tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8078379512095504946.post2634812313120765351..comments2024-03-29T01:07:30.224-07:00Comments on Had Enough Therapy?: The Freudian Con GameStuart Schneidermanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12784043736879991769noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8078379512095504946.post-35454903715737135782015-12-08T11:41:54.981-08:002015-12-08T11:41:54.981-08:00p.s. I came upon a long interview of Toronto Psych...p.s. I came upon a long interview of Toronto Psychologist Jordan Peterson today, worth a listen.<br />https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07Ys4tQPRis Religion, Myth, Science, Truth | an evening of Darwinian thought with Dr. Jordan B. Peterson<br /><br />I thought his characterizations of different truths was interesting, what he called Darwinian truth and Newtonian truth, the first basically about "what works" in an evolutionary sense, and the second what works within dead mechanical systems of simple cause and effect. <br /><br />His example was like dominance hierarchies which are hundreds of millions of years, old, so they are "true" as emergent characterization of survival of living systems, and can't be deduced from mere physical laws, but rather exist as a large set of organism working together within soft "rules" of that system.<br /><br />So I can see a little how the new agers get into the mental mush of "We create our own reality", that is to say - those who are at the top of a status hierarchy really can "make reality what they want" at least if they understand the rules of that system at an instinctual or intellectual level in order to take advantage of it.<br /><br />And so if to degrees "reality is mutable" based on our ability to convince others of our personal special place within reality, we really can manifest that reality, almost like magic, at least as long as we can deliver what we promise to those that matter.<br /><br />And when those on the bottom of a given status hierarchy object, and try to change the system, to some degree they're fighting against a system, but actually since none of us really controls the status hierarchy, there's apparently room for all types, so the "con artists" for good or ill are just performing a role within the system.<br /><br />Some skeptics might even call Christianity as "the big con", at least as big as Islam's promise of virgins in the afterlife, but in the Christian case, we learn the meek shall inherit the earth, but somehow the difficulties on how a rich person can pass into heaven is too inconvenient for rich people to worry about, and Christian martyrdom, that's not for people of high status. That's for the poor people who we need to not question their place in the status hierarchy.<br /><br />But as long as we can keep extracting more and more material abundance this year as last year, and greater sources of energy, its a credible vision, and for now we can almost believe there will be enough for all, if we just let the winner-take-all system go another generation, and we'll all be trickled down upon as God promised.<br /><br />Beliefs and narratives sure go together, as long as we have what we want, or believe working harder will get us to the promised land.Ares Olympushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09726811306826601686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8078379512095504946.post-65567486414879542122015-12-08T09:35:08.556-08:002015-12-08T09:35:08.556-08:00It would seem to me that the opposite can be true....It would seem to me that the opposite can be true. Given we all are quite able to deceive ourselves, then the purpose of psychology ought to be help us see how our perceptions are distorted by our beliefs and desires, and how to step back from those and see reality with less distortion.<br /><br />As well, if the human mind is a narrative-creator, then the answer to avoiding the power of a narrative is to contrast it to other narratives, which is the exact opposite of what a con man wants you to do.<br /><br />And as a psychologist (or parent even), there does seem to be a dilemma. How do you help a client step out of their narrative without imposing a different narrative? And we also know the mind is reactive, and someone who strongly believes one thing, once they escape by some great event, they're just as likely to move to the complete opposite thing. So the true believer in God becomes the true atheist who believes God can't exist, and believes this with just as much passion.<br /><br />It might be for all I know, that everything Freud said was his own over-arching system of narratives that had to be self-consistent and complete, and he never doubted a single idea that ever came into his head, or tried to see how any of them could be proven or disprove. It does make sense that Freud might not want to tell his patient his archetypal narratives, since they may not help a patient escape them, and if he's wrong, it would just confuse the patients as well.<br /><br />I tend to assume Jung was more open about interpretations, and less rigid about requiring any singular framework to explain anything. And I'm equally unsure how much Jung or his followers tried to express their symbolic archetypal understandings to a patient, versus using them as probes of inquiry, to try to find the chink in the mind's defenses that prevent questioning reality.<br /><br />We can also wonder how we might help protect our family and friends from conmen, and see if we can identity traits that are problematic. I mean the best conmen perhaps are slightly disassociated themselves, and actually believe everything they're saying as they're saying it. At least that would be especially true in terms of pyramid schemes where there's lots of money following, and a business might slide from legitimate to illegimate by borrowing money to cover holes, and then shift to rising stock values to cover them.<br /><br />It is scary to try to ever know how to protect yourself much less others, and merely having a skeptics minds can as easily just leave you fearful of everything and everyone.<br /><br />But I guess this blog is supposed to be associating psychoanalysts as conmen, apparently the self-deceived kind, who believe in their own cures, and are too stupid to see their own corruption. Or maybe some know they are conmen, and don't care? Maybe that's the cynics in the end, who lose faith in their own power to help people, but as long as it pays the bills, they have their own family to raise, and figure as long as people seem to feel better, and insurance companies are paying the bills, its good enough. <br /><br />I can see it would be frustrating to leave the practice after decades, and then judge all talk therapy as equally helpless, and propagated wrongfully by ignorance and keep hoping you can stop it someday.Ares Olympushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09726811306826601686noreply@blogger.com