Dialogue with Psychiatrist in India

Sitaram
Dialogue With A Psychiatrist

(9-14-2000)

============================
(highlight from dialogue):
“When Individual Self perishes; Universal Self is Born”
“Only when your particular individual self perishes may that
Universal Self be born in its stead”
===========================

(Note: “Mad_Shrink” is actually a minor alteration of the screen name which he has chosen)

Mad_Shrink: Hello, Sitaram, so, how’re you doing today?

Sitaram: You are the psychiatrist whom I met on-line in yahoo chat last week, yes?

Mad_Shrink: Yes , you have a good memory

Sitaram: Yes, you were flattering. You said I was “expansive”…

Sitaram: and you said that I gave you an inferiority complex

Mad_Shrink: I accessed your website

Sitaram: Thanks for visiting.

Mad_Shrink: You have a sharper memory than I could ever imagine

Sitaram: Actually, I am very forgetful and absent-minded, but your words happend to stick in my mind.

Mad_Shrink: Yes, I read some of your inter-faith dialogues

Mad_Shrink: and think that you are expansive

Sitaram: Do you find anything useful there, or of interest?

Mad_Shrink: I’ve learnt a lot already

Sitaram: Ah, good! I like it when people learn.

Mad_Shrink: ..although I have’nt seen too many pages.

Sitaram: It is good to use our minds.

Mad_Shrink: Yes, of course.

Sitaram: Dont forget, you can download the entire site to your hard drive in minutes and view off-line.

Mad_Shrink: How does one do that?

Sitaram: You must be able to use pkzip or winzip to unzip the files that you download.

Mad_Shrink: Will you please explain, I am new to computers.

Sitaram: pkzip,winzip is free shareware, from http://www.pkware.com

Sitaram: Yes… you click on my INDEX OF PAGES

Mad_Shrink: Yes?

Sitaram: Then, the first three items will download 100 pages at a time

Mad_Shrink: and then?

Sitaram: each download takes less than 5 minutes

Mad_Shrink: and then, how do I access them later?

Sitaram: then… you must have pkzip winzip installed,… which is I think from http://www.pkware.com

Sitaram: When you unzip them… they expand in a directory to files called page001.htm , page002.htm, etc

Sitaram: up to page255.htm

Mad_Shrink: OK, I’ll try to do as you say

Sitaram: Then you simply key into your browser for example c:myfilespage001.htm, if the htm files are in a folder called myfiles on drive c: , and you will be viewing everything in your brower… but without need for internet

Mad_Shrink: I want you to talk to me today about the Bhagvad Gita, please?

Mad_Shrink: if you wish

Sitaram: Did you give me your email… are you on my email list?

Sitaram: I send out about 5 articles today…..

Mad_Shrink: what, in your erudite opinion, is the essence of the Bhagvad? in very brief

Mad_Shrink: your knowledge of comparative theology is indeed awesome

Sitaram: Thanks for kind words….

Mad_Shrink: and you are well-read, indeed

Sitaram: Some of the articles I send out are simply interesting ones I find on the internet…

Sitaram: Today, I found a nice one on srimad Bhagavatam

Mad_Shrink: I often wonder how you found so much time to do so much?

Mad_Shrink: anything you’d like to tell me about the Bhagvad Gita, once again, please?

Sitaram: well… I just emailed you that one article on srimad bhagavatam

Sitaram: but… since you ask…

Sitaram: I will say….. some of the things i like to mention frequently from Gita

Mad_Shrink: I’d like to know your perception of the essence of the Gita not quotations, please, if you do not mind

Sitaram: Ch 4 vs 11 In whatever way people approach Me, I accept them…

Mad_Shrink: your own viewpoint

Sitaram: people everywhere follow My path….

Mad_Shrink: so, do that

Mad_Shrink: I approach you in this way

Sitaram: of course…. there are other translations of that verse which are more sectarian….

Mad_Shrink: no quotations, please, talk to me, don’t show off your knowledge

Sitaram: hmmm….. but…. I am trained to think in this fashion… giving references for everything….

Mad_Shrink: I want to know the essence of the Gita, in your opinion, your views

Sitaram: usually, people reject anything which is not substantiated

Mad_Shrink: No, I am interested in you as a person relating to me, not as a mouth-piece

Sitaram: It is like asking me to write to you, but without using letters of the alphabet, since I would be showing off my knowledge of the alphabet

Mad_Shrink: You have a point

Sitaram: to talk about Gita,… we must quote the Gita

Sitaram: to talk about Gospels, we must quote Gospels

Mad_Shrink: but the analogy is not quite accurate

Mad_Shrink: I am seeking your opinion

Mad_Shrink: I do not mean to say that I know so much that I can discuss with you

Sitaram: there are a certain number of dialogues at my website, where I speak theology apart from any scripture or textual reference….

Mad_Shrink: I am interested in relating to YOU

Sitaram: yet you must realize that whatever I say,…. I am only the sum total of everything which I have internalized…

Mad_Shrink: here, on the net

Sitaram: I have a suggestion for you,… an idea….

Mad_Shrink: fine, tell me

Sitaram: have you ever read Dostoevsky?

Mad_Shrink: yes

Sitaram: the Brothers Karamazov?

Mad_Shrink: No , I have read Crime and Punishment and The Idiot

Sitaram: the first 100 pages or so is an account given by the fictional character, the monk Zossima….in Brothers Karamazov

Mad_Shrink: You are very factually oriented, brother

Sitaram: the monk Zossima tells how as a young man, he rejected a career in the military to take up the orthodox monastic spiritual life

Mad_Shrink: I wonder how your family ever coped with you, or did they?

Sitaram: But I am trying to make a point for you…

Mad_Shrink: Alright , go ahead

Sitaram: If you read Doestoevsky’s account… you will see that….

Mad_Shrink: yes?

Sitaram: Someone like Zossima…. BECOMES ZOSSIMA,…. precisely by internalizing all the scriptures until they become second nature

Mad_Shrink: Yes

Sitaram: in other words…. the indivuality of Zossima is not what is interesting

Mad_Shrink: That is true, indeed, but you are stuck midway

Sitaram: that individuality dies as part of the spiritual developmental process; that which TRULY interests us is the personality which evolves as a living embodiment of those scriptures and traditions….

Mad_Shrink: I also thought, albeit open to criticism, that you are a poor listener

Sitaram: so…. a Ramakrishna, or a Ramana Marharshi fascinates us PRECISELY because their own individuality perished as they became LIVING EMBODIMENTS of the traditions that they represent.

Mad_Shrink: You are pontifical

Sitaram: but.. I am addressing myself in a very precise way to your first objection… but you do not have the attention span to pursue the thought to its conclusion…. ( I know that sounds harsh), and you mix in too much of I, Me, My ego which makes it difficult for you to listen and perhaps benefit…

Mad_Shrink: I merely asked you to tell me your view of the essence of the Gita, from your gleanings

Sitaram: but… then in a bizzare fashion… you forbade me to quote from the Gita…

Mad_Shrink: to quote, yes

Sitaram: Yet anyone and everyone who speaks on Gita is expected to quote from gita

Mad_Shrink: But where was your originality?

Sitaram: The object is precisely NOT to be original.. that is the very point that you are missing… Although I have written 2000 pages on these things.. which you may download and read…. yet you want me to speak DIRECTLY to you… on the same subject… which is a desire that stems from your personal ego….

Mad_Shrink: Do i have a right to disagree?

Sitaram: So when I try to oblige your desire…

Mad_Shrink: Yes, I am listening

Sitaram: then you feel you must CONTROL the manner in which I discourse

Mad_Shrink: Fine, go ahead

Sitaram: which also stems from your personal ego…

Mad_Shrink: and tell me using the form you wish

Sitaram: I am merely trying to hold up for you a mirror so you may perhaps see your own psychodynamics

Mad_Shrink: I understand and I do not mean any offence

Sitaram: you currently have obstacles, impediments to your inquiry…

Mad_Shrink: for at a level, I have tremendous respect for a person such as you

Sitaram: until you understand and remove these ego impediments… you will not benefit from readings or discourse

Mad_Shrink: Yes, I am grateful that you point this out

Sitaram: If you truly want to understand, and to BECOME the Gita, Upanisads, Gospels, Dhammapada… then you must give up desires for originality

Mad_Shrink: but you could have just said that earlier

Sitaram: Only when your particular individual self perishes may that Universal Self be born in its stead.

Mad_Shrink: stopped me there, saying that you will decide the form or that it is not possible for you to have me control the way you would answer the question

Sitaram: so, getting back to Doestoyevsky, Zossima is of interest only when, through a process, his individuality dies… and Zossima becomes an embodiment of the Gospels….

Mad_Shrink: I understand

Sitaram: but if you can manage to download my website to your local drive you can read for yours the highlights of dialogues I have had over past 2 years….

Mad_Shrink: why do you always get back to your website?

Sitaram: which is, in some ways BETTER than speaking to me directly

Mad_Shrink: You probably are right, I’ll try that

Sitaram: Since I am an organic being… with moments of weariness, forgetfulness, etc….

Mad_Shrink: Your style is too expansive for me

Sitaram: …so, writing is a tool which distills and synthesizes something that is MORE than me at any given moment

Mad_Shrink: I prefer a simple, straightforward chat, do not mean to be hurtful

Sitaram: If we could chat with Plato or Socrates… it would not be as rewarding as a Platonic dialogue for the same reason…

Mad_Shrink: but I find your manner a trifle adversarial

Sitaram: Those figures which we admire in history… we come to know them ONLY THROUGH that distillation of writing and tradition

Mad_Shrink: I know exactly what you mean

Sitaram: Which by its very nature is LARGER THAN LIFE…

Mad_Shrink: You are right! Yes, sitaram

Sitaram: SO you see, if you met me face to face… well… I might be a disappointment after the ME that you might come to know through my writings

Mad_Shrink: sure

Sitaram: but I understand peoples need to have something straight from “the horses mouth” so to speak…

Sitaram: actually,.. you have raised some intersting issues in this dialogue of ours

Mad_Shrink: Thank you, sitaram, like what for instance?

Mad_Shrink: What issues?

Mad_Shrink: Please?

Sitaram: Well… our entire discussion of the person we meet in writings vs the person in real life

Mad_Shrink: and one may now add net life

Sitaram: that the literary persona is LARGER than life…. just like the moviestar on screen is more striking than in person

=================

Reader response to Dialogue with Psychiatrist

===== (a readers response):

I enjoyed that post of your dialogue with the psychiatrist. Would a meeting with the Buddha be a disappointment? All the stories I’ve read about encounters with the Buddha (or Ramkrishna Paramhansa) are eloquent about the peace radiating from the person. The person impressed more than the words. Would you then make a distinction between (learning and knowledge) on one hand and (enlightenment and self-knowledge) on the other? Can the latter be attained without the former?

I have a question that I think Mad-Shrink was leading to… With all your learning of Theology, Hindu and otherwise, would you consider yourself to be happy and enlightened?

I’m not trying to be rude. I’m just curious.

=============(my reply):

Actually, you are correct in pointing out that Ramakrishna, Ramana Maharshi and others wrote little or nothing themselves, and did radiate a tremendous grace or peace. In fact, Someset Maughm had a meeting with Ramana Maharshi and, because he was an “intellectual” totally conditioned to that “literary presence”, he totally missed the point of sitting with Ramana Maharshi in silence. I was rather hastily trying to make a point to the psychiatrist, a point which still has validity, though it does not precisely apply to people like Ramakrishna or Ramana Maharshi.

Lord Krisha said “Better to do ONE’S OWN DHARMA, even if imperfectly, rather than to do another’s Dharma to perfection.

I am reminded of some of those New Yorker cartoons of the clown sitting in his dressing room forlornly reciting Hamlet before the mirror. The clown desires to play Hamlet. Mr. Spock of Star Trek grows to detest his portrayal of a Vulcan alien, to the point of writing a book entitled “I am not Spock”.

I am a failure at many different things at life, but curiously successful in this strange little thing I have been doing for the past two years. I personally believe that I am doing that Dharma which I was ment to do in this lifetime, however imperfectly I may be doing it. I myself am a means to some greater end. That end has nothing to do with my own personal happiness or enlightenment, other than the fact that it is “good” to do ones own Dharma, to surrender to it. I am also aware that I may very likely pay for my activities one day with my life. That is something which I realized long ago and accepted as “part of the job”. If you take what I was told in my dream with any seriousness, in page 1 of my website, then you realize that I must be reborn several more times to be “purified” through suffering.

One of the pages at my website states that “we are exactly what we should be at each point in time”. Someone was scandalized by this and said, “Does that mean that people should be prostitutes or drug dealers.” My answer was that people like Gandhi and Mother Theresa and Ramana Maharshi were as much ineluctably drawn to satyagraha, charity, and ascetical tapas, as the thief or prostitute or drug addict is drawn to their life and activities. It is part of a karmic cause and effect that each of us must work through. There was a necessity for Hitler and Ravanna; without them there would be no Schindler’s List, and no Ramanand Sagar (or Tulsidas) Ramayan. For all we know, a bee is happy makeing honey, the viper is happy making venom, and the cow is “happy” making milk; yet all three drink from the same pool of water to quench their thirst.

Bottom line: If you are circus clown, and know you were meant to be a circus clown, and have surrendered to that Dharma, then be a GOOD circus clown. Dont pine away because you are not playing Hamlet.

(the reader then asks):

Why didn’t Krsna reveal the message of the Geeta to Duryodhan? If Arjun *needed* the Geeta at that point because he was hesitating from doing his duty, does that mean that the Kauravas were ‘better’ (in a loose sense)? They were fairly committed to their Dharma. Is there a bias in the cosmos towards ‘good’ or is there no such thing as ‘good’? What does the Geeta say about this? Why did Krsna side with the Pandavas?

I understand intuitively when you say that your dharma may not be coupled strongly with your peace of mind.

Your comment about the viper reminded me of a rather heart-warming thought that I read in this book called ‘The snake-bite survivor’s club’ or something like that. It was to the effect that ‘It is only in India that you might learn not to fear the snake, and indeed learn to love it.’

==============

(my reply):

Why does Lord Krsna manifest to Arjuna and not Duryodhan? Lord Krishna says (paraphrasing): “Whenever righteousness declines, and unrighteousness increases, I will descend and Manifest Myself, in every age.”

It is true that Lord Krishna appeared to Arjuna, but that does not mean that the Supreme Lord manifests to EACH and every one of us personally when we are in need.

Through all the centuries of history of the Jewish peoples, God appeared in some personal fashion to only a relative handful: Moses, Abraham, Samuel, David, Job, Elijah, Elisha, etc.

It IS TRUE that God will manifest in some way to each of us during our lives, if we are ripe for it, but for the majority of us, that manifestation is WITHIN our reading, meditation, and absorption into such Divine Lilas as the Geeta, Gospels, the Torah, etc. And if we take the Anugita seriously, with Arjuna’s predicament, that even though he was given spiritualized vision and was allowed to see the Lord’s Universal Form or Satsvarup; now the radiance of that experience was fading to a dim memory, and Arjuna approaches Krishna asking what he should do.

Even though only certain Apostles beheld the Transfiguration of Christ on Mt. Tabor as a radian Being of Light surrounded by Prophets in transcendent dialogue, yet when that moment ended, as all moments end, those apostles were left with there original embodied human frailty and doubts.

That is why Jesus said “Yea, blessed are you who see these things, but far more blessed are those who never see and yet believe.” In the Ramayan, Shabari’s most blessed moment was NOT when she met her Lord Ram face to face; but was rather that moment in her devotion, her bhakti when she attracted the Lord’s attention. Lord Krishna says a very perplexing thing: “All sentient beings, embodied jivas, are the same in My eyes and I treat them all equally; yet My devotee is most dear to me.” This would seem to be a contradiction, would it not?

Since the Lord as the author and master of all dualities transcends all dualities, i.e. is immanent in each quality as its source (I am the cleverness of the cheater, I am the old man upon the staff, I am the young maiden, I am the green parrot with the red eyes); hence the eight siddhis or powers of the Lord seem mutually contradictory. The Lord may become infinitely great, or infinitessimally small; He may become heavy as a mountain, or light as a feather….. etc etc…. but here is the most significant of the Lord’s abilities… He may become absolute master, BUT ALSO HE MAY SUFFER ABSOLUTE BONDAGE AND SERVITUDE.

One of the names of Lord Krsna is Damodar, which means “bound at the waiste or stomach”.

When Mother Yashoda attempts to bind young Lord Krsna to a pillar for His impish pranks, she discovers that all the rope in the village is not enought to encompass Him. No matter how much she adds, it always falls short by half an inch. But finally, Lord Krishna allows Himself to be bound. Is this not strikingly similar to the Crucifixion? The imagery is the same, The Infinite takes human birth and suffers to be bound.

It is bhakti (devotion) which binds the Lord.

I could say much much more, but this post is sufficiently long.

===============================================================

SOME WEEKS LATER (9/20/2000),… the dialogue with Mad_Shrink resumes:

Mad_Shrink: STOP “I” ing me to death with every sentence. Simply talk with me without constantly saying “I”, “I”, “I”

=======connection is lost

Mad_Shrink: You left! Was I too harsh? Did I anger you?

Mad_Shrink: sorry

Sitaram: no.. i clicked wrong button and closed the chat window

Mad_Shrink: fine

Mad_Shrink: yes, back to your question “is there some the confluence of all religions”

Sitaram: sorry for my grammer…. i was taught from ealiest childhood that it is the greatest impropriety to stray from correct grammar and spelling, so I do not feel comfortable unless I frequently use the personal pronoun.

Mad_Shrink: never mind

Sitaram: it is a cultural thing…

Mad_Shrink: let’s talk about religion

Mad_Shrink: the confluence

Mad_Shrink: the Jehad

Mad_Shrink: please

Sitaram: ok… wait a minute.. i want to take a moment to add you to my yahoo pager list… this yahoo pager is very new to me

Mad_Shrink: i do not wish to do that

Mad_Shrink: please

Sitaram: aha.. it worked fine…

Sitaram: ohhh… sorry.. didnt see your last post

Sitaram: so.. then… simply deny request

Mad_Shrink: never mind

Sitaram: sorry

Mad_Shrink: never mind

Mad_Shrink: accepted

Sitaram: didnt mean to be presumptuous

Mad_Shrink: but you always are presumptuous

Mad_Shrink: never mind

Sitaram: you see.. i have a problem with absentminded ness….. and i speak with hundreds…. so its more convenient,for people i really like

Mad_Shrink: the confluence of all religions

Sitaram: to have them on a buddy list

Sitaram: ok back to confluence

Mad_Shrink: what is the common thread running through all the religions?

Sitaram: let me gather my thoughts one second

Sitaram: we must distinguish between two aspects of “confluence”,…. point of origin (more properly effluence, i suppose), and teleological/eschatological confluence (or unity) if that should indeed ever come to pass

Mad_Shrink: what is eschatological mean?

Sitaram: there is the issue of the common origin/source of all religiosity/spirituality….

Mad_Shrink: sorry

Mad_Shrink: what does,,,,,,

Mad_Shrink: yes

Mad_Shrink: what is eschatology?

Sitaram: in greek (you must be patient with me, i speak greek, and someties think in greek)

Mad_Shrink: please

Mad_Shrink: oh

Mad_Shrink: i see

Sitaram: eschatos means temporal end…… but not necessary a final teleology or goal towards which something is perfecting

Sitaram: Teleios means “end” in the sense of a perfected goal towards which things were striving

Mad_Shrink: what is your understanding of the Holy Spirit?

Sitaram: for example… if the sun explodes tomorrow, or a comet strikes the earth,… that is the eschatological end of things (but with no purpose of design…)… simply a temporal end

Sitaram: but…. a “final judgement” a “second coming” a “new heaven/new earth”… the things which Abrahamic religions dwell on… such is a teleiological end

Mad_Shrink: fine

Mad_Shrink: thank you

Mad_Shrink: Holy Spirit?

Sitaram: and… to have an even better understanding… it helps to be somewhat familiar, as a good example of this, of the thinking of Hegel…. and his notion of “an end of History”,

Sitaram: sorry.. i know you are now impatient to change subjects to “holy spirit”

Sitaram: though we have not delt adequately with first question of “confluence of all religions”

Mad_Shrink: not a “change” of subjects at all

Sitaram: but… i aim to please….

Sitaram: ok… regarding question of Holy Spirit… one moment

Mad_Shrink: please do not aim to please me

Mad_Shrink: i wonder how you must be in your personal life

Mad_Shrink: you hardly ever pay attention to what the other is saying…..

Sitaram: it is my nature, a cultural thing… like the grammar business of personal pronouns,… or my habit of trying to proceed along one line of thought in a certain progression

Mad_Shrink: perhaps because you have so much to tell

Sitaram: you are unfair in your criticism…. because i am bending over backwards to do things “your way”….

Mad_Shrink: very linear

Sitaram: not that im angry or offended… but in one breath.. you say “do not try to please me”.. but in another….you insist that everything be “your way” =======(loss of internet connection. I log back in and resume dialogue)

Mad_Shrink: hi

Mad_Shrink: glad i waited

Sitaram: sorry… i often loose connection

Mad_Shrink: what happened?

Mad_Shrink: you were logged out?

Sitaram: static on phone line

Sitaram: perhaps

Mad_Shrink: oh

Sitaram: sometimes i get 6 hours straight… no problems

Mad_Shrink: i do not mean to hurt you

Sitaram: other time, i get “booted” every 30 minutes

Mad_Shrink: but in a dialogue, you can’t necessarily be so linear

Sitaram: no… actually… i think i rather understand the “psychodamics” of how you perceive me, and interact with me…

Mad_Shrink: one often gets interrupted

Mad_Shrink: and one has to change

Mad_Shrink: track

Sitaram: but… were i to speak candidly… you would think me presumptuous

Mad_Shrink: you may not be able to reach the completion of a thought

Mad_Shrink: unless you are alone

Mad_Shrink: i believe you are not a good listener

Sitaram: you see… you were quite accurate, in our initial meeting, when you described me as “expansive”

Mad_Shrink: but you want complete conformity from those who listen to you

Mad_Shrink: in the way they need to listen

Sitaram: but… you fail to see that it is YOU who insists on complete conformity… an you project that on me…

Mad_Shrink: till you have completed your linear thought to it’s logical conclusion

Sitaram: if i may share something with you in all sincerity and candor

Mad_Shrink: i think there is a mismatch here

Mad_Shrink: please share

Mad_Shrink: waiting, Sir

Sitaram: in the past 2 years… of chatting with literally hundreds of people.. literally 12 and 16 hours per day….. you are unique in certain things which you have insisted upon/or said

Mad_Shrink: this was not candid

Sitaram: and… my website is a audit trail of many of those dialogues

Mad_Shrink: not candid at all

Sitaram: im not finished with my thought

Mad_Shrink: waiting, Sir

Sitaram: you lack the patience to even allow me to compose my thoughts and express myself

Mad_Shrink: fine

Mad_Shrink: and do you ever listen?

Sitaram: in 2 year (full time)… with HUNDREDS…no one has become angry at my use of personal pronouns… for example

Sitaram: no one has ever insisted that i discuss a scripture.. but use absolutely no quotations…

Mad_Shrink: fine, so that is unique?

Sitaram: i am trying to help you get some insight into your own “personality”

Mad_Shrink: so?

Mad_Shrink: so?

Mad_Shrink: so?

Mad_Shrink: you are indeed kind

Sitaram: you are a VERY PROUD individual… and that pride gets in your way…

Mad_Shrink: sarcasm very much intended

Mad_Shrink: how do you know?

Sitaram: you see.. you are angry… and i am not

Mad_Shrink: yes, i am proud

Sitaram: i realize that it is difficult for a physician, such as yourself, to approach someone such as me, a self taught layperson, with no degrees….

Mad_Shrink: that is untrue

Sitaram: it is the very nature of our society to view MDs in a special light

Mad_Shrink: untrue, again

Mad_Shrink: some deserve it

Sitaram: even our President is “Mr President”…. but we always say Dr. and Mrs. Smith

Sitaram: you know.. I will share something with you that I read in David Viscott’s autobiographical book “The Making of a Psychiatrist”

Mad_Shrink: please do

Sitaram: Viscott pointed out the great irony that….. the very process of Medical School and Residency to train a Psychiatrist, tends to allow only those who are “hard boiled owls”…. to make the grade

Sitaram: in other words… thick skinned, highly competitive, driven…etc

Mad_Shrink: yes, true in general

Mad_Shrink: now you will be happy because i agreed with you

Sitaram: and yet in practice… they are engaged in an activity which requires compassion in the utmost… and perhaps…. a great degree of humility

Sitaram: aha.. but… you again project YOUR OWN happiness at “receiving approval”… upon me

Sitaram: if you will read through my website.. you will understand how little such agreement means to me……

Mad_Shrink: sitaram, thank you for your valuable insights, i would like to leave

Sitaram: i am sorry you feel that way

Mad_Shrink: bye, sitaram

Sitaram: i do hope, if you are calmed down… you will chat with me in the future

Mad_Shrink: well, you are overestimating me

Mad_Shrink: bye, sitaram

Mad_Shrink: sitaram?

Sitaram: this is very sad

Sitaram: i hope you reflect upon these issues

Mad_Shrink: sure

Mad_Shrink: sure

Sitaram: actually… we both have something to gain by continued dialogue

Mad_Shrink: bye, sitaram

Sitaram: bye…

Mad_Shrink: bye

Sitaram: you must one day confront this enemy within you

Sitaram: or you will never know peace

Mad_Shrink: which enemy?

Mad_Shrink: which enemy?

Mad_Shrink: which enemy?

Sitaram: your anger, your pride… your stubbornness… your desire to control

Mad_Shrink: thank you, again

Sitaram: you will not be able to properly serve your patients… unless you change

Sitaram: I can help you with some suggested readings.. such as David Viscott’s autobiography… and some other works in psychology, psychiatry

Sitaram: such readings would not be the advice of a layperson like myself…but would be words from fellow physicians

Mad_Shrink: thank you, sitaram, you send mail regularly anyway

Mad_Shrink: bye, sitaram

Sitaram: bye… I am most saddened by your behavior

Sitaram: for your sake..not for my own

Mad_Shrink: i meant that in your mail, you send references anyway

Mad_Shrink: for that, we do not have to chat

Sitaram: would you prefer that i send you some thoughts on this matter in email…

Mad_Shrink: no, please

Sitaram: perhaps you would find email less upsetting than on line chat

Mad_Shrink: you have humiliated me enough, without bothering to get to know or understand me

Sitaram: but… it is you who humiliate yourself… that is what the demon of pride does…

Mad_Shrink: alright

Sitaram: look at great personalities like Jesus or Gandhi…. who were never humiliated…

Mad_Shrink: how would you know?

Sitaram: humility is the vaccination against humiliation

Mad_Shrink: how would you know?

Sitaram: it is most evident in their lives and writings….

Mad_Shrink: but you have taught me one thing

Sitaram: you know a very great woman Eleanor Roosevelt said it best…

Sitaram: No one can humiliate you without your consent

Mad_Shrink: and that is, this kind of dialogue cannot appreciate the non-verbal nuances of expression

Sitaram: she was a very unattractive woman, in the public eye, with a handicapped husband who was unfaithful to her

Mad_Shrink: thank you for that

Mad_Shrink: this is a very deficient “form”

Sitaram: yet.. she never allowed herself to be humiliated

Mad_Shrink: YOU ARE RIGHT

Mad_Shrink: YOU ARE RIGHT

Sitaram: humiliation and anger is an admmission of defeat

Sitaram: I do not have a great desire “to be right”

Mad_Shrink: I take this lesson today with me

Sitaram: I do have a desire to assist others who are trying to improve themselves… along whatever path

Mad_Shrink: HUMILIATION AND ANGER IS AN ADMISSION OF DEFEAT

Mad_Shrink: YES

Sitaram: are you sincere… or is this sarcasm

Mad_Shrink: CERTAINLY

Mad_Shrink: THANK YOU

Mad_Shrink: NO

Mad_Shrink: SINCERE

Mad_Shrink: A SHIFT CREATED SOMEWHERE

Sitaram: have I truly helped you see something of value

Mad_Shrink: IN THE MIND

Sitaram: ?

Mad_Shrink: YES, YOU HAVE

Sitaram: there is perhaps a purpose for our meeting…

Mad_Shrink: THAT IS WHAT I MEAN ABOUT THE NET

Sitaram: things do not happen without purpose

Sitaram: there is something which you need from me, and you have been attracted to communicate with me….

Mad_Shrink: UNLESS YOU ARE WITH ME, AND SEE ME TALK TO YOU, HOW WILL YOU KNOW ME OR SEE THAT I AM NOT SARCASTIC

Sitaram: we must both be patient and discover what that “something ” is…

Mad_Shrink: yes

Mad_Shrink: yes

Mad_Shrink: yes

Mad_Shrink: but not on this impersonal net

Sitaram: i have a suggestion… but perhaps you will find my suggestion strange, or even egotistical… but… it has come to my mind just now

Mad_Shrink: this is definitely my last net chat with you

Sitaram: really!

Mad_Shrink: tell me, please

Sitaram: I thought you were finding something of value.. with your last statements

Sitaram: ah… my suggestion…

Mad_Shrink: what came to your mind just now?

Sitaram: I am thinking of Ramana Maharshi…..

Mad_Shrink: yes

Sitaram: how people would come and simply have “darshan”, sit silently in his presence….

Sitaram: when we look into someones face… something is communicated…

Sitaram: so.. here is my strange idea…..

Mad_Shrink: true

Mad_Shrink: yes?

Sitaram: get a photo of ramana marharshi… and also a picture (drawing of Shirdi Sai Baba)…..

Sitaram: and finally… go to page 1 of my website and print out the photo of me there…..

Sitaram: perform this unusual experiment….

Mad_Shrink: and?

Sitaram: spend some time looking at those three pictures…. ramana and sai for the obvious darshan…

Mad_Shrink: and?

Sitaram: but look too at my picture… my face…. to access that about me…in me… which does not come easily in typed words

Mad_Shrink: ok

Sitaram: and perhaps…. something in you will change, which will facilitate further discussions

Mad_Shrink: bye, sitaram

Sitaram: of course.. another possibility in the future is yahoo voice chat in a private chat room,

Sitaram: where we can hear each others voice

Sitaram: do you think my idea has any merit… or does it seem foolish to you?

Mad_Shrink: i do not know

Sitaram: you need not answer today

Mad_Shrink: fine, thank you, sitaram

Sitaram: your welcome

Mad_Shrink: may i leave now?

Sitaram: certainly… i hope you return

Mad_Shrink: bye

Mad_Shrink: God Bless

Sitaram: the both of us… blessing

Mad_Shrink: i am small, you are knowledgeable

Mad_Shrink: bye

Consciousness and Conscience

Nyc: Conscience and Consciousness could have easily been plugged in for Ethics and Morals.

But, at a minimum, that would have completely lost 75% of the Mass Audience that that engineered and ghost-written piece of populist tripe was aiming to reach.

William: Nyc, we all have consciousness unless we are unconscious (is being asleep technically unconscious?)… anyway, consciousness doesn’t mean much. Conscience means something if you heed it. I guess if you never listen to it it just goes away on it’s own. Conscience is that little voice in your head which doesn’t seem to be your own voice or mind and it is saying that if you do or don’t do certain things you will be sorry and regretful or you will feel guilt.

Nyc: By Consciousness, in addition to the Wakefulness that you mention, I mean Awareness of ones self and others and of what one’s impact, for good or ill, is on the world in which they live.

Combine that with what you wrote on Conscience and that’s a rather sturdy rack of Ethics and Morality to hang one’s hat on.

Dawn: are you kidding me???? consciousness is EVERYTHING. its the difference between acting in your own self interest and/or for the greater good.

consciousness is NOT just being awake, it is being aware, it is acting from a place of repsonsibility with conscience. consciousness is having a proper persepctive of yourself and the world you live in, as well as thoughtful action that takes that place in consideration BEFORE you act.

its the difference between be a self serving sociopath , a narcisist or a greedmonger and being a true leader of people.
and without consiousness Sonscienceness doesnt exist. you have to be conscious to have a conscience

consciousness is being aware of the conscience and acting upon it. killers know killing is wrong, they know it will get them in trouble and unless they are a sociopath they KNow they will feel bad about it later, but they become Unconscious when they value the ego or the part of their mind that tells them they will benefit from doing it more than any consequence would cost, so, they DONT think about it.

its in every religion, its freudian, its Jungian, its Kantian, in biblical terms they call it sleep. and it is what came from eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. its being aware of all of the aspects of yourself that you listed and acting afterwards according to what causes the least harm and does the most good, without thought of gain for yourself, but simply because it is the best possible action possible, for humanity.

according to genesis, we became LIKE GOD knowing good and evil. thats consciousness. knowing the impact of your actions BEFORE you commit them and acting using your consciousness in spite of what the ego tells you to do, because its the right thing to do.

William: I am not kidding. In the 1970s Robert Ornstein and Charles Tart were two leading writers on the psychology of consciousness. Tart went into ordinary states of consciousness and altered states of consciousness. For most people conscious is simply the opposite of unconscious and it means you can answer questions like what year is it and who is President. With all sorts of New Age movements like Krishna Consciousness and Transcendental meditation the world consciousness has come to have a kind of mystic significance like “if I pluck a flower than a distant star is affected.”

Dawn: well there are for sure different levels of consciousness, in the 70s they didnt think much about the impact of their actions on people of other nations, but now especially with facebook and the internet our paradigm has shifter, it has grown exponentially, so there is alot more to be aware OF, it changes completely both the consciousness, and the conscience of any person aware enough to think.

I can give you an example of the difference that will be obvious to you, have you ever done some sort of tedius work, or have you ever been driving home on a route that you always take, and while you dont really realize that your consciousness LEFT you at some point, suddenly you realize, I don t remember making that turn, or doing that specific task? you arent really aware of NOT being conscious but you certainly realize you werent conscious when you Become conscious again. thats your consciousness returning to you.

like temple grandin asked, where does it go? that is surely what happens to you when you die. it just leaves you the body that you are identified with, you are no longer identified with, that doesnt mean the energy or awareness that is you, is no more. energy cannot be created or destroyed only changed.

hypnosis is another state of consciousness, as is rem sleep,some part of you is registerring perception because you dream.

you know the saying I think therefore I am, thats BS. I am not the thinking, I am the awareness that I am thinking, and thats a completely different thing. we are as humans supposed to be masterring the consciousness that is us, we are supposed to be controlling our mental dialogue but instead we teach people that the mental dialogue that is constantly there means your crazy if you acknoeldge it so people stay unconscious. its the part of you that is aware that you think thats the real consciousness thats you, and thats the energy that cant be created or destroyed.

I think of it like this, theres a stream of vibrations that we exist IN, like a stream of water, and we vibrate at any given time at either the same pace, that moves us along, or we exist at a different pace than whats around us. when that happens there is a diruption in our existance that we experience as either anger, fear, love, happiness relative to the relationship between the vibrations that are us and the vibrations of the world around us. we can alter and change the world around us with our vibrations, and we can ultimately through masterring our inner dialogue and our senses and our emotions manipulate that energy to work for us, or we can roil against it and problems happen.

revolution MUST be the majority of the people vibrating at a pace that exceeeds the vibration of the norm. therefore it changes the pace of the norm. havoc happens when there are many people vibrating at rates that are inconsistent with each other and with the norm. so we get great upheaval which causes anger fear shame.

thats the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, its being able to correlate what is with what we put out, and changing it for the greater good. the reason Obama is so powerful is because we all sense his strength, we cognize strength because we sense that vibrational power in his countenance. thats why we were drawn to him, and why the world was drawn to him, he doesnt know his own power because he doesnt put his self first. and we sense that too, his moral compass ( another reference we never actually think about that points to the power of the energy vibrations that we are). its seriously time for us to stop talking about whats wrong, and start talking about How it should be. we need to make our government what we know it should be, he is our go to man, but we need to first congnize what we want, then get his attention and plead our case. then he can make the changes we WANT and know we should have.

and by the way the point in which the energy vibration that IS us impacts with the energy that IS the energy of the rest of the world, is NOW, it is time manifest here and now, jesus also said the kingdom of heaven is at hand, and he meant that we manifest the world as it is, and we do it constantly in the NOW; and thats KANT

Nyc: I totally ♥ the version of Consciousness that’s presented in the second Terminator movie at the end of the 1st Act.

Easily one of the best expressions of what it is that I’ve ever seen or heard in any medium.

It’s the scene in the car when the 2 Connors, mother and son, and the Protector machine have for the first time *finally* gotten cleanly away from both the malicious Terminator and the authorities that have been relentlessly on their tail.

It’s the middle of the night out, in the middle of nowhere and they’re moving even further into the darkness, at a high rate of speed in the car they’re driving in, that, btw, does *not* have its night-lights on.

Baffled Sara Connor looks at the Terminator quizzically and asks him if he can see anything on the dark road and he turns and tersely says to her…

“I see everything…”

And he most certainly does.

Something to aspire to in the drive towards maintaining one’s Consciousness, though, as King Solomon pointed out so plaintively in Ecclesiastes, it’s something that we humans will always fall short of being able to do 100% of the time, including all of our waking hours.

Dawn: would have to include the phrase Living with Intention which is One of MY favorite explanations of conscious living. conscious BEING is different than conscious action. IN this scenario the masses ideally are conscious Being while the leaders would be untilizing conscious action.

William: Kant may be totally wrong about space and time with regard to quantum and relativity so I wouldn’t run around shouting Kant like it is the be-all end-all of truth and wisdom. And whether Kant is right or wrong with respect to space and time, no one in this thread has the background in mathematics or physics to reconcile Kant to quantum. We all just repeat as hearsay what we have read elsewhere. 90% of the American voting public wouldn’t have the foggiest notion of what anyone in this thread is talking about so therefore these assertions of yours cannot have much real bearing on the daily life of the average citizen. Dawn, I seriously doubt that in your heart of hearts you can claim that you are sinless and have never done a wrong thing and yet you are conscious when you are awake to the same degree as the Dalai Lama or Billy Graham or Pope Benedict so you make yourself sound foolish to argue that conscience and consciousness are somehow connected and even if they ARE connected it doesn’t change the fact that everyone does mean, rotten, immoral or dishonest things at times in their life knowing full well at the very moment they act that they are doing something they shouldn’t. Even if you DID understand all these things at the level of someone like Kant I feel certain that you do some of the same contemptible things that everyone else does from time to time. I doubt that you float around on a cloud, your feet never touching the ground, with a glow of light surrounding your head. And as soon as I post this I am going to re-read the entire thread to see what other criticisms I can make.

@Nyc I doubt that you sit over there in Munich thinking about how “Awareness of ones self and others and of what one’s impact, for good or ill, is on the world in which they live.” Ha ha, go tell Wanda that this is what you have been thinking about all day. And then go tell your old landlady who makes you buy back Deutch Marks because she is too cheap to convert her washing machine to Euros.

Dawn wrote:
(begin quote)
Consciousness is EVERYTHING. its the difference between acting in your own self interest and/or for the greater good.

Consciousness is NOT just being awake, it is being aware, it is acting from a place of repsonsibility with conscience. consciousness is having a proper persepctive of yourself and the world you live in, as well as thoughtful action that takes that place in consideration BEFORE you act.
(end quote)

With all due respect, I think this is a lot of baloney for a number of reasons. There over 6 billion humans on this planet. If what Dawn said had any real bearing upon human existence then very few of those six billion humans would use tobacco or alcohol and there would not be a widespread AIDS/HIV crisis. Everyone who wakes up in the morning and starts walking around is conscious. They all do dumb, selfish dangerous things from time to time. I have actually spent time in Greek monasteries and Korean Buddhist monasteries and Hindu ashrams and those people in theory are supposed to be living on some higher level of spiritual consciousness. They ARE actually more spiritual and self aware than your average person in the street, but they are also completely human and fallible. They laugh at times, and get angry and feel sad.

On page one of Hobbes’s Leviathan he said “if people were angels there would be no need for government.” Well, Dawn, if what you say about consciousness and conscience had any REAL meaning or application in daily human existence then we would not have much need for governments or police or prisons.

I quite frankly do not understand how any educated person could make the statement Dawn made in all seriousness with a straight face. Therefore, I am assuming that Dawn is simply mocking us and speaks in jest.

And now I shall see what the Dalai Nyc of Toytown Munich has posted and then read all this nonsense for yet a third time.

Nyc, it is very simple. When we start believing our own BS then we are really deluded or delusional if you prefer. It is one thing to sell snake oil but it is quite another to buy it from yourself, take it, and expect that it is going to have some positive effect.

Point number TWO: Even if we speak with the tongues of angels, if what we say is irrelevant to more than half the people on the planet then what we say is merely the tinkling of bells and the sounding of brass cymbals (which is a very ancient way of saying BS.)

OK now with respect to vibrations (it took me a while to remember this and google) but vibrations goes all the way from Pantanjali’s vritti http://satyamyoga.com/vrittis.htm to the morphic resonance of Rupert Sheldrake http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Sheldrake …. but for all this… human nature is pretty much the same today as we see in Homer’s epic poems. Technology has changed but human nature remains the same.

Nyc:
Funny I said expressed the same exact sentiment to one of my Transhumanist/The Singularity Approacheth friends today.

I’ve been insanely dark, pessimistic and fatalistic lately, with a healthy heaping measure of righteous self-scorn over my life’s many blown opportunities thrown in for good measure and this person tried to cheer me up by offering me the prospect of an eternal life, provided I’m still around 50 years from now when the tech reaches that point where we humans can merge our consciousness with the machines, and/or keep our human bodies in a perfect physical state for Eons, and that I should ‘chin-up’ since in an eternal, or many thousand years life scenarios many more opportunities will inevitably come my way.

I turned that offer down flat because I figured the ones that are going to be around to enjoy the fruits of that tech are going embody the worst, not the best, characteristics of people today, and I had no desire to spend millennia being miserable with a self-selected group of the most miserable people on earth.

Sounds downright hellish to me.

And no opportunity in the world seems worth it to me. What, is some magical brand new food stuff, sexual position or intoxicating elixir going to come along that thats going to make putting up with all the day to day bullshit worth it?

Not very bloody well likely. The food’s gonna taste like chicken, I’ll get my rock’s off too soon, or not at all, and get accused of beng selfish, to boot, and whatever that potion, drug or drink may be, I’m sure that it’ll come with the equivalent hang-over.

Who needs any of that shit? Not me.

The first 2/3rds of my life are over now and the way I’m feeling I see no reason to extend that last third by so much as a picosecond and I plan to do nothing towards it from this point on.

What’s the point of that? Keep myself healthy only to inevitably get trapped in a body that’s going to get sick?

That’s the very definition of a pointless and futile endeavor, and I have enough self awareness and consciousness to know that I want no further part in it.

William:
Nyc, what you said just now about your ennui with respect to life makes a lot more practical sense to me than all that Dawn has said. I am reminded of now the goddess Calypso offered Odysseus immortality but he refused.

http://messagenetcommresearch.com/myths/bios/kalypso.html

I am also reminded of how the shade of Achilles said that it is better to live as a lowly servant on Earth than to be king of all the dead.

Dawn mentions Jesus in some of her posts. Now I see two enormous problems with bringing Jesus into the discussion, namely POVERTY AND WAR. Jesus and Moses BOTH say “the poor shall always be with you.” Jesus mentions it as an afterthought when he explains why the woman is anointing his feet with precious ointment. Moses mentions it as an afterthought when he forbids gleaning of the fields (which means to leave something for poor people and hungry animals.) Now the Old Testament Prophets hint in places that there will come an end to war, but the New Testament states that until the end of the world there will always be wars and rumors of war. So if all these things about consciousness and self-awareness have any real meaning then there should be some improvement in the general human condition and poverty and war should be eliminated.

Let us, for the sake of argument, assume that Dawn has indeed unlocked all the secrets of the universe and human existence and happiness then we must say to Dawn “what are you going to DO with all this wonderful knowledge?” How are you going to fix the problems in Africa or the problems in North Korea?

Now we have some simple wisdoms such as SMOKING CAUSES CANCER and UNPROTECTED SEX SPREADS HIV. These simple wisdoms can be comprehended by any person of sound mind in any culture. But the simple knowledge does stop people from using tobacco and does not slow the spread of HIV infection. So what in the world will all these obscure notions of vibrations and cosmic energy and consciousness and self-awareness do for the quality of six plus billion people on the planet?

Dawn: when did I say I had it down to a science??? you mean now that KANT and einstein have it down to a science?? why would I even have to run for office to change them???? The President we have is a conscious human being with a conscience.

and arent you the one that has it all figured out??? IM saying the person in charge needs to be aware of the process by which he makes decisions that impact all of the people, and from that, you come back with I have it all figured out and should run for office????? HUH????

NO, the President we have is a contitutional law professor, He is a politician as well., I AM NOT, so I have MY own job to do, and that entails holding my own representatives feet to the fire as I can assure you I do. I have to act in MY own conscious way in my own role. just like you do.

IF you have it all figured out why dont YOU run for office?? you seem to be saying IM wrong, therefore you clearly think you have knowledge that makes me wrong, therefore you have knowledge that I dont. YOU must surely know whats right since you can tell me that IM wrong.

I have read the philosophies of other people that ” have it figured out” John Maynard Keynes and Immanuel Kant, Jesus and Buddha, freud and JUNG. Jefferson and Locke, I am relaying what THEY have figured out as I interpreted it. since NYC said the same thing, and so did all of those other people including Iacoca I think we are right. I dont make any claim to anything as an original thought even. so How exactly do you get to, I have it all figured out so I should run for president, and I cant help but notice that even though NYC said the same thing I did you arent saying that to HIM. so whats that about???

did you NOT want a conversation??? was this just an exorcize in you making statements for us to read or what???

for the most part I agreed with you, so how is it, I am a know it all, but you arent??? and I happen to agree with you about a person being at least a little crazy for wanting to be President.

William:
I personally admire Obama more than any other president in my lifetime. I still think American will go down the toilet bowel of history. I don’t believe these theories that Dawn offers are valid scientific or philosophical principles which will make any difference in the world. I doubt that Obama would really know or care to know what you are talking about. I doubt that there are more than 500 people in the whole world who have the background necessary to explain Kant’s ideas completely or Einstein’s ideas completely. In my opinion Christianity had not make the world a better place in over 2000 years. Islam has not made the world a better place. Kant has not make the world a better the world a better place. Einstein has not made the world a better place.

I guess all I am saying is that the proof of the pudding has to be a marked improvement in the overall human condition.

The conversation is fine Dawn. Such conversations give me mental exercise. You must admit at a certain point you seemed to be going of the deep end… you started off by saying “are you kidding me…” and then you proceeded as it seemed to me to assert that a number of things were patently obvious and perhaps undeniable… then you seemed to jump into some kind of cosmic consciousness and vibrations and charismatic energy that involved Jesus…. I am a bit groggy and headed for bed soon.

Not to be cruel but you wrote “exorcise” as a kind of Freudian slip. I think you meant exercise, and yes everything I post is kind of an exercise of my mind. But the things I addressed to you WERE an “exorcism” of the demonic delusions which seemed to be in possession of your reasoning. Now as I quickly read the end of your post I see that you are actually on a very reasonable level. I would disagree that Kant, Jesus, Buddha, Jung, Jefferson, Locke and Iacocca have it all figured out, and I think if they were all in the same room for a month speaking the same language they would violently disagree NOT because of the essence of their writings which have come down to us but because of their essential human nature and pride and obstinateness.

Dawn I am not simply saying that you are wrong IF it was the case that you were seriously asserting all this things as indisputable facts. I am also saying that NO ONE HAS it right. We are doomed as a species to decline deeper and deeper into poverty, illness war and suffering and there is no leader or system which will bail us out. That is what I say. No one is “right” or has all the answers.

By the way, I had to find out the answer to my own question about being asleep vs. being unconscious: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/000022.htm

Unconsciousness is when a person is unable to respond to people and activities. Often, this is called a coma or being in a comatose state.

Being asleep is not the same thing as being unconscious. A sleeping person will respond to loud noises or gentle shaking — an unconscious person will not.

An unconscious person cannot cough or clear his or her throat. This can lead to death if the airway becomes blocked.

So this goes back to my original statement that when any person (even a native in a Brazilian rain forest) wakes up then they experience human consciousness which has nothing to do with conscience. They probably have some mores and folkways and taboos which give them a some moral notion and some sense of guilt when they transgress. But conscience and consciousness are not really related and there is no great mystical cosmic consciousness connecting all of us with Jesus or the Holy Spirit or Buddha or the Bodhisattvas, in my humble estimation.

Dawn:

I didnt say anyone had all of the answers, I did give a number of cources thast disagreed with your assertion that conscience was important and consciousness iis NOT.

Unless you know something I dont, Im not getting paid to spell check, theres no freudian slip just a typo. IM not a christian or a buddhist but I recognize the truth when I hear it.

you want us to believe the world is doomed and nothing will ever change that, and I think its crap. the world isnt doomed, it is an evolving thing, and part of evolution is breaking down the old structures for new ones. YOU seem to be taking that as a negative, and I dont. NO ONE will fix our problems, MANY people will fix our problems, the person that finds the cure for cancer will be a different person than the person that changes the broken financial system. they will be different people, but to think that those changes and those improvements wont happen is irrational. if theres one thing we KNOW it is that all things break down and new things come in their place. thats common sense.

your use of the word IT as an all defining thing is irrational and is NO WHERE close to what I said, in fact the fact that I listed a ton of people WITH the thopughts they had on different subjects should be evidence that I too OF COURSE dont believe ONE person will solve our problems, you are tilting at windmills, the reason I listed so many people with philosophies that are relative to each other but are in different areas, like JUng and freud, Kant and jesus and Buddha, and smith and jefferson, all agree on certain fundamntal things, consciousness being ONE of them, but they all had different fieelds of study and different areas of expertise, so HOW in the hell could you possibly get that I was saying One person would solve all of our problems, it will happen over thousands of years through many lifetimes, and like NYC I have no desire to be In this existence when that happens. But I certainly can look back over history and see steady movement towards a better world, you seem to be saying, there have been NOne and will be none, and I cannot see for a second how anyone could come to that conclusion. it seems to me its a pessimistic viewpoint that is more mood or emotion related than logical, I get that, I see how someone could be hopeless in a world of sufferring, but it isnt a world of ONLY sufferring. the fact that I can flip over and talk to someone in afghanistan or Pakistan right now is an amazing leap forward. the implications will be HUGE.

the reason I defined iacocas words is because we were clearly not operating on the same definition with consciousness and I wanted to clarify the rest. what seems unrelated to you, were not neccessarily unrelated to me. I make connections and you make connections, but we have different paradigms so the connections may be different but they may also both be correct.

William: I think Iacocca is a smart man. I feel sorry about Chrysler. Nothing lasts forever. The most interesting thing about this whole thread is the reason why I brought up Iacocca in the first place. In one of his recent books he urges us all to moral outrage over what has happened to our country and Washington. I saw someone else post it and I always doubt such quotes until I find it elsewhere but the quote is genuine. By the way I DO see America as “The Titanic.” Of course I am not going to live long enough to see it sink, and lets hope I am mistaken, but I do see America as “The Titanic.” I see Obama as head and shoulders about Bush and Cheney and McCain and Palin but I dont thing Obama with fix the nation and I dont thing anyone the Republicans can dig up will fix the nation or the world. That is just me. That is how I am. I am not an optimist. I am a pessimist.

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

On May 17, 2007, Simon & Schuster published Iacocca’s new book, Where Have All the Leaders Gone? co-written with Catherine Whitney. An article with the same title, and same two co-authors, has recently appeared. In the book, Iacocca writes:

“Am I the only guy in this country who’s fed up with what’s happening? Where the hell is our outrage? We should be screaming bloody murder. We’ve got a gang of clueless bozos steering our ship of state right over a cliff, we’ve got corporate gangsters stealing us blind, and we can’t even clean up after a hurricane much less build a hybrid car. But instead of getting mad, everyone sits around and nods their heads when the politicians say, “Stay the course.” Stay the course? You’ve got to be kidding. This is America, not the damned Titanic. I’ll give you a sound bite: Throw the bums out!

Dawn: HAVING it right, is a bogus context. a leader doesnt get to go into a room and create the world, they have to deal with the world as it is in a way that improves it. thats what leaders do. Obama wont be able to make the world perfect because people are not perfect, but he could go a long way toward doing that with a few adjustments, like changing the financial system to be more in concert with Keynes who said you have to balance private sector jobs with government jobs, and by creating an education and healthcare system building it and staffing it he could create jobs wherever there are people.

the fact that you think I would take a statement about a typo as cruel, says you have wayyy more invested in facebook than I do. its entertainment, not a job for me. I certainly dont think it was cruel, or a freudian slip, since I am happy to elaborate on any part of a very complex subject at any time. Its amazing to me that people expect to be able to discuss profound subjects like consciousness in a few sentences. thats part of our problem, people dont really proccess what they learn, they memorize and they want, therefore little bits of profound information without any actual reading being required.

and I dont mean YOU personnally, I mean people in general. and Just because I am a shitty speller doesnt mean the content that I convey is incorrect. BY that logic all dyslexics ( of which einstein was one) would be stupid and have nothing to contribute. shame people think that way.

The value of forgetting

I am amazed by some of the things that people (including myself) cannot remember at all. Someone told me that during my senior year I would occasionally come out in the hallway of 4th Floor Chase Stone and play “Oh Susanna” on a harmonica to make people laugh. I had totally forgotten that until someone mentioned it 30 years later, but then I clearly remembered. I clearly remember some things other people said or did which one would think would be unforgettable and yet when I mention it to them they have no memory. I suppose there is some protective function to forgetting/blocking/selectively remembering, something to protect us from what is painful, or perhaps just the fact that we need room in our minds to focus upon other things and so it we remembered everything with clarity then we would not have proper focus.

+++++

Thanks for the kind words, Fenton. I have kind of lost all hope regarding life and the future. Every day that I wake up is more and more painful in terms of memories, regrets, and futures which are gone forever. It is a terrible thing to say but turning 62 I find little reason to turn 72. I did find it interesting to read Woody Allen’s biography. Allen said that dialog and jokes just come into his head. I don’t think I could manage that ever day. Some of the funny things that I say are simply in the context of these Facebook posts and then too not everyone laughs. Perhaps, Fenton, you are amused because we were “comrades in arms” during our youth and also because you are compassionate and perhaps sense the emptiness which underlies some of these blog ramblings. Human relationships depend on shared memories and experiences. St. John’s just happens to be an unusual school were EVERYONE experiences the same readings, classes and seminars for four years and the same today as in the 1960s and for this reason only we who are age 60 plus have something in common with younger alumni. One of the funniest scenes I remember from a Woody Allen movie is rather morbid but is sadly typical of the male mind (or at least my male mind.) Woody sees a beautiful young woman and asks her if she would like to go out on Friday night. She says “Oh, Friday I am committing suicide.” So Woody says, “Well, what about Thursday then?” Woody’s humor portrays males as desperate to have sex with almost anyone and willing to do anything however ruthless if in any way they can get what they want with no empathy for the other person as an individual with feelings, needs, ambitions, dreams, or a sense of personal dignity.

DSM

The most frequently used DSM diagnosis “axis” is the one which says “mild adjustment disorder” because no one wants the STIGMA on their record of whatever they are really seeing a shrink for and “adjustment disorder” is the most innocuous. I was fascinated by the DSMIII-R (which is what it was called in the late 1980s) simply because it seemed fascinating to try to catalog all of human behavior in Aristotelian fashion in something like Aquinas’s Summa Theologica or the Roman Catholic Catechism (which is 900 plus pages!) Oh, and the big deal that DSM DECLASSIFIED homosexuality as a disorder but then they turned around later and reclassified it somehow.

The Impetus of Drama to Gain Significance

Each of us struggles in our own way to feel significant in a world where most of us are doomed to insignificance. Young men hear G.W. Bush with his bull horn at WTC “we will smoke them out” and wax patriotic, join the army, and return a month later as paraplegics never having fired a shot (one said “all I saw were women and children running”) … other take up the fight against environmental pollution, others become Marxists and struggle against the evils of Capitalism, others fight poverty and illness, and yet other seek obscene wealth or power. So, Assange has found his arena of struggle and justifies it to himself in some way whether rightly or wrongly. What is Newton’s law that an object in motion continues in motion? Well, sometimes we set upon a certain path of action and it takes over and we no longer think or moralize or idealize about it but simply continue on our path because it gives us purpose and that purpose gives us the illusion of significance. Even a ponzi artist like Madoff has a sense of significance from his achievement. Rommel becomes a Rommel and Eisenhower becomes an Eisenhower on history’s stage apart from the merits and demerits of the politics and ideologies they represent. Bogie and Bacall are romantic figures burning the candle at both ends whether they are on the side of good or evil. The same may be said for Sartre or Marshall McLuhan or Andy Warhol or Picasso. We may also see this in the protagonist of Camus’s “The Stranger.” What I am suggesting it that there is an impetus and motive to an individual’s drama which is driven simply by the drama and not by the ethics or end results.

Being crucified as a martyr gains much significance apart from the issue of whether or not crucifixion is salvific. If we see the opportunity to do ANYTHING of significance and daring (apart from questions of good and evil; right and wrong) if we turn away our punishment is shear boredom.

Those Damn Americans!

Our educational television channel (PBS – Public Broadcasting System – originally started with public funding – and watched by only a minority of intellectual intelligentsia) once aired a LONG documentary about life in North Korea. A family was seated at their dinner table in their home when suddenly the lights went out. North Korea often has power problems. The family started cursing “those damn Americans” who cause such power interruptions. NO I AM NOT MAKING A JOKE THEY REALLY THINK THAT AMERICANS DO SUCH THINGS TO ANNOY THEM…. different topic, for several years I worked with a VERY RELIGIOUS Christian from the Dominican Republic. At work she would pause and have people kneel in prayer. Anyway, one day, she was telling a group of women how she was cleaning a home and went to open a door and SUDDENLY it was mysteriously locked and she could not open it — AND IT WAS SATAN ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE DOOR HOLDING IT SHUT TO ANNOY HER!!! Well, all I could think to myself is that if there WERE a satan devil then he would be far to busy with other things to bother annoying a Dominican cleaning lady and SECONDLY if satan appear and did ANYTHING to anyone then surely that person’s faith in God would increase, and from what I know about Satan he does not want people to believe in God.

Try to understand

How about simply “understand” – just try to understand why someone believes or does or practices whatever it is that you would never consider but that many other people consider and do. Try to understand Communists and Socialists. Try to understand smokers and alcoholics. Try to understand people who choose to end their lives. If you are a male, try to understand what it is like to be a female and get pregnant and give birth. If you are a female then try and understand what it might be like to have testosterone raging through your body and look longingly at women. If you are an adult then you dont have to “understand” teenagers or toddlers because you WERE one so you simply have to REMEMBER what it was like. If you are young then try to understand what it is like to be an elderly person who takes 10 or 20 pills to stay alive and who is loosing their short term memory and who lives in a society that has utterly no use for them and who knows that in a little while they are going to die. UNDERSTAND… you dont have to love it, dont have to like it, dont have to respect or disrespect it, just imagine yourself in their position and try to understand.

Finding not what divides but what unites

Egyptians HATE to admit that they are on the continent of AFRICA and insist they are ARAB.

I have little in common with those South of the Mason-Dixon line but they are Americans and we all share North America with Canadians and Mexicans. African nations and other nations laugh at Egypt’s denial. Some obviously Black Africans were arguing that they are descendants of Mohammad and are not at all Black Africans. One of the Hadith actually reads “Which one of those men is the Prophet?” and the answer is “Oh, you see that VERY WHITE MAN over there.” There is nothing wrong with being African or being of color. There is something wrong with shame and denial.

Perhaps this world of ours would be a better place if we would all strive to find things that we share in common (even if we are mistaken) than to look for things which divide and distinguish us.

Socrates (or someone like that) supposedly said “I am a citizen of the world” and in all likelihood the world population at that time was around 6 million souls. I find it curious that someone should have such a global sentiment in an era where neighboring city-states viewed one another with suspicion as aliens. Supposedly Aristotle somewhere observes that the Greeks represent an ideal median between the extreme gentility of the Africans and the gross barbarity of the Germanic tribes. This fact was cited in some book entitled “Black Fire” to stress that Africans were seen as cultured or refined.

Humility and Pride

The harder we try to be humble the more tempted we are to feel pride at our progress.

St. John Climacus (Ladder) wrote “The Ladder of Divine Ascent” as guidance for ascetical monastic renunciates. Pride is seen as the original (first) sin of Lucifer (the brightest angel) who was beguiled by his own excellence and sought the worship of others. Hindu and Buddhist writings point out that the very desire for enlightenment is itself an impediment to enlightenment.

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

You will notice on the book cover at the above link that many are falling off the ladder of ascent.

Here is an ancient anecdote:

A bishop came to a small village on the occasion of a religious celebration. An icon was placed on the back of a donkey to transport it in procession. As the donkey passed by people they cheered. The donkey assumed that everyone was cheering him and began to bray and prance. One wise old monk whispered to the bishop “that foolish donkey thinks himself admired and does not realize that the admiration is directed to the burden he bears and what it represents.” The bishop felt shame for he suddenly realized that he was guilty of a similar error of pride, mistaking the veneration paid to his office for personal admiration.

Summary of Psychological Theories

Ruth is looking at the writings of Reiss and his list of human motivators.

16 Basic Human Motivations, by Steven Reiss: Acceptance; Curiosity; Eating; Family; Honor; Idealism; Independence; Order; Physical Activity; Power; Romance; Saving; Social Contact; Status; Tranquility; Vengeance.

I became curious to find a synopsis of all the major psychological analysts and their basic theories (looking for a “Psychologies in a Nutshell”)

I commenced with this link by John E. Smethers, Ph.D. which concerns itself with addictions but mentions many of the key psychologists.

I realize that many people dislike Wikipedia but this article is a pretty good starting point and names the major players:

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

William James

Sigmund Freud

Carl Jung

Alfred Adler

Karen Horney

Erich Fromm

The culmination of Fromm’s social and political philosophy was his book The Sane Society, published in 1955, which argued in favor of communitarian socialism. Building primarily upon the works of Karl Marx, Fromm was the first political and social commentator in this school of thought to introduce the ideal of personal freedom, more frequently found in the writings of classic liberals, such as Frederic Bastiat, and objectivists, such as Ayn Rand. Fromm’s unique brand of socialism rejected both Western capitalism and Soviet communism, which he saw as dehumanizing and bureaucratic social structures that resulted in a virtually universal modern phenomenon of alienation.

“Erich Fromm sees clearly that for many people Christianity is a thin veneer over the idolatrous worship of power, success, and the authority of the marketplace; or it is a cover masking their idolatrous fixation on their clan, religious or ethnic group, or nation-state. Fromm’s insights about the dynamics of our modern idolatries illuminate many of the growth-blocking religious beliefs, practices, and institutions one encounters both in doing therapy and in society.” – Howard J. Clinebell

http://www.religion-online.org/showchapter.asp?title=1939&C=1746

Harry Stack Sullivan

Erik Erikson

Another protégé of Freud, Erikson was only a mediocre student, and he never earned a university degree of any kind, but his credibility is well established with one of the most widely accepted models of human development.

Gordon W. Allport

Allport believed that most adult motives consist of cognitive processes that are relatively independent of biological drives; for example, Kamikaze pilots during World War II followed the manifestly unpleasurable course of sacrificing their lives for their country. Instances like these lead Allport to conclude that much of adult behavior cannot be explained in terms of drive reduction.

Allport describes the personality in terms of traits: friendliness, ambitiousness, cleanliness, enthusiasm, seclusiveness, punctuality, shyness, talkativeness, dominance, submissiveness, generosity, prejudice, and so forth. He estimates that there are some 4,000 to 5,000 traits and 18,000 trait names.

Allport (1954) justifies the normality of prejudgment: Everywhere on earth we find a condition of separateness among groups. People mate with their own kind. They eat, play, reside in homogeneous clusters. They visit with their own kind, and prefer to worship together. Much of this automatic cohesion is due to nothing more than convenience. There is no need to turn to out- groups for companionship. With plenty of people at hand to choose from, why create for ourselves the trouble of adjusting to new languages, new foods, new cultures, or to people of a different educational level? It requires less effort to deal with people who have similar presuppositions?

Carl R. Rogers

Abraham H. Maslow
Maslow’s self-actualization, according to Goble (1970), “is prominent only in older people. The young are more concerned with issues like education, identity, love, and work, which Maslow regards as preparing to live. As self-actualized people are usually sixty years of age or more, most people do not belong in this category; they are not static, they have not arrived; they are moving toward maturity. The actualization process means the development or discovery of the true self and the development of existing or latent potential” (pp. 24, 25). Maslow, therefore, refers to the needs of self-actualizing individuals as metaneeds, among which are a love of beauty, truth, goodness, justice, and usefulness. Self-actualizing individuals have strong moral and ethical standards.

Rollo May
Each of us has an inherent need to exist in the world into which we are born, and to achieve a conscious and unconscious sense of ourselves as an autonomous and distinct entity. The stronger this being-in-the-world or “Dasein,” the healthier the personality. According to May our dynamic being-in-the-world comprises three interrelated modes: biological drives (Umwelt), relationship to others (Mitwelt), and the affirmation of one’s self and values (Eigenwelt)

B. F. Skinner

James Hillman
His ‘acorn theory’ proposes that each life is formed by a particular image (which he calls the daimon), an image that is the essence of that life and calls it to a destiny, just as the mighty oak’s destiny is written in the tiny acorn.