For me for example,
… [read full article]Posts by Kenneth Udut
Yes, I take issue whenever someone says such and so is “an illusion” implying that they have “the real knowledge”. It’s a common pattern and it’s maddening. It’s likely we’re more or less on the same page. I figured out a few years back that I’m probably a “hard physicalist” but to an extreme; and we spent a lot of time describing what we think is outside of ourselves when what we’re REALLY DOING is mapping the inside of our brains as best we can as it interacts with forces in and outside of itself
Yes, I take issue
… [read full article]TA <-> Fairbairn #1: “Following Stern, Fairbairn, Guntripp and many other writers on this subject, we believe that our deepest motivation is for contact with others and that a sense of ‘cohesive’ self develops through the quality of the relationship. ” Good I traced that family well; #2: “At this point in the therapy I began to think of developmental models of personality. For instance, Fairbairn, Guntrip and Winnicott all refer to the problem of developing a mature love when there have been gross failures in empathic attunement with the infant. ” #3 “Under the tyranny of an overcritical father and lacking the mirroring, holding and attunement that occurs when an infant is either with a depressed mother or, in this case, an absent mother, we can hypothesize that this patient had withdrawn a part of herself from the relationship (Fairbairn 1940). ” CONCLUSION: Transactional Analysis _+is+_ in the family of psychoanalysis here ,which is why it is so familiar. TA DEPARTS from “Object Relations” _however_, it is very much a ‘child of” and remains very close. It is “self” oriented so it probably lacks some stuff about “large groups” but it is good for encounters. “In Stage One – The Approach, we expand upon our theoretical and methodological approach and introduce our theory of self. This theory provides transactional analysts with a lexicon with which to discuss the aetiology of development and disturbances in the self (diagrams in Chapter 2). Following Stern, Fairbairn, Guntripp and many other writers on this subject, we believe that our deepest motivation is for contact with others and that a sense of ‘cohesive’ self develops through the quality of the relationship. It is therefore obvious that the nature and quality of contact becomes a crucial aspect of development. This stage charts the process of this development and the empathic relationship that is necessary to the formation of the healthy self and to the facilitation of a therapeutic relationship in the consulting room.”
TA <-> Fairbairn #… [read full article]
I’m undecided on that. The reason I am undecided on that is just how wedded MOST of the sensory mechanisms in the body are linked to the very same physical processes we observe in stuff like balls hitting other balls and such.
I’m undecided on that. … [read full article]
Yes, he is “working towards” – I would put it as a “towards a theory of iconicity” or something but I don’t think it’s complete. I mean, it’s enough for a life’s work and to give ted talks and write books; but it’s flawed in that it doesn’t address the fact of programmers who are aware of the assembly language and can break it down to the bare metal level if necessary; in the icon theory it does not allow for that
Yes, he is “working … [read full article]
well, only in the way the sentences were structured. Me putting that chart up does not address: What does Maybe mean? What does is mean? What does inexpressible mean? What happens when they combine?
well, only in the
… [read full article]Yes, don’t think any of them has yet found ‘it’ nor do I think I’ll find an ‘it’ but what I’m _hoping_ to find, at the very least, “my fit” – that is, what is the most compatible “family of thought” where I can say, “Yes, this is my neighborhood”. I already have some clues; for example, I know that transactional analysis is there and I’m mapped some of that. But I’ve NEVER been able to figure out the BREAK from Freud; that is, why I have always detested Freud and he has never made any sense to me. And now I know WHO the break came from – which tells me that what I’ve learned is vaguely from this family; that of Ronald Fairbairn at the extreme. It’s very encouraging; finding out that they simply did not teach him for decades (I guess in hopes he’d just go away) explains the knowledge hole I was in;
Yes, don’t think any
… [read full article]