Two Perfect Addictions

[Mole]

Just as MBTI is fake so psychological therapy is harmful.

The very assumption of therapy is that there is something wrong with you. And guess what, therapy can fix you.

When you are told there is something wrong with you, you enter a trance. And when they tell you they can fix you, you enter a second trance.

And these are two interactive trances - one trance leads to the other and the other leads back to the first.

This is a trance loop, consisting of two trances.

And yes, any addiction is a double trance loop - hey, there is no way out.

Go to any bookstore, to the Therapy section, and you will see book upon book upon book - there is no end to them.

If therapy worked, there would be no need to keep producing book after book after book.

But therapy merely produces an addiction.

So just as MBTI is demonstrably fake but keeps on going and going and going, so therapy is also fake and keeps going and going and going.

Two perfect addictions.

Victor.

 

[Anonymous]

You need therapy.

 

[ThatsWhatHeSaid]

Just as MBTI is fake so psychological therapy is harmful.

The very assumption of therapy is that there is something wrong with you. And guess what, therapy can fix you.

When you are told there is something wrong with you, you enter a trance. And when they tell you they can fix you, you enter a second trance.

What about therapies that teach you to exit the trance? Isn't that exactly what your post is all about?

Go to any bookstore, to the Therapy section, and you will see book upon book upon book - there is no end to them.

If therapy worked, there would be no need to keep producing book after book after book.

This is a bad argument because (1) not all books on therapy must be complete or even good. 100 bad books doesn't affect the quality of the 101st. (2) Different books address different problems. (3) Different books have been written at different times to address different audiences. (4) Different books reflect the way we continually refine our understanding of disorders and their causes. Your criticism is just a part of that process, not separate from it. I think it's funny and also a bit that you continuously try to cast yourself apart from the mainstream and criticize it, while not appreciating that you're not only a direct product of it (and depend on it) but even a part of it.

Wanting Enlightenment is a Big Mistake. What you're saying is nothing new, V-dawg.

 

[Totenkindly]

Just as psychological therapy is fake then seeing a medical doctor is harmful.

The very assumption of medicine is that there is something wrong with you. And guess what, medicine can fix you.

When you are told there is something wrong with you, you enter a trance. And when they tell you they can fix you, you enter a second trance.

And these are two interactive trances - one trance leads to the other and the other leads back to the first.

This is a trance loop, consisting of two trances.

And yes, any addiction is a double trance loop - hey, there is no way out.

Go to any yellow pages and look in the Medical section, and you will see name upon name upon name of doctors - there is no end to them.

If medicine worked, there would be no need to keep producing doctor after doctor after doctor.

But medicine merely produces an addiction.

So just as psychotherapy is demonstrably fake but keeps on going and going and going, so medicine is also fake and keeps going and going and going.

Two perfect addictions.

 

[Mole]

A Lovely Parody

Just as psychological therapy is fake then seeing a medical doctor is harmful.

The very assumption of medicine is that there is something wrong with you. And guess what, medicine can fix you.

When you are told there is something wrong with you, you enter a trance. And when they tell you they can fix you, you enter a second trance.

And these are two interactive trances - one trance leads to the other and the other leads back to the first.

This is a trance loop, consisting of two trances.

And yes, any addiction is a double trance loop - hey, there is no way out.

Go to any yellow pages and look in the Medical section, and you will see name upon name upon name of doctors - there is no end to them.

If medicine worked, there would be no need to keep producing doctor after doctor after doctor.

But medicine merely produces an addiction.

So just as psychotherapy is demonstrably fake but keeps on going and going and going, so medicine is also fake and keeps going and going and going.

Two perfect addictions.

They tell me, dear Jennifer, that you know you have arrived when you have been parodied.

And you have made a lovely parody.

Victor.

 

[Geoff]

Perhaps you could explain why the act of writing a book about a subject demonstrates that the subject matter is ineffective...? As opposed to, say, sharing how it works and could be applied to those who have not yet experienced it.

 

[matmos]

Just as MBTI is fake so psychological therapy is harmful.

The very assumption of therapy is that there is something wrong with you. And guess what, therapy can fix you.

When you are told there is something wrong with you, you enter a trance. And when they tell you they can fix you, you enter a second trance.

And these are two interactive trances - one trance leads to the other and the other leads back to the first.

This is a trance loop, consisting of two trances.

And yes, any addiction is a double trance loop - hey, there is no way out.

Go to any bookstore, to the Therapy section, and you will see book upon book upon book - there is no end to them.

If therapy worked, there would be no need to keep producing book after book after book.

But therapy merely produces an addiction.

So just as MBTI is demonstrably fake but keeps on going and going and going, so therapy is also fake and keeps going and going and going.

Two perfect addictions.

Victor.

Actually Victor may have a point with reference to the self-perpetuating and circular nature of therapy. RD Laing had a view on conventional therapy back in the 60s which largely agreed with the view if you look for something wrong you'll find it.

MBTI *demonstrably fake* - as demonstrated by who? Take the good bits and throw away the bad bits.

How's the weather in Canberra? Good therapy weather I hope.

BT.

 

[ThatsWhatHeSaid]

The reaction you get is related to the content of your posts. Your post in this case went over the top is decrying all therapy, neglecting the fact that your post it self is a form of therapy, and that other therapies exist for the same reason, which is to shake one's thirst and clean up their karma. You're not ALL wrong, but your statements are over the top, as usual, and end up getting you into trouble because you sacrifice precision for shock-value and your didactic tone. Your didactic tone is condescending, whether you intend it that way or not, as if to say: here, lowly peons, let me explain to you what's wrong with you all. I don't buy it. A person who really has their shit figured out don't prattle for attention, they speak to communicate efficiently, knowing best how to inculcate their message. You're in the same position we are, searching for answers through trial and error. You can talk to us accordingly, or keep getting negative feedback for your OPs.

 

[Mole]

Sailing Across the Wind

The reaction you get is related to the content of your posts. Your post in this case went over the top is decrying all therapy, neglecting the fact that your post it self is a form of therapy, and that other therapies exist for the same reason, which is to shake one's thirst and clean up their karma. You're not ALL wrong, but your statements are over the top, as usual, and end up getting you into trouble because you sacrifice precision for shock-value and your didactic tone. Your didactic tone is condescending, whether you intend it that way or not, as if to say: here, lowly peons, let me explain to you what's wrong with you all. I don't buy it. A person who really has their shit figured out don't prattle for attention, they speak to communicate efficiently, knowing best how to inculcate their message. You're in the same position we are, searching for answers through trial and error. You can talk to us accordingly, or keep getting negative feedback for your OPs.

I seem to be caught between two stools - I can talk down to you or I can go along with the conventional wisdom.

I know you will say these are not the only two options but at the moment that is all that seems availble to me.

And yes, you don't like being spoken down to and speaking down to you gives me an ego boost.

But on the positive side of the ledger, speaking down to you raises the emotional temperature. And high e-motiion leads to motion - leads to you making posts.

And that is essentially why I am here - for the interaction.

I would prefer positive interaction but I get very little, almost none, of that so I would prefer negative reaction to none at all.

Of course I walk a very fine line between garnering attention and being banned.

It's a bit like sailing across the wind - it is exciting but there is a danger of tipping over.

Victor.

 

[matmos]

I would prefer positive interaction but I get very little, almost none, of that so I would prefer negative reaction to none at all.

Hey, Victor. Is that an admission of trolling? Actually I quite like your turn of phrase. "Caught between 2 stools". I know the feeling. Oh yes.

 

[Geoff]

Yeah, the honesty is quite refreshing, even if I don't agree with the reasoning.

 

[Mole]

Therapy, Oprah Winfrey and Paris Hilton

Perhaps you could explain why the act of writing a book about a subject demonstrates that the subject matter is ineffective...? As opposed to, say, sharing how it works and could be applied to those who have not yet experienced it.

Well, behind the shed in the Showground, they shared a cigarette with me and showed me how it worked - and as of that moment, I had not yet experienced a cigarette.

And so I was introduced to an appetite that couldn't be sated - I was introduced to an addiction.

And behind the shed of Society I was introduced to therapy.

At the time I was not told that cigarettes are addictive, nor was I told that therapy is addictive.

Cigarettes must now carry a warning but not therapy.

Because we live in a Therapeutic Society, therapy has now become invisible - it is just part of the furniture.

Therapy is now a way of perceiving Society - so we don't actually see therapy itself.

When everyone smoked, it seemed perfectly natural. And when everyone has a self-help book beside them, it seems completely natural.

Watch Oprah Winfrey push the self-help book, "The Power of Now". And watch Paris Hilton take, "The Power of Now", to prison with her.

Victor.

 

[ThatsWhatHeSaid]

First off, thanks for opening up. I appreciate it.

I seem to be caught between two stools - I can talk down to you or I can go along with the conventional wisdom.

I know you will say these are not the only two options but at the moment that is all that seems availble to me.

There's nothing unconventional about talking down to people. People who are truly unique are the one who don't really care where they fall and let their ideas shape their environment, rather than the other way around. It takes practice and insight, but you seem capable of both.

I would prefer positive interaction but I get very little, almost none, of that so I would prefer negative reaction to none at all.

Have you really tried? There's nothing wrong with being weird if that's who you are. I happen to agree with a lot of the things you say and I've got some weird ideas of my own. Maybe you just have to be patient and let the positive interaction come after you post a little and let people get to know you and feel comfortable (and curious) around (and about) you.

Think about it in terms of dogs. When a new dog joins the house, other dogs are hesitant. They don't just go sniff the other dog's ass; they wait until it's safe and the dog has become somewhat predictable and peaceful. Then they go and introduce themselves and interact, forming some connection. But if the same dog was too nervous about forming that connection and just started howling any time they came near it, they would interact at a distance, if it all, and would never really enjoy everyday boring interaction that comprises friendships.

I'm going to make a suggestion that I hope you consider it. Stop posting in sentences and start posting in paragraphs. It has a dual purpose of integrating you into the crowd and forcing you to face your fear of being normal and not sticking out immediately so you can be noticed by others. Maybe just try it for one post a day. You seem like an ok guy, so stop worrying so much. Even the weirdos are accepted here. The condescendors have a bit more trouble.

Edahn.

And stop signing your fucking name to every post. We know who you are. (lol)

Edahn.

 

[Nadir]

What I don't quite understand is the affronted reactions that characterize most of Victor's threads. I don't necessarily agree with what he's saying but I don't know why it is that he's either ignored completely or shot down just because his opinions happen to be different. Certainly I don't agree with Edahn's thoughts on this matter -- I think there's no inherent shock value to his posts, nor do I feel as if I'm spoken down to. Eye of the beholder, I think, and I don't know why people view his threads while operating under certain assumptions -- it makes the view none the clearer, but helps you see what you want to see. And it looks like it's becoming something of a habit.

 

[ThatsWhatHeSaid]

What I don't quite understand is the affronted reactions that characterize most of Victor's threads. I don't necessarily agree with what he's saying but I don't know why it is that he's either ignored completely or shot down just because his opinions happen to be different. Certainly I don't agree with Edahn's thoughts on this matter -- I think there's no inherent shock value to his posts, nor do I feel as if I'm spoken down to. Eye of the beholder, I think, and I don't know why people view his threads while operating under certain assumptions -- it makes the view none the clearer, but helps you see what you want to see. And it looks like it's becoming something of a habit.

Considering how he just admitted that he talks down to people, I would say you're not reading carefully enough.

 

[Mole]

Negative Feedback Loop

Hey, Victor. Is that an admission of trolling? Actually I quite like your turn of phrase. "Caught between 2 stools". I know the feeling. Oh yes.

Sometimes I wonder if I am a troll.

I think in the sense that I seek attention, I am a troll.

But I think this is ameliorated by the fact that I engage in discussion.

So perhaps I am a marginal troll.

I troll for attention but once I have caught the fish I want to land it, fry it and eat it.

And then ready for the next fish.

I recognise the limitations of trolling for attention and I would much prefer a regime of positive inteaction.

However I also recognise that many of us are quite defensive. And the defensiveness often takes the form of repeating the conventional wisdom or criticizing anyone who speaks out of turn.

And I must admit I don't like such defensiveness just as you don't like me criticizing your assumptions about MBTI or therapy or speaking down to you.

So each of us and all of us are caught in negative feedback loop.

Victor.

 

[Mole]

Dominance and Deference

Considering how he just admitted that he talks down to people, I would say you're not reading carefully enough.

What is most interesting is that Nadir and I both come from different cultures than you.

I know that my culture views deference quite differently than your culture.

And I would guess this is the same in Nadir's culture.

So you regard my 'speaking down to you' as a lack of deference.

You assume that a childish equality is a sign of deference.

So we are in the odd postion in that you feel I am not showing you due deference and so you don't show me due deference.

We have different ways of showing deference.

In a multi-cultural world, different cultures show deference in different ways.

Victor.

Postscript: I would really like to emphasise that dominance and deference are expressed differently in different cultures.

But we take our own culture for granted - but here we are in the noosphere consisting of more than one culture - so we need to understand different cultures are different.

And let me say it is the height of dominance to ignorantly force your cultural assumptions on others.

 

[Geoff]

What is most interesting is that Nadir and I both come from different cultures than you.

I know that my culture views deference quite differently than your culture.

And I would guess this is the same in Nadir's culture.

So you regard my 'speaking down to you' as a lack of deference.

You assume that a childish equality is a sign of deference.

So we are in the odd postion in that you feel I am not showing you due deference and so you don't show me due deference.

We have different ways of showing deference.

In a multi-cultural world, different cultures show deference in different ways.

Victor.

I too, am from a different culture... this isn't about deference. It is about making blanket statements that are designed to have shock value and... more likely to create lack of respect.. the patronising suggestion that others don't understand what you believe you are (near) alone in doing. It's no wonder that people react in such a way to these sort of comments.

Classic examples are you stating the reasoning behind other people's comments - like "you say these things because you don't like me". Have you noticed how often people react and point out you misunderstand them, or their motives when you say such things? One learns by asking of others, not prescribing their own intentions and motives to them.

On the subject of deference... you pointed out earlier in the thread that you choose to talk down to others eg Edahn, to get a reaction. You will be hard pushed to find a culture, Australian or otherwise, where talking down to someone will elicit a worthwhile response.

 

[ThatsWhatHeSaid]

So you regard my 'speaking down to you' as a lack of deference.

UM. YES.

You assume that a childish equality is a sign of deference.

UM. NO. Equality has nothing to do with deference, and like Geoff said, this has nothing to do with deference. It has to do with you chilling out instead of howling.

So we are in the odd postion in that you feel I am not showing you due deference and so you don't show me due deference.

I think I show you more deference than is due.

We have different ways of showing deference.

In a multi-cultural world, different cultures show deference in different ways.

Victor.

Which culture shows deference by talking down to people like they're unenlightened ignoramuses, exactly? Yours of Nadir's?

 

[Nadir]

Considering how he just admitted that he talks down to people, I would say you're not reading carefully enough.

That's easy. For instance, if someone tells you that they are telling the truth, what is your reaction? Just as it is your choice to believe if someone is telling you the truth or telling you lies, independent of that statement, I would suggest that his saying that he talks down to people does not mean anything as long as people aren't offended. The admission of talking down to anyone does not mean anything in isolation. Someone needs to disapprove of it first. It's the perceiver's choice to be offended... at which point the concept of "talking down to people" rears its head. It was you, originally, that accused him of being didactic and condenscending, i.e. "talking down to others."

Even discarding this... what is it that I'm not reading carefully? We read the same words... but our interpretations differ.