Page 5 of 6 [ 84 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Asp-Z
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Dec 2009
Age: 26
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,016

06 Jan 2012, 5:03 pm

NeantHumain wrote:
The ego defense mechanism of acting out (through your colorful meme) may be indicative of a borderline personality structure. It may be suspected that you were deprived of mother's milk—on the receiving end of the "bad breast"—and thus cycle through periods of idealization and devaluation. In this case, you see the analyst as a sort of surrogate father figure, devaluing him and his sage advice about the good/bad breast phenomenon. This transference could lead to a breakdown of the therapeutic alliance, so it is necessary for you to re-enact the developmental stage of weaning by suckling upon the analyst's strap-on mammories with baby bottles of warm milk attached. Then you will come to the developmental stage of realizing that the very same breast that sustains you (i.e., the good breast) is also the breast that frustrate you (i.e., the bad breast) and your grandiose, infantile urges, enacted in the schizoid-paranoid position. After this, you will need to start dealing with the Oedipal complex, castration anxiety, etc., eventually reaching the genital stage of psychological maturity.


Image



peebo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Mar 2006
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,627
Location: scotland

07 Jan 2012, 2:48 am

Saturn wrote:
peebo wrote:
Saturn wrote:
NarcissusSavage wrote:
In my opinion, one of the greatest contributors to "mental dysfunction" is forced inclusion within a society. For example, I am a US citizen, I live within a society and am compelled to modify my behavior to within the standards of the American societal rules, and am bound by its laws, and face the general opinions of other Americans in my interactions. I made no decision to join this group, yet am fully bound to it and responsible for conforming regardless. This forced inclusion may be a root cause of feelings of powerlessness, discontent and numerous other "mental health" issues. My philosophies of life, my choices of behavior and what I consider important in general does not align well with the society I have found myself a member of. The compulsive nature of inclusion only further aggravates this and amplifies it to levels of dysfunction.

I have often pondered why citizenship is mandatory, and why there is not a system in place for people who are born into a society whom disagree with it on fundamental levels. Then again, I disagree with it on so many levels I shouldn’t be surprised that compulsive inclusion is just another one on the list.


I agree. I think this for me is core to 'the human condition': natural intellectual animals living thoroughly within civilization rather than within nature as our pre-human ancestors did. But don't forget that civilization for all it's troubles, has provided and continues to provide great benefits to us, ones which we not be able to have in a state of nature. Civilization is basically here to stay so the question is how best to optomise that civilization and ones individual life within it.


don't you think it might be the nature of social organisation within civilisation, rather than civilisation itself, that might be the problem? for instance, don't you think that authoritarian conditioning might well be a source of trauma?


To say 'the nature of social organisation within civilization' is, to me, another way of saying 'the nature of civilization' or the nature of 'a particular civilization', and to this extent I would agree with you, that that is 'the problem'. However, I do find it hard to see how, in practice, any form of civilization and the various sub-forms within that, can be immune to generating fundamental difficulties in terms of individual psychic life. And this is because any state of culture rather than of nature demands the sublimation of natural inclinations in exchange for the aggregated benefits of the civilized state. What is more, within a civilization, natural desires will express themselves in one way or another and this will lead to social and economic injustice, among other things, where some get what they want at the expense of others not getting what they want.


but surely civilisation can be egalitarian and tolerant? disparity of wealth and the atomising, alienating effects of capitalism are what i would see as the problems.

Quote:
I think authoritarian conditioning is at least a major source of trauma. For Freud, at least, I understand, the early Freud, the primal authoritarian trauma is the one inflicted by the father on the son by barring his full enjoyment of the mother. The corresponding electra complex on the female side, I find less compelling, but the general idea, for me, significantly illuminates, the causes for individual and collective, what has come to be known as, psychic dysfunction. For Freud, the authoritarian rules and norms of society by which we are all conditioned, are the father writ large. So we have trauma occuring through the conditioning by the family and by the wider state and culture as a whole.

How do you see it?


aye i think it's a big factor. the education system, pressure to conform, tendency towards bullying and authoritarian relationships, economic precarity, working long hours under pressure in meaningless low paid demeaning work, living in claustrophobic and overcrowded environments etc. all of these are contributory factors.


_________________
?Civil government, so far as it is instituted for the security of property, is in reality instituted for the defense of the rich against the poor, or of those who have some property against those who have none at all.?

Adam Smith


peebo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Mar 2006
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,627
Location: scotland

07 Jan 2012, 2:52 am

see also erich fromm's the sane society, a critical synopsis of which can be found here:

http://www.marxists.org/archive/mattick ... /fromm.htm


see also here: http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/fromm.html


_________________
?Civil government, so far as it is instituted for the security of property, is in reality instituted for the defense of the rich against the poor, or of those who have some property against those who have none at all.?

Adam Smith


Saturn
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 23 Dec 2011
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 317
Location: UK

07 Jan 2012, 8:25 am

I think civilzation can be improved upon but I think it is an authoritarian or even violent act to establish a civilization, as against the state of nature, in the first place. This is why I think that authority is inherent to civilzation. I think it could be possible for civilization to be less authoritarian, more egalitarian and generally better in aggregate for its members, but I find it hard to see how some kind of utopian civilization is possible in practice.



peebo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Mar 2006
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,627
Location: scotland

07 Jan 2012, 12:57 pm

what do you consider to be the state of nature, and how can it not be reconciled with civilisation?


_________________
?Civil government, so far as it is instituted for the security of property, is in reality instituted for the defense of the rich against the poor, or of those who have some property against those who have none at all.?

Adam Smith


Robdemanc
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 May 2010
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,922

07 Jan 2012, 1:56 pm

In nature there is evidence of authority and society. Bees, Ants etc have hierarchies in the structure of their nests. It is as though humans are trying to force ourselves into that scenario. Now imagine if genetic engineering takes place and we end up with a Brave New World type future. We could end up the mamalian equivelent of a bee hive, or Ants nest.



peebo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Mar 2006
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,627
Location: scotland

07 Jan 2012, 2:41 pm

do you think authority is a prerequisite of civilisation?


_________________
?Civil government, so far as it is instituted for the security of property, is in reality instituted for the defense of the rich against the poor, or of those who have some property against those who have none at all.?

Adam Smith


Robdemanc
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 May 2010
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,922

07 Jan 2012, 2:55 pm

peebo wrote:
do you think authority is a prerequisite of civilisation?


If by civilisation we mean simple pottery and farming then no. But if we mean the building of cities then yes.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,726
Location: New Jersey

07 Jan 2012, 3:32 pm

peebo wrote:
what do you consider to be the state of nature, and how can it not be reconciled with civilisation?


Mankind has not lived in a "state of nature" for over 10,000 years. All humans live in societies, the most primitive of which are extended families and the most complicated of which are large collection of non-blood related folk united by language and culture.

ruveyn



peebo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Mar 2006
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,627
Location: scotland

07 Jan 2012, 3:38 pm

that's what i was getting at.


_________________
?Civil government, so far as it is instituted for the security of property, is in reality instituted for the defense of the rich against the poor, or of those who have some property against those who have none at all.?

Adam Smith


Saturn
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 23 Dec 2011
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 317
Location: UK

07 Jan 2012, 5:19 pm

peebo wrote:
what do you consider to be the state of nature, and how can it not be reconciled with civilisation?


Good question.

I suppose I'm thinking of a situation where 'might is right' ie, where the strongest tend to get their way at the expense of others. A situation where there are no rules governing behaviour other than those that the strongest enforce in practice. A situation where there is nothing stopping us from getting what we want apart from the consequences of that.

Actually, that's starting to sound a lot like civilization, and I suppose that should be no surprise as natural tendencies must try to come out one way or another. I think the question could be whether civilization will only ever really benefit the strong. Going back to the riots, as an example, perhaps here we see a threat to the strong. Will the strong make concessions to the weak? Perhaps only if the upsurge of the weak is a threat to the strong's position.

That's one angle on your question. Excuse the simplistic language where appropriate.



peebo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Mar 2006
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,627
Location: scotland

08 Jan 2012, 1:55 am

but egalitarian societies have existed, though. how would you explain it?


_________________
?Civil government, so far as it is instituted for the security of property, is in reality instituted for the defense of the rich against the poor, or of those who have some property against those who have none at all.?

Adam Smith


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,726
Location: New Jersey

08 Jan 2012, 3:11 am

peebo wrote:
but egalitarian societies have existed, though. how would you explain it?


Even in such societies there is a hierarchy, even if it is informal and not decreed by law. Some people are more equal than others.

Among the Primates there is always an alpha male.

ruveyn



Saturn
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 23 Dec 2011
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 317
Location: UK

08 Jan 2012, 6:44 am

peebo wrote:
but egalitarian societies have existed, though. how would you explain it?


for example...



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,726
Location: New Jersey

08 Jan 2012, 8:45 am

peebo wrote:
but egalitarian societies have existed, though. how would you explain it?


Where? Give examples. And how long have they last as egalitarian societies?

It is natural for humans to create hierarchies. That is part of our primate nature. Somewhere, somehow there is an alpha male.

ruveyn