Paranoid-schizoid position

[Saengnapha]

Is much of freud's work still widely accepted as valid...

Really? Oedipus complex, Electra complex, anal phase, castration anxiety, penis envy, etc? Did Freud's work bring healthy results?

No, but he did open up the field and has currently been overridden by many. He did not have the Buddha as an ally, just cocaine.

[chownah]

Is much of freud's work still widely accepted as valid...

Really? Oedipus complex, Electra complex, anal phase, castration anxiety, penis envy, etc? Did Freud's work bring healthy results?

I don't understand how this is a response to me. Are you asking "Really are you asking a question?"....or what... Did you see that I answered that same question later on in my post?
I'm confused.
chownah

[DooDoot]

I'm confused

Obviously, I misread your post.

[chownah]

I'm confused

Obviously, I misread your post.

Good. Now I'm deconfused.......however confusion can be sort of fun sometimes....but not always.
chownah

[binocular]

The latter of those will find the true Dhamma utterly incomprehensible, but perhaps if I have a clearer understanding of what's going on in their heads, I can have a better comprehension of where they're coming from.

I think this is where you're going in the wrong direction.

Trying to understand what goes on in another's head is usually just about projection and patronizing. And virtue-signalling, and white-knighting. And an attempt to find safety in an uncertain, unknown world.

I think understanding others is overrated. Despite a popular trend to emphasize empathy. Better to just focus on the task and hand and get work done. This has the beautiful side-effect of defusing a lot of relationship drama. And limit efforts to understand others to a few significant, close, mutual relationships.

[binocular]

While I don't know much about the subject matter, I find Gregory Bateson's & R.D. Laing's 'Double-Bind' theory as more plausible

And while we're at Bateson and double binds: The general solution for double bind situations is to look at the context (or the context of the context etc.) for so long that one arrives at a situation that isn't a double bind and where one can act in a beneficial way.

This means, for example, that when you're stuck in a double bind drama with your narcissistic mother, where nothing you do or could do seems good enough to her, look at what the context of that situation is. For example, the context is that it's 4 PM and at 4.30 PM you have to pick your kid from soccer practice, and it takes you 20 minutes to get there, so you better get going.

It helps to create such contexts in advance -- in terms of time and tasks, such as having a schedule and a to-do list, but also in terms of relationships where in a calm hour, you actually sit down and think about the troublesome but inavoidable relationships in your life, and define what those relationships mean to you and set boundaries, and think in advance about how you could act wholesomely despite the drama an the double binds.

This may seem cold ... I think it's best to reserve understanding others for a few important relationships. Understanding others takes a lot of work and time, and one has to be prudent with how one uses those.

[aflatun]

The best description that I've come across in Buddhist terms that describe stress and other disturbances is Punnaji's beginning description of the path. He calls this disturbance, emotional reactivity. It is described as citta, the unconscious reactions of the 'animal' parts of our brain, the amygdala, that involve unconscious fear and survival activities along with all the other disturbances we develop. The job of the beginning stages of practice is to make these emotional reactions conscious by using mano, the thinking and reasoning part of our brain, the neo-cortex. He calls this Selective Thinking. We change the orientation of our emotional state to one of Dhamma, this being Samma Ditthi, Right View. Mano is the part of the brain that can 'control' these unconscious reactions from influencing our overall state of mind. This is the same theory that Cognitive Behavioral Therapy uses but Punnaji insists the Buddha discovered this 2500 years ago! and is built into the 8 Fold Path. The neo-cortex is said to grow and begin to override the amygdala's responses leading to harmony and tranquility, 'entering the stream'. Then the deeper stages of practice can unfold once the emotional reactivity has been calmed.

I think there is a lot of truth to the idea that the Buddha kind of "created" CBT . Probably also the worlds first and greatest phenomenologist, pragmatist, etc. But as we know none of these things are "the point," and so he went a lot further! I'm glad you're finding resonance with Ven. Punnaji's teachings, keep us posted.

[Saengnapha]

The best description that I've come across in Buddhist terms that describe stress and other disturbances is Punnaji's beginning description of the path. He calls this disturbance, emotional reactivity. It is described as citta, the unconscious reactions of the 'animal' parts of our brain, the amygdala, that involve unconscious fear and survival activities along with all the other disturbances we develop. The job of the beginning stages of practice is to make these emotional reactions conscious by using mano, the thinking and reasoning part of our brain, the neo-cortex. He calls this Selective Thinking. We change the orientation of our emotional state to one of Dhamma, this being Samma Ditthi, Right View. Mano is the part of the brain that can 'control' these unconscious reactions from influencing our overall state of mind. This is the same theory that Cognitive Behavioral Therapy uses but Punnaji insists the Buddha discovered this 2500 years ago! and is built into the 8 Fold Path. The neo-cortex is said to grow and begin to override the amygdala's responses leading to harmony and tranquility, 'entering the stream'. Then the deeper stages of practice can unfold once the emotional reactivity has been calmed.

I think there is a lot of truth to the idea that the Buddha kind of "created" CBT . Probably also the worlds first and greatest phenomenologist, pragmatist, etc. But as we know none of these things are "the point," and so he went a lot further! I'm glad you're finding resonance with Ven. Punnaji's teachings, keep us posted.

I think in human terms, it is the point for the vast majority of folks who wish to be fully human and have a semblance of sanity. Only then, is there a possibility of going further and contemplating our own experience in the way the Buddha taught.

[binocular]

I think in human terms, it is the point for the vast majority of folks who wish to be fully human and have a semblance of sanity. Only then, is there a possibility of going further and contemplating our own experience in the way the Buddha taught.

Do you believe that one first needs to be normal on worldly terms before one can go further and contemplate our own experience in the way the Buddha taught?

[DooDoot]

This means, for example, that when you're stuck in a double bind drama with your narcissistic mother, where nothing you do or could do seems good enough to her, look at what the context of that situation is. For example, the context is that it's 4 PM and at 4.30 PM you have to pick your kid from soccer practice, and it takes you 20 minutes to get there, so you better get going.

It helps to create such contexts in advance -- in terms of time and tasks, such as having a schedule and a to-do list, but also in terms of relationships where in a calm hour, you actually sit down and think about the troublesome but inavoidable relationships in your life, and define what those relationships mean to you and set boundaries, and think in advance about how you could act wholesomely despite the drama an the double binds.

This may seem cold ... I think it's best to reserve understanding others for a few important relationships. Understanding others takes a lot of work and time, and one has to be prudent with how one uses those.

You sound like a professional here.

[retrofuturist]

Greetings,

Trying to understand what goes on in another's head is usually just about projection and patronizing. And virtue-signalling, and white-knighting. And an attempt to find safety in an uncertain, unknown world.

I'm pleased you said "usually", otherwise you'd potentially be doing this to me. As it stands, this has no bearing on my situation... other than, somewhat ironically, describing some of the kinds of people I'm talking about.

I think understanding others is overrated. Despite a popular trend to emphasize empathy. Better to just focus on the task and hand and get work done. This has the beautiful side-effect of defusing a lot of relationship drama. And limit efforts to understand others to a few significant, close, mutual relationships.

I agree here. To be clear, the situation isn't causing me any dukkha. It would just be useful, and informative in "focusing on the task at hand", given that the execution of some of my tasks extend beyond the domain of my nearest and dearest.

Metta,
Paul.

[manas]

And limit efforts to understand others to a few significant, close, mutual relationships.

This makes sense to me. I need to understand my children so as to be able to better help them, to grow to maturity - so there's a benefit for me to be able to delve into their mental and emotional worlds, so to speak.

As for others - well, I'm having a hard enough time, just comprehending myself, to be honest. With the limited time I have left, I'm hoping I can just get that urgent task done, sometime before falling off the perch.

[Saengnapha]

I think in human terms, it is the point for the vast majority of folks who wish to be fully human and have a semblance of sanity. Only then, is there a possibility of going further and contemplating our own experience in the way the Buddha taught.

Do you believe that one first needs to be normal on worldly terms before one can go further and contemplate our own experience in the way the Buddha taught?

Yes. Otherwise their neuroses cannot allow them to relax and be present.

[alan]

The President has major psychological problems, and is not fit to serve. Is this not obvious to everyone?
Because it is obvious to me. Has been for a long time. How can people not see this?
Trump is a child. A stupid, ridiculous one.

[retrofuturist]

Greetings Alan,

Are you suggesting Trump operates from the Paranoid-schizoid position?

Or perhaps that his rabid detractors do?...

Or do you just love talking about Trump?!



Metta,
Paul.