 9, 9:32 am, Anton Vredegoor <***@gmail.com> wrote:

> So now you're pimping faith, eh? The problem is we are hardwired to want
> all kinds of things. The first thing we must do is to become free of
> want, so that we can see clearly.

No. I was explaining a point of theology. Getting rid of want appears
to take a lot of work. You want to spend ten years staring at a wall
daily for two hours? I so want to not do that.

If you could figure out how to get rid of want in a weekend seminar
you might find yourself richer than Osho.

B.
smith
2007-07-09 15:04:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
***@my-deja.com wrote:
> On Jul 9, 9:32 am, Anton Vredegoor <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> So now you're pimping faith, eh? The problem is we are hardwired to want
>> all kinds of things. The first thing we must do is to become free of
>> want, so that we can see clearly.
>
> No. I was explaining a point of theology. Getting rid of want appears
> to take a lot of work. You want to spend ten years staring at a wall
> daily for two hours? I so want to not do that.
>
> If you could figure out how to get rid of want in a weekend seminar
> you might find yourself richer than Osho.
>


Trying to get rid of want is trying to get rid of life.

Just kill yourself.

m.
Anton Vredegoor
2007-07-09 15:24:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <T7ski.1435$m%***@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net>,
***@youhandsomedevil.org says...
> Trying to get rid of want is trying to get rid of life.

According to Maslov it's a kind of pyramid where becoming free of the
wants in some lower level opens one up to want things in some higher
level.

> Just kill yourself.

Do it now, before technology makes us immortal.

A.
b***@my-deja.com
2007-07-09 16:57:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Jul 9, 10:24 am, Anton Vredegoor <***@gmail.com> wrote:

> According to Maslov it's a kind of pyramid where becoming free of the
> wants in some lower level opens one up to want things in some higher
> level.

The highest level (I don't personally know of anybody who has achieved
this) is when you got your own private jet. "Baby you want to go for a
ride in my jet?" is the Ultimate Pickup Line, buddha on earth!

B.
Anton Vredegoor
2007-07-09 19:12:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <***@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
***@my-deja.com says...

> The highest level (I don't personally know of anybody who has achieved
> this) is when you got your own private jet. "Baby you want to go for a
> ride in my jet?" is the Ultimate Pickup Line, buddha on earth!

Nah, all that materialistic stuff belongs to the same level in Maslov's
pyramid. If one is satisfying a level beyond what is reasonable one is
blocking one's progress to a higher level because of a fixation.

A.
bob
2007-07-09 21:39:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 9 Jul 2007 17:24:41 +0200, Anton Vredegoor
<***@gmail.com> wrote:

>In article <T7ski.1435$m%***@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net>,
>***@youhandsomedevil.org says...
>> Trying to get rid of want is trying to get rid of life.
>
>According to Maslov it's a kind of pyramid where becoming free of the
>wants in some lower level opens one up to want things in some higher
>level.

I want quiet. The world is way too loud.

>> Just kill yourself.
>
>Do it now, before technology makes us immortal.

If only.
smith
2007-07-10 15:14:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Anton Vredegoor wrote:
> In article <T7ski.1435$m%***@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net>,
> ***@youhandsomedevil.org says...
>> Trying to get rid of want is trying to get rid of life.
>
> According to Maslov it's a kind of pyramid where becoming free of the
> wants in some lower level opens one up to want things in some higher
> level.
>
>> Just kill yourself.
>
> Do it now, before technology makes us immortal.

I'm not the one with a problem with desire.


I embrace my existential confrontation with mortality.

m.
bob
2007-07-11 01:09:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 15:14:40 GMT, smith <***@youhandsomedevil.org>
wrote:

>Anton Vredegoor wrote:
>> In article <T7ski.1435$m%***@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net>,
>> ***@youhandsomedevil.org says...
>>> Trying to get rid of want is trying to get rid of life.
>>
>> According to Maslov it's a kind of pyramid where becoming free of the
>> wants in some lower level opens one up to want things in some higher
>> level.
>>
>>> Just kill yourself.
>>
>> Do it now, before technology makes us immortal.
>
>I'm not the one with a problem with desire.

I don't seem to have much want either. I'd like to be able to sleep 8
hours without waking five to ten times but I'm not interested in
pharmaceutical solutions.

>I embrace my existential confrontation with mortality.

It hasn't been all that long since I decided that it would be worth my
while to live a healthier lifestyle.
Bug-Eyed Churl
2007-07-12 03:54:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Juiane <***@youhandsomedevil.org> wrote:


> I embrace my existential confrontation with mortality.


So when's your frigging funeral, bitch?


D.

--
"I'm feeling real shot down..."
...................................................................
(C) 2007 TheDavid^TM | David, P.O. Box 21403, Louisville, KY 40221
Epizoot Wilkins
2015-01-07 15:31:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 2007-07-10 15:14:40 +0000, smith said:

> Anton Vredegoor wrote:
>> In article <T7ski.1435$m%***@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net>,
>> ***@youhandsomedevil.org says...
>>> Trying to get rid of want is trying to get rid of life.
>>
>> According to Maslov it's a kind of pyramid where becoming free of the
>> wants in some lower level opens one up to want things in some higher
>> level.
>>
>>> Just kill yourself.
>>
>> Do it now, before technology makes us immortal.
>
> I'm not the one with a problem with desire.
>
>
> I embrace my existential confrontation with mortality.
>
> m.

I want to catch something that I might be ashamed of.
b***@my-deja.com
2007-07-09 19:12:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Jul 9, 10:04 am, smith <***@youhandsomedevil.org> wrote:

> Trying to get rid of want is trying to get rid of life.
>
> Just kill yourself.

Open your mind!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sadhu_Haridas

B.
smith
2007-07-10 15:16:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
***@my-deja.com wrote:
> On Jul 9, 10:04 am, smith <***@youhandsomedevil.org> wrote:
>
>> Trying to get rid of want is trying to get rid of life.
>>
>> Just kill yourself.
>
> Open your mind!
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sadhu_Haridas
>

Yesterday, I was confronted with a long train ride. While skimming my
book shelves for a slender book that would fit nicely in my bag, I
happened upon -the courage to be-.

It's been a long time since I flipped through that book.

I've decided it's a much better pop-psychology book than most
pop-psychology books (a few weeks ago I re-read "drama of a gifted
child" --what utter crap).

m.
b***@my-deja.com
2007-07-10 15:49:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Jul 10, 10:16 am, smith <***@youhandsomedevil.org> wrote:

> I've decided it's a much better pop-psychology book than most
> pop-psychology books (a few weeks ago I re-read "drama of a gifted
> child" --what utter crap).

It is useless for all practical purposes. But. Imagine how thrilling
it must be, able to project your narcissistic personality disorder on
everybody in the culture. Kind of like being Oprah, minus the private
jet.

My shrink gave Alice Miller high marks. I should have known right
there right then.

B.
smith
2007-07-10 22:55:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
***@my-deja.com wrote:
> On Jul 10, 10:16 am, smith <***@youhandsomedevil.org> wrote:
>
>> I've decided it's a much better pop-psychology book than most
>> pop-psychology books (a few weeks ago I re-read "drama of a gifted
>> child" --what utter crap).
>
> It is useless for all practical purposes. But. Imagine how thrilling
> it must be, able to project your narcissistic personality disorder on
> everybody in the culture. Kind of like being Oprah, minus the private
> jet.
>

> My shrink gave Alice Miller high marks. I should have known right
> there right then.
>

My shrink gave me the book when I was 19. I liked the name, and it
played into my drama with my mother.

Now, I truly think shrinks have caused personality itself to be seen as
a disorder. I don't know how you spend time with those people.


Ever read any Mark Epstein?

m.
b***@my-deja.com
2007-07-10 23:14:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Jul 10, 5:55 pm, smith <***@youhandsomedevil.org> wrote:

> Ever read any Mark Epstein?

Yes. Now I am reading Evans-Wentz and shopping for a meditation
temple. Can I eat steak and drink wine and have a Buddha nature?

I ain't going on no ten day retreat with no meat and no alcohol; I can
swear to that.

B.
bob
2007-07-11 01:18:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 23:14:38 -0000, "***@my-deja.com"
<***@my-deja.com> wrote:

>On Jul 10, 5:55 pm, smith <***@youhandsomedevil.org> wrote:
>
>> Ever read any Mark Epstein?
>
>Yes. Now I am reading Evans-Wentz and shopping for a meditation
>temple. Can I eat steak and drink wine and have a Buddha nature?
>
>I ain't going on no ten day retreat with no meat and no alcohol; I can
>swear to that.

I'll do it if you do.

When I realized I had a BP problem I went w/o drink for several weeks.
In the past, I've gone w/o meat for months. I'd enjoy a ten day
retreat that didn't involve much human interaction.

http://www.trappist.net/retreat/index.html

I used to attend services at this monastery when I lived in Georgia in
the late 80's.

We'll see.
Mica
2007-07-12 01:40:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
bob wrote:

> When I realized I had a BP problem I went w/o drink for several weeks.
> In the past, I've gone w/o meat for months. I'd enjoy a ten day
> retreat that didn't involve much human interaction.
>
> http://www.trappist.net/retreat/index.html
>
> I used to attend services at this monastery when I lived in Georgia in
> the late 80's.

It looks relaxing, but a bit too much talk of god for it to
appeal to me. I'd like an tropical island retreat myself.
Nothing fancy, and a lack of meat and booze would be just fine.
One rule: no talking.

M
there would have to be cheese though
bob
2007-07-12 07:09:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 18:40:39 -0700, Mica <***@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:

>bob wrote:
>
>> When I realized I had a BP problem I went w/o drink for several weeks.
>> In the past, I've gone w/o meat for months. I'd enjoy a ten day
>> retreat that didn't involve much human interaction.
>>
>> http://www.trappist.net/retreat/index.html
>>
>> I used to attend services at this monastery when I lived in Georgia in
>> the late 80's.
>
>It looks relaxing, but a bit too much talk of god for it to
>appeal to me. I'd like an tropical island retreat myself.
>Nothing fancy, and a lack of meat and booze would be just fine.
>One rule: no talking.

What about ...

>M
>there would have to be cheese though

Sounds gouda.
m***@sbcglobal.net
2007-07-12 23:09:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Jul 12, 12:09 am, bob <***@coldmail.nu> wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 18:40:39 -0700, Mica <***@sbcglobal.net>
> wrote:
>
> >It looks relaxing, but a bit too much talk of god for it to
> >appeal to me. I'd like an tropical island retreat myself.
> >Nothing fancy, and a lack of meat and booze would be just fine.
> >One rule: no talking.
>
> What about ...

Well, I wouldn't mandate utter silence. Just no complete sentences.

> >M
> >there would have to be cheese though
>
> Sounds gouda.

Would brie lovely.
Veldfuchs
2007-07-13 11:53:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
***@sbcglobal.net wrote:
>>> M
>>> there would have to be cheese though
>> Sounds gouda.
> Would brie lovely.

That was kinda stilton.

m, norweigan beaver cheese
g***@gmail.com
2007-07-11 03:00:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Jul 10, 9:49?am, "***@my-deja.com" <***@my-deja.com> wrote:
> On Jul 10, 10:16 am, smith <***@youhandsomedevil.org> wrote:
>
> > I've decided it's a much better pop-psychology book than most
> > pop-psychology books (a few weeks ago I re-read "drama of a gifted
> > child" --what utter crap).
>
> It is useless for all practical purposes. But. Imagine how thrilling
> it must be, able to project your narcissistic personality disorder on
> everybody in the culture. Kind of like being Oprah, minus the private
> jet.
>
> My shrink gave Alice Miller high marks. I should have known right
> there right then.
>
> B.

Just curious (and pardon me for barging).... It's been about ten
years since I read Drama of the Gifted Child, but I don't remember
getting the same impression. At the time, I heard it as a reminder
that, for those people who tend to beat themselves up for the tendency
to try to meet others' expectations without necessarily being aware of
their own 'self', then there can sometimes be a reasonable explanation
for how some of those patterns of behavior began.

I agree that it's possible to take something like this too far, using
childhood experiences as an excuse for negative adult behavior, but I
remember Miller presenting situations pretty fairly and referring to
the past as something which can't be changed now. Examining what
helped to create behavior patterns and then moving on from there
(without setting up camp with blame and bitterness) seems okay, as a
starting point.

Anyway, I don't mean for this to come across as a disagreement,
necessarily....just wondering if I'm misremembering the book....
b***@my-deja.com
2007-07-11 03:39:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Jul 10, 10:00 pm, ***@gmail.com wrote:

> Just curious (and pardon me for barging).... It's been about ten
> years since I read Drama of the Gifted Child, but I don't remember
> getting the same impression. At the time, I heard it as a reminder
> that, for those people who tend to beat themselves up for the tendency
> to try to meet others' expectations without necessarily being aware of
> their own 'self', then there can sometimes be a reasonable explanation
> for how some of those patterns of behavior began.

What is wrong with Miller is the Freudian assumption accepted as
universal fact "the child begets the man". Then you build a stack of
cards on it and you got nothing. Not that when Freud first came up
with his theories a hundred years ago, it wasn't substantial and
original, but now it's obsolete. The current state-of-the-art is in
Seligman, Beck, & Ellis; the psycho is informed by childhood
experience; but effective therapy is focused on now and the future.

I had a conversation with my aunt about this last week. I think she is
more traumatized by my childhood than I am. I told her something like,
"look, growing up is hard for all. There is not one person on the
planet who did not get a full quota of strife, pain, and unhappiness.
That I had more than you doesn't give me any kind of get-out-of-jail
card towards treating you more shabbily than you treat me. We all had
more than we thought we could stand."

I don't have Drama Gifted Child. I have "Paths of Life". I just
flipped through the pages. I am a compulsive underliner. In five
minutes of reviewing this book on a topic I am very interested in, not
one single remarkable sentence can be found. It is thin gruel, like
what they have for soup in a prison camp.

This is a flippant analysis, but what I see is an unhappy person
fixated upon victimhood, fantasizing everything would have all been
different if her childhood hadn't been so dreadful.

> I agree that it's possible to take something like this too far, using
> childhood experiences as an excuse for negative adult behavior, but I
> remember Miller presenting situations pretty fairly and referring to
> the past as something which can't be changed now. Examining what
> helped to create behavior patterns and then moving on from there
> (without setting up camp with blame and bitterness) seems okay, as a
> starting point.

Miller is (was?) a Freudian analyst. Four years at an hour per week of
examining what happened before moving on is a scandal on the therapist
and a calamity on the patient.

> Anyway, I don't mean for this to come across as a disagreement,
> necessarily....just wondering if I'm misremembering the book....

It's been seven years since I read it so who knows what this is worth?

Bukvich
g***@gmail.com
2007-07-12 20:22:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Jul 10, 9:39 pm, "***@my-deja.com" <***@my-deja.com> wrote:
> On Jul 10, 10:00 pm, ***@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > Just curious (and pardon me for barging).... It's been about ten
> > years since I read Drama of the Gifted Child, but I don't remember
> > getting the same impression. At the time, I heard it as a reminder
> > that, for those people who tend to beat themselves up for the tendency
> > to try to meet others' expectations without necessarily being aware of
> > their own 'self', then there can sometimes be a reasonable explanation
> > for how some of those patterns of behavior began.
>
> What is wrong with Miller is the Freudian assumption accepted as
> universal fact "the child begets the man". Then you build a stack of
> cards on it and you got nothing. Not that when Freud first came up
> with his theories a hundred years ago, it wasn't substantial and
> original, but now it's obsolete. The current state-of-the-art is in
> Seligman, Beck, & Ellis; the psycho is informed by childhood
> experience; but effective therapy is focused on now and the future.

I agree with what you're saying here. I didn't remember the book this
way, but it's been quite a while since I read it.

> I had a conversation with my aunt about this last week. I think she is
> more traumatized by my childhood than I am. I told her something like,
> "look, growing up is hard for all. There is not one person on the
> planet who did not get a full quota of strife, pain, and unhappiness.
> That I had more than you doesn't give me any kind of get-out-of-jail
> card towards treating you more shabbily than you treat me. We all had
> more than we thought we could stand."

I agree with you, again. I would add that some people who seem to
have been through a mountain of 'stuff' early on, and who haven't
chosen to remain stuck in some way, can then move forward with some
strength and awareness.

> I don't have Drama Gifted Child. I have "Paths of Life". I just
> flipped through the pages. I am a compulsive underliner. In five
> minutes of reviewing this book on a topic I am very interested in, not
> one single remarkable sentence can be found. It is thin gruel, like
> what they have for soup in a prison camp.

I haven't read Paths of Life, or a ton of Miller, so your comments are
helpful.

> This is a flippant analysis, but what I see is an unhappy person
> fixated upon victimhood, fantasizing everything would have all been
> different if her childhood hadn't been so dreadful.
>
> > I agree that it's possible to take something like this too far, using
> > childhood experiences as an excuse for negative adult behavior, but I
> > remember Miller presenting situations pretty fairly and referring to
> > the past as something which can't be changed now. Examining what
> > helped to create behavior patterns and then moving on from there
> > (without setting up camp with blame and bitterness) seems okay, as a
> > starting point.
>
> Miller is (was?) a Freudian analyst. Four years at an hour per week of
> examining what happened before moving on is a scandal on the therapist
> and a calamity on the patient.

Agreed.

> > Anyway, I don't mean for this to come across as a disagreement,
> > necessarily....just wondering if I'm misremembering the book....
>
> It's been seven years since I read it so who knows what this is worth?
>
> Bukvich

Same here. I dug out my copy of DGC, and found that I'd written 'May,
1998' inside the cover.

Guess I'll go look up some Seligman, Beck, and Ellis....
g***@gmail.com
2007-07-12 20:43:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Jul 10, 9:39 pm, "***@my-deja.com" <***@my-deja.com> wrote:
> On Jul 10, 10:00 pm, ***@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > Just curious (and pardon me for barging).... It's been about ten
> > years since I read Drama of the Gifted Child, but I don't remember
> > getting the same impression. At the time, I heard it as a reminder
> > that, for those people who tend to beat themselves up for the tendency
> > to try to meet others' expectations without necessarily being aware of
> > their own 'self', then there can sometimes be a reasonable explanation
> > for how some of those patterns of behavior began.
>
> What is wrong with Miller is the Freudian assumption accepted as
> universal fact "the child begets the man". Then you build a stack of
> cards on it and you got nothing. Not that when Freud first came up
> with his theories a hundred years ago, it wasn't substantial and
> original, but now it's obsolete. The current state-of-the-art is in
> Seligman, Beck, & Ellis; the psycho is informed by childhood
> experience; but effective therapy is focused on now and the future.

I agree with what you're saying here. I didn't remember the book
this
way, but it's been quite a while since I read it.

> I had a conversation with my aunt about this last week. I think she is
> more traumatized by my childhood than I am. I told her something like,
> "look, growing up is hard for all. There is not one person on the
> planet who did not get a full quota of strife, pain, and unhappiness.
> That I had more than you doesn't give me any kind of get-out-of-jail
> card towards treating you more shabbily than you treat me. We all had
> more than we thought we could stand."

I agree with you, again. I would add that some people who seem to
have been through a mountain of 'stuff' early on, and who haven't
chosen to remain stuck in some way, can then move forward with some
strength and awareness.


> I don't have Drama Gifted Child. I have "Paths of Life". I just
> flipped through the pages. I am a compulsive underliner. In five
> minutes of reviewing this book on a topic I am very interested in, not
> one single remarkable sentence can be found. It is thin gruel, like
> what they have for soup in a prison camp.

I haven't read Paths of Life, or a ton of Miller, so your comments
are
helpful.

> This is a flippant analysis, but what I see is an unhappy person
> fixated upon victimhood, fantasizing everything would have all been
> different if her childhood hadn't been so dreadful.
>
> > I agree that it's possible to take something like this too far, using
> > childhood experiences as an excuse for negative adult behavior, but I
> > remember Miller presenting situations pretty fairly and referring to
> > the past as something which can't be changed now. Examining what
> > helped to create behavior patterns and then moving on from there
> > (without setting up camp with blame and bitterness) seems okay, as a
> > starting point.
>
> Miller is (was?) a Freudian analyst. Four years at an hour per week of
> examining what happened before moving on is a scandal on the therapist
> and a calamity on the patient.

Agreed.

> > Anyway, I don't mean for this to come across as a disagreement,
> > necessarily....just wondering if I'm misremembering the book....
>
> It's been seven years since I read it so who knows what this is worth?
>
> Bukvich

Same here. I dug out my copy of DGC, and found that I'd written
'May,
1998' inside the cover.

I'll go look up some Seligman, Beck, and Ellis.... Thanks for the
recommendations.
g***@gmail.com
2007-07-12 20:57:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Jul 10, 9:39 pm, "***@my-deja.com" <***@my-deja.com> wrote:
> On Jul 10, 10:00 pm, ***@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > Just curious (and pardon me for barging).... It's been about ten
> > years since I read Drama of the Gifted Child, but I don't remember
> > getting the same impression. At the time, I heard it as a reminder
> > that, for those people who tend to beat themselves up for the tendency
> > to try to meet others' expectations without necessarily being aware of
> > their own 'self', then there can sometimes be a reasonable explanation
> > for how some of those patterns of behavior began.
>
> What is wrong with Miller is the Freudian assumption accepted as
> universal fact "the child begets the man". Then you build a stack of
> cards on it and you got nothing. Not that when Freud first came up
> with his theories a hundred years ago, it wasn't substantial and
> original, but now it's obsolete. The current state-of-the-art is in
> Seligman, Beck, & Ellis; the psycho is informed by childhood
> experience; but effective therapy is focused on now and the future.

I agree with what you're saying here. I didn't remember the book this
way, but it's been a while since I read it.

>
> I had a conversation with my aunt about this last week. I think she is
> more traumatized by my childhood than I am. I told her something like,
> "look, growing up is hard for all. There is not one person on the
> planet who did not get a full quota of strife, pain, and unhappiness.
> That I had more than you doesn't give me any kind of get-out-of-jail
> card towards treating you more shabbily than you treat me. We all had
> more than we thought we could stand."

I agree with you here, too. I would add that some people who seem to
have been through a mountain of 'stuff' early on, and who haven't
chosen to remain stuck in some way, can then move forward with some
strength and awareness.

>
> I don't have Drama Gifted Child. I have "Paths of Life". I just
> flipped through the pages. I am a compulsive underliner. In five
> minutes of reviewing this book on a topic I am very interested in, not
> one single remarkable sentence can be found. It is thin gruel, like
> what they have for soup in a prison camp.

I haven't read Paths of Life, or a ton of Miller, so your comments are
helpful.

>
> This is a flippant analysis, but what I see is an unhappy person
> fixated upon victimhood, fantasizing everything would have all been
> different if her childhood hadn't been so dreadful.
>
> > I agree that it's possible to take something like this too far, using
> > childhood experiences as an excuse for negative adult behavior, but I
> > remember Miller presenting situations pretty fairly and referring to
> > the past as something which can't be changed now. Examining what
> > helped to create behavior patterns and then moving on from there
> > (without setting up camp with blame and bitterness) seems okay, as a
> > starting point.
>
> Miller is (was?) a Freudian analyst. Four years at an hour per week of
> examining what happened before moving on is a scandal on the therapist
> and a calamity on the patient.

Agreed.

>
> > Anyway, I don't mean for this to come across as a disagreement,
> > necessarily....just wondering if I'm misremembering the book....
>
> It's been seven years since I read it so who knows what this is worth?
>
> Bukvich

Same here. I dug out my copy of DGC, and found that I'd written 'May,
1998' inside the cover.

I'll go look up some Seligman, Beck, and Ellis.... Thanks for the
recommendations.
Bug-Eyed Churl
2007-07-12 03:53:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Juliane <***@youhandsomedevil.org> wrote to Bukvich:
[...]

> Just kill yourself.

Wow, it really hurt when Bukky rejected you, huh?

What other long-time angst.men rejected you besides us? Jonah? Max? Ilya?


Nub,
D.

--
"I'm feeling real shot down..."
...................................................................
(C) 2007 TheDavid^TM | David, P.O. Box 21403, Louisville, KY 40221
Jonah Thomas
2007-07-09 19:54:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
"***@my-deja.com" <***@my-deja.com> wrote:
> Anton Vredegoor <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > So now you're pimping faith, eh? The problem is we are hardwired to
> > want all kinds of things. The first thing we must do is to become
> > free of want, so that we can see clearly.
>
> No. I was explaining a point of theology. Getting rid of want appears
> to take a lot of work. You want to spend ten years staring at a wall
> daily for two hours? I so want to not do that.

I found that with a very little bit of training I could get rid of want
for up to 3 hours or so at a time. Sometimes as long as 12 hours.

But at some point, you either notice you want to get up and use the
potty or else you just go ahead and pee on yourself.

It isn't really a big deal to miss a meal or two because you don't want
to eat enough to get up and find food. But it takes real work to not
care whether you pee on yourself.

> If you could figure out how to get rid of want in a weekend seminar
> you might find yourself richer than Osho.

No, it doesn't work that way. The weekend seminar thing needs a lot of
word-of-mouth advertising. People will answer a chain letter just
because they got a chain letter. They'll eat bonbons just because
somebody gives them bonbons to eat. But it takes real motivation to get
them to go to a weekend seminar, particularly if it costs actual money.
(And if it doesn't cost them anything some of them will go for the
chance to heckle and troll.) When a friend tells them "I did it and it
was the greatest thing in my whole entire life! I want you to do it to
because I want you to have this wonderful chance" they might possibly do
it. When one of their old friends suddenly doesn't want anything at all,
they probably won't even find out what happened to him.

No word-of-mouth = no large audiences paying large sums of money.

To get the money you don't want to teach people to have no desire, you
want to teach them to desire to take your next course and desire that
other people take this course. And a lot of the Forum failures come from
people who want to "get ahead" who essentially are trying to make the
corn grow faster by tugging on the cornstalks.
Jonah Thomas
2007-07-09 19:21:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
"***@my-deja.com" <***@my-deja.com> wrote:

> Suddenly I feel I must sound like Jonah. But this ain't Jonah; it's
> Luther / Tillich.

There's nothing wrong with Luther/Tillich sounding like me. I can't
particularly object. They're both dead anyway, aren't they?
Loading...