![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 12 to 36 of 36. Go back in thread:
Posted by pegasus on August 9, 2004, at 23:34:26
In reply to Bootstrap? Bootstrap Method?, posted by 64bowtie on August 9, 2004, at 2:49:17
>Why would I be arrogant, aloof, insensative, detached, and condescending and remain here? Why would I ever waste my time and your time herein to keep up this cloud of illusion? Please ask yourself why I am consistant and have never asked y'alls to deny your pain or your success.
Rod, I have to tell you that I often get exactly that impression when I read your posts, and I have indeed wondered why you keep posting that way. If aloof and condescending are attitudes that you're opposed to, then I think you're coming across differently than you mean to. At least to me.
>I am just parachuting in with knowledge and success that is off many radar screens. Perhaps I have information you don't even know that you don't even know that you can't even guess at.
Perhaps, indeed. And yet the ideas to which you refer here don't sound to me as new or revolutionary as you seem to think they are. I think many people here, including myself, have considered your approach before, and either agreed or decided for valid reasons that it didn't go far enough for them, or wasn't helpful for them, or they weren't ready for it or interested in it, that they disagreed, etc. I don't get the impression that people here are refusing to considering something because it is "off their radar."
Frankly, I'm annoyed whenever I see another post from you saying largely the same thing that you've said before, and directed to no one in particular, and therefore to all of us. I feel accused of *something* I can't put my finger on every time. If people were asking you about your ideas, or if you were tying it to specific incidents in specific posts, then your manifestos would be easier for me to take. As it is, I usually avoid reading your posts, because I know I usually react negatively to them.
Along the same lines, when I read your statement above, my first thought was that perhaps it would be useful for you to take your own advice (I'm not trying to be sarcastic here! I'm being sincere). You sound very earnest about being open minded. And yet, I get the impression that you may not yet have understood what many people here have been trying to tell you.
And yet, I also want to say that I have seen you be incredibly supportive, and you take criticism amazingly well. You obviously have passion about your view of things, and want to help people. So I hope you won't be offended by my frankness. I think I mostly want to give you feedback that might help you be *more* helpful here.
Respectfully
pegasus
Posted by Shadowplayers721 on August 9, 2004, at 23:35:13
In reply to Bootstrap? Bootstrap Method?, posted by 64bowtie on August 9, 2004, at 2:49:17
topic? ----"Pull yourself up by your bootstraps and get along with your life"
"Is bootstrap a valuable label to you, or a derogation of my intentions, or something else, or nothing at all?"
What I actually think the statement came from and means?....
I think this was an old statement made in the day when people were forced to do hard labor to make their earnings. So, they had to put on their work clothes and boots to go out in the fields to do a hard days work from sun up to sun down. Your life depended on your animals, field, and labors. Some people still live like this.
I take the meaning of the statement as you do what you got to do to live
Now, is it valuable. hmmmmmm It makes me think, "What are the things/people/ideas that I am living by or on to get me through life. What are my so called "boot straps"?
Do I think you are derogative of your own intentions? Well, I don't know. What are your intentions?:)
Does that statement mean something else or nothing at all? All it means to me is what I said up above.
Posted by 64Bowtie on August 10, 2004, at 1:46:03
In reply to Are you trying to drum up business?, posted by Joslynn on August 9, 2004, at 22:34:28
(((Joslyn))),
I can't do anything for clients over this medium and under Dr Bob. Besides I read the opening disclaimer and I agree with it and his premise from which it was derived. That doesn't make you wrong or bad. I am only stating my objective position. BTW, I ain't gonna... Troll for clients.
I ask for feedback like yours. I was left with quite a bit of intellectual legacy recently, with no forum to share it on. Much of it is sorta unfinished and needs fleshing out. I also journal ideas and ways to say or communicate my stuff. What you are seeing in some posts, is me like an opera singer practicing a note. Is that so bad? In computer parlance, you are getting the free beta test copy of the real thing. Use it and enjoy it. I have crumby technique still. If I do pass on a "gem" though, I ask you to let me know that it helped you.
From another post:
<<< That said, I see my weak suit (bridge analogy, and I don't do good bridge), my weak suit is communication. I can't figure out what's important without help. Babblers are so generous with the feedback I sense I need. I hope y'all respond to my questions objectively and don't get intimidated by me. I want to do what I do better than I do now. Timing and comunication are my personal citadels, and at the same time my grail.No, I'm not trolling for $$$$! I am letting you proof read my writing so that we can be a success because of it. You may be the only one who reads it. If it helps you, is it bad because it is intended to someday be published?
What I write here isn't what you will see in print anyway. You may see consepts developed and improved here in the writing someday, but they can be useful to you if they impact your life enough. Besides, for PhDs, the adage is "Publish or perish". "Recovery or Oblivion" was such a smashing failure for me that I now approach publishing cautiously with an 11 foot pole.
Keep responding. I love it!
Rod
PS: you're not totally wrong about my style. It probably smacks of all that sales training I've been through over the years. That's why I cherish your post to me. ...just one more thing I wasn't aware of (besides the spinach stuck in my front teeth). Smile!
Posted by 64Bowtie on August 10, 2004, at 1:59:19
In reply to Re: Bootstrap? Bootstrap Method?, posted by pegasus on August 9, 2004, at 23:34:26
(((pegasus))),
I am looking for just that feed back. The silence of lack of responses has been deafening....!
When YOU say respectfully, I sense you are not triffling with me.... You know what you're doing and you mean it.
Thanx again,
Rod
Posted by 64Bowtie on August 10, 2004, at 2:09:27
In reply to Re: First let me be sure I'm understanding you » 64bowtie, posted by Dinah on August 9, 2004, at 9:41:27
(((Dinah))),
> You think this is an unstable environment with discussions that tend to placate and support pathology?
<<< How on earth did I evoke this? I know it must be me. What clued you in that I must be talking about a pathology, and when did I intimate "unstable" as a label for Babble? I'm bewildered.... Please help me.
Rod
Posted by Dinah on August 10, 2004, at 2:11:55
In reply to Please hold that - those thoughts » Dinah, posted by 64bowtie on August 9, 2004, at 21:29:37
Oh, I don't feel bad for doing it, Rod.
I tried to use your own words as much as I could, and from recent posts so that my memory isn't too involved. And I'm checking back with you to make sure that what I heard was what you intended to say. I think those are good things, not bad.
Because somewhere along the line in reading a message, I do infer things from the message, and while I think I have the actual words correct, the inferences might not be right. Perhaps on the receiving end, or perhaps on the sending end. That's why I think it's valuable to check back.
And as I've been thinking about it more, I can see that bootstrap probably isn't as efficient a shorthand as, say, "choice" would be. I get the feeling that a lot of what you say is about choices.
Posted by Dinah on August 10, 2004, at 2:21:56
In reply to How did you get ther from where I was??? » Dinah, posted by 64Bowtie on August 10, 2004, at 2:09:27
> (((Dinah))),
>
> > You think this is an unstable environment with discussions that tend to placate and support pathology?
>
> <<< How on earth did I evoke this? I know it must be me. What clued you in that I must be talking about a pathology, and when did I intimate "unstable" as a label for Babble? I'm bewildered.... Please help me.
>
> RodOOOh, an easy one. :) As I said, I tried to use your own words as much as possible. That statement came from your first post in this thread.
"My motives, feelings, and behaviors have been to inject results orientation where I find ***placation*** oriented discussions that historically turn a blind eye to anything unfamiliar." (emphasis mine)
and
"There is continuing scrambling to push me in to categories this way and that, probably because I threaten stability in an already ***unstable environment***." (emphasis mine)Pathology was my inference, because "placation" is not a word to describe something you do to something you find healthy, probably combined with the topics of recent posts.
But I suppose the heart of what I was trying to say is in my last paragraph, not my first. About choice.
Posted by 64Bowtie on August 10, 2004, at 3:30:27
In reply to Re: Bootstrap? Bootstrap Method?, posted by tabitha on August 9, 2004, at 13:45:17
(Tabitha),
> I have the impression that you think you have unique new knowledge that therapists and therapy clients are just too closed-minded to accept. What I hear you saying is that your ideas are just too unfamiliar, too new, too success-oriented for us to take in.
<<< Are you saying I'm a bad person? You are being pretty judgemental in your tone. I'm OK with you being judgemental when appropriate. You sound very concerned for the safety and integrity of the Babble community.
>If that is your thinking, well can you see how you might have a high probability of offending some people? It can sound like 'if you disagree with me, that shows that my ideas are too advanced for you.' It gives the listener a choice between agreeing with you, or being called slow.
<<< You sound very concerned, however, I don't know where I am or where I'm going, so I'm asking for help finding my way. Ever asked for directions? That's me...
<<< All I will ever want is for us all to find a clear path to freedom and happiness.
===Freedom meaning minimize our dysfunction, no longer feeling stuck in our lives.
===Dysfunction meaning a collection or a suite of bad destructive habits messing up our lives.
===Happiness meaning joy with only one voice in our minds, our own, and our internal conflictedness extinguished.<<<I've shared some ideas in the past on how to do it. Can you see and suggest some others?
> It appears to me that you are determined to convince us that life coaching concepts are superior to psychotherapy concepts.
<<< I know Life-Coaching works. I don't make any comparisons that you're claiming I do. I only brought Life-Coaching to Babble because it is an alternative and it is important instead of invisible, and I needed help finding my way with this package of knowledge and powerful skills .
NOTE: I hope no one trys to side step good therapy because Life-Coaching is cheaper or quicker. If its not meant to help YOU, don't try it. Go to good therapy until you no longer need it, then try finishing with good Life-Coaching. These are lifetime skills taught to be used by you on yourself, for the rest of your very valuable life.
> I wonder what you are needing from us.
<<< Thank you for being concerned about what I might need. I need answers, and help with my communication skills, and my timing. Can you think of some suggestions?
Rod
Posted by 64Bowtie on August 10, 2004, at 3:38:14
In reply to Re: How did you get ther from where I was??? » 64Bowtie, posted by Dinah on August 10, 2004, at 2:21:56
Posted by Shadowplayers721 on August 10, 2004, at 12:56:41
In reply to Mea Culpa! I responded in a hurry... Bad Idea! (nm) » Dinah, posted by 64Bowtie on August 10, 2004, at 3:38:14
So, the intentions of the posts are....
"Much of it is sorta unfinished and needs fleshing out. I also journal ideas and ways to say or communicate my stuff. What you are seeing in some posts, is me like an opera singer practicing a note."
-------------------------------------------------
What I read there is a testing the waters of how an audience will hear a speech. What I learned in speech is that you need to know who your audience is and give them what they want. This audience (Shadowplayers) enjoys posts that are written with sincerity of need of support or education in relation to Psychology. So, this is how to best get what you want from Shadows too. "Hey, you'll. I am writing a speech to a group of people for X and I want your opinions. What do you think?"Shadowplayers were suspicious that there was a motive here that wasn't mentioned. Now, that it is mentioned. We can proceed with the process if the intentions are clearly identified. However, things like this post may not fall under the psychology category anymore, but on the Social board.
Posted by 64bowtie on August 10, 2004, at 20:49:01
In reply to the intentions?, posted by Shadowplayers721 on August 10, 2004, at 12:56:41
<<< Thanx for reading and connecting...
> So, the intentions of the posts are....
>
> "Much of it is sorta unfinished and needs fleshing out. I also journal ideas and ways to say or communicate my stuff. What you are seeing in some posts, is me like an opera singer practicing a note."<<< I have many motives for being here. I have disclosed most of my motives as you can detect by going to my -psychology posts as far back as Nov 15, 2003. As long as I post respectfully and remain responsible by fully managing my many motives, I'm sure my posts won't somehow harm you and your quest for therapy stories and information here at Babble.
> What I read there is a testing the waters of how an audience will hear a speech. What I learned in speech is that you need to know who your audience is and give them what they want.
<<< I seem to remember that in my High school debate classes, The Original Oratory competition had that mandate, back in 1964.
> This audience (Shadowplayers) enjoys posts that are written with sincerity of need of support or education in relation to Psychology.
<<< Do you see a disconnect between life skills and psychology? RSVP
> So, this is how to best get what you want from Shadows too. "Hey, you'll. I am writing a speech to a group of people for X and I want your opinions. What do you think?"
<<< I can do that!
> Shadowplayers were suspicious that there was a motive here that wasn't mentioned.
<<< See above....
> Now, that it is mentioned. We can proceed with the process if the intentions are clearly identified. However, things like this post may not fall under the psychology category anymore, but on the Social board.
<<< Respectfully, isn't this a Dr Bob issue? Czek it out with him. If it must (mandatory) be redirected, I will comply, lovingly and with compassion...., because I can and do.
Rod
Posted by 64bowtie on August 11, 2004, at 3:38:31
In reply to Re: First let me be sure I'm understanding you » 64bowtie, posted by Dinah on August 9, 2004, at 9:41:27
> You think this is an unstable environment with discussions that tend to placate and support pathology?
<<< I sense that Babblers are in unstable situations, reaching out for constancy and stability here at Babble, thus I represent more (in)-stability when I post here the way I do. Sadly I mistyped again. I left off the "in" prefix, totally changing the meaning of my sentence. At no time have I ever intimated or suggested that Babble was in anyway an unstable environment. I apology for typos, now and in the future.
> As opposed to your result oriented technique that tries to change our pathology? And you want to add your contribution of *not* placating and supporting our pathology.
<<< I sense that effort must be honored and conserved (not wasted). Results leans toward doing just those two things. If we seek results instead of comfort, effort is not wasted on placation habits.
<<< I'm not sold on the fact Babblers are suffering from as much pathology as their pdocs want them to believe. I don't buy into the pathology model unless the mri-s and cat scans show anomolies. Pathology may serve to get the government or the insurance comapny to pay bills by requiring (blindly, wink-wink) that clients have a pathology to be covered.
<<< Like I've said many times in many posts, I hear cogniphobia! Many Babblers have a phobia against thinking; seeing themselves as they are in their mind's eye, and accepting what they see. I can't see any reference equating phobias to pathology. Cancer is pathological. Phobias are faulty beliefs based on flawed information, being enacted out physically, much to the clients discomfort and despair. When confronted about their fear of thinking is done successfully, phobics overturn years and decades of conflictedness and confusion within minutes. I have witnessed hundreds of successful encounters and done a few myself, where the conditions were right. Pathologies like those of a Charles Manson or a Jeffry Daumer, don't get fixed by coaching.
> You think that our talk of inner children is one example of the pathology we placate here? And that adults don't have the illusion of inner children?
<<< I studied Transactional Analysis in the early to mid 70s, so I am accutely aware of an internal child overlay concept. For an adult, the child ego-state has a tiny parent, adult and child built in blah, blah, blah... I could go on and on. Whether I believe it or not, I can repeat the tails of how TA works and how skills can probably improve our lives. I can do it with even more gusto for 12 step stuff, from many programs, even. Do I consider that effort and time well spent if I did it now? Nnaaahhhh! My Life-Coaching stuff is the grail, finally, and not just the grail d'jour as TA became for many.
> So that if we were to truly embrace our adulthood, we wouldn't cling to this illusion? But you're ok with imagining yourself as a child and talking to yourself as a child.
<<< The rules are different for this EMDR as you call it and the child ego-state of TA. I accept my conjered fantasy child across the room, whose suffering is only a manifestation of a memory that might continue to haunt me. That haunting can be easily extinguished by this visual technique, employing the powers of the adult visual cortex to update the memory to something "here-and-now" appropriate.
> You think that memories are things that can't cause pain because they aren't real in the sense of being tangible. Are you including flashbacks here?
<<< ...they are not in the here and the now, so participants are not tangible. Good question by the way...
> While you say "I did not say the memories can't hurt you." You also say "[Aside], how do memories hurt anyone? Why would anyone give that much power and energy to an abstraction, a story about what happened to you, that it, the abstraction has the ability to take action against your senses and physically cause pain?", two statements that might appear on the surface to be contradictory. So I'm making the leap to concluding you are saying that memories can hurt you, but only emotionally not physically, and only if you let them.
<<< Thank you for understanding. (((((Dinah))))) I hear acceptance in your realization of the concept. If I were only here for gratification, right now I would be glowing with pride. Thanx!!! I add, that if you are only on the planet to find and be comfortable, any emotional upsetness will destabilize and thus, hurt. My, my, my how life is so much more than that. Go get your share!!!
> You say "I just choose to live in the here and now and time and tides take care of the past." But you also say that you don't deny what happened to you in the past or minimize it. You just choose not to dwell on it. And that anyone can choose to do what you did.
<<< I could add to that but I will go back in my corner and re-hook my leash and be good..., and quiet. You said it so much better than I ever did!
> So my overall view of your message is that you think we choose to feel the way we do now, and we can choose to feel differently if we wish. That we are indulging our child selves and not choosing to live with the freedom an adult self would have.
<<< My dear sweet (((Dinah)))... Thanks for the lesson on how to say my stuff!!! Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!
> That we should quit indulging ourselves and each other and start making better choices about how to feel. To choose to leave the past in the past. To accept what happened to us, but to choose to leave it in the past where it belongs. To start thinking and behaving like adults.
<<< Can I interest you in becoming my editor. I promise not to post at Babble without your approval if you do!......lol
> ...am I receiving the same message you are intending to send?
<<< Wow!!! How and what do I say, Boss?
Rod
PS: Thanx, many times over!!!
Posted by Dinah on August 11, 2004, at 11:44:42
In reply to Re: Re: First let me... » ((((((((Dinah)))))))), posted by 64bowtie on August 11, 2004, at 3:38:31
>
> <<< Like I've said many times in many posts, I hear cogniphobia! Many Babblers have a phobia against thinking; seeing themselves as they are in their mind's eye, and accepting what they see.Do you perhaps see why posters might be offended by reading that they have a phobia against thinking? Especially since posters in general seem like a well read bunch who rather like to think. Just because people come to different conclusions than you come to doesn't mean they don't like to think.
A lot of people here *do* have trouble accepting themselves. Others don't. But for those who do, do you think that implying their difficulty in accepting themselves is due to a fear of thinking is a useful method to promote self acceptance?
> I can't see any reference equating phobias to pathology. Cancer is pathological. Phobias are faulty beliefs based on flawed information, being enacted out physically, much to the clients discomfort and despair.
Phobias have historically been one of the conditions most amenable to treatments like CBT. But sometimes, as in my case, the phobia is more than a phobia. And correcting the faulty beliefs, and exposure and response prevention, only address the symptom (the phobia) and not the root cause. Sometimes a fear of vomit is just a fear of vomit. Sometimes a fear of vomit is a handy obsession to distract one from the underlying issues. Such was the case with me. The phobia wasn't a faulty belief based on flawed information. I had the correct information. But it was way too scary not to be scared of vomit.
> > You think that our talk of inner children is one example of the pathology we placate here? And that adults don't have the illusion of inner children?
>
> <<< I studied Transactional Analysis in the early to mid 70s, so I am accutely aware of an internal child overlay concept. For an adult, the child ego-state has a tiny parent, adult and child built in blah, blah, blah...Are you willing to accept and respect that for some of us, an inner child is more than an "internal child overlay concept"? That for some of us there is far more involved than a "tiny parent, adult, and child built in." And to accord far more respect for our experience than "blah, blah, blah" would indicate? Inner child is a useful shorthand, a socially accepted way of discussing something that is far more meaningful to us than that. You don't have to understand it. But I ask that you respect an integral part of myself by not speaking disrespectfully of my experience.
> > While you say "I did not say the memories can't hurt you." You also say "[Aside], how do memories hurt anyone? Why would anyone give that much power and energy to an abstraction, a story about what happened to you, that it, the abstraction has the ability to take action against your senses and physically cause pain?", two statements that might appear on the surface to be contradictory. So I'm making the leap to concluding you are saying that memories can hurt you, but only emotionally not physically, and only if you let them.
>
> <<< Thank you for understanding. (((((Dinah))))) I hear acceptance in your realization of the concept. If I were only here for gratification, right now I would be glowing with pride. Thanx!!! I add, that if you are only on the planet to find and be comfortable, any emotional upsetness will destabilize and thus, hurt. My, my, my how life is so much more than that. Go get your share!!!You hear understanding, and acceptance that that is how you think and feel about the subject. And if it works for you, and for all of those it works for, I am pleased and say go for it. I'm glad this has helped you. But if you have been listening to everything I have said, you may also have heard me saying that some people feel very hurt by this message. There is a big step between saying memories can hurt only if you let them, and being *able* to not let them hurt. I imagine that most everyone here has tried not to let those memories hurt them. There are few people who don't *know* that their abusers aren't in the room and can't hurt them. Although, by definition, aren't flashbacks in the technical sense an inability to *know* that? And a well researched and documented phenomenon because of the many studies done on battle fatigue, shell shock, etc. People often feel bad enough that they aren't able to prevent memories from hurting them. Hearing that it's their choice or that they could choose to feel differently just makes them feel ashamed by their failure, in addition to hurt by their memories. From what *I* heard, and this is just my understanding, many people have tried to tell you this.
>
> > You say "I just choose to live in the here and now and time and tides take care of the past." But you also say that you don't deny what happened to you in the past or minimize it. You just choose not to dwell on it. And that anyone can choose to do what you did.
>
> <<< I could add to that but I will go back in my corner and re-hook my leash and be good..., and quiet. You said it so much better than I ever did!
>
> > So my overall view of your message is that you think we choose to feel the way we do now, and we can choose to feel differently if we wish. That we are indulging our child selves and not choosing to live with the freedom an adult self would have.
>
> <<< My dear sweet (((Dinah)))... Thanks for the lesson on how to say my stuff!!! Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!
>
> > That we should quit indulging ourselves and each other and start making better choices about how to feel. To choose to leave the past in the past. To accept what happened to us, but to choose to leave it in the past where it belongs. To start thinking and behaving like adults.
>
> <<< Can I interest you in becoming my editor. I promise not to post at Babble without your approval if you do!......lol
>
OK, since I have feedback that I indeed do understand your message, just let me say this. You do not believe in allowing others to shame us, right? And yet your message is based on the concept that if we do not let go of the pain, it's because we're choosing to hang on to it. It's our *choice* to feel the way we do. And yet most of us have tried our best *not* to feel bad. We've made the choice over and over again to feel differently. Some of us, like me, have even succeeded. I managed to choose not to feel the way I felt. I chose to feel differently. Yet the self built on those choices eventually crumbled, because *I* (and I'm only speaking for myself - not you or your successful clients) couldn't sustain improvement based on choice. When I read your words, I sometimes feel shame that I wasn't stronger and able to maintain an edifice built on will and choice and intellect. Yet I truly do accept your message that I shouldn't allow someone else to shame me. Which means that I have to reject the message that I could have done better if I tried hard enough. If I *chose* hard enough.> <<< I sense that effort must be honored and conserved (not wasted). Results leans toward doing just those two things. If we seek results instead of comfort, effort is not wasted on placation habits
If you truly believe that effort must be honored and not wasted, wouldn't it be better to direct your message to those who wish to receive it? Those who would receive it as the empowering message you intend it to be, and not the shaming message that many people read into it? Don't you think it would be a great conservation of effort to ask people if they'd rather hear a placating answer or a direct answer in accordance with your coaching techniques? I for one would happily answer "placating" (although you might want to find a more positive word for placating).
> My Life-Coaching stuff is the grail, finally, and not just the grail d'jour as TA became for many.
I understand that that is what you believe. I hope that you and your clients have great success with it. I hope that you are able to help millions with it. And I'm glad that you respect that it isn't the grail for me.
Posted by AuntieMel on August 11, 2004, at 14:41:41
In reply to Re: Re: First let me... » ((((((((Dinah)))))))), posted by 64bowtie on August 11, 2004, at 3:38:31
On the issue of choice. I think everyone here has *chosen* to get better and not have the memories and what others would call *faulty* thinking.
But it's not as easy as choosing what cereal to have for breakfast, and it's a harder thing for some than for others to obtain results.
And the definition of 'results' is subjective, too. For some it may mean walking away from therapy whistling a tune, content with the new self.
For others it is something more basic like not dissolving into a quivering mass of jello when hearing certain things that bring painful feelings.
It's the HOW that can't be one-size-fits-all.
Posted by Shadowplayers721 on August 11, 2004, at 15:12:28
In reply to the intentions?, posted by Shadowplayers721 on August 10, 2004, at 12:56:41
Posted by fallsfall on August 11, 2004, at 16:55:47
In reply to All right then. Since I understand... » 64bowtie, posted by Dinah on August 11, 2004, at 11:44:42
Dinah,
Will you be my therapist, please? What I really want to hear from him is that he understands what I am trying to tell him. He doesn't have to agree with it, but I do wish that he could understand. Once I knew he understood, then we could discuss the assumptions that we both base our thinking on, and maybe we would get somewhere. But until I know that he understands I feel like I have to keep explaining it.
This is such hard work for us to be doing - and I do hope that at some point we will be successful. I also understand that my *need* for him to understand before I can talk about the assumptions is something that I would be happier if I could change.
Being understood is a wonderful gift.
Posted by Dinah on August 11, 2004, at 20:24:02
In reply to Re: All right then. Since I understand... » Dinah, posted by fallsfall on August 11, 2004, at 16:55:47
I told you you'd like my therapist. ;) I think I *am* internalizing him.
Yes, feeling heard and understood *is* a wonderful experience. It's something my therapist does a lot of, even if he frequently disagrees with all or part of what he's understood. lol.
Next to his flexibility it's my favorite quality about him. But we've been at this for nine years, and the first three or four weren't at all like that. There's still plenty of time for your therapist to "get" you.
(((Falls)))
Posted by 64bowtie on August 12, 2004, at 3:18:52
In reply to Re: All right then. Since I understand... » fallsfall, posted by Dinah on August 11, 2004, at 20:24:02
Posted by Dr. Bob on August 12, 2004, at 3:49:42
In reply to Re: Re: First let me... » ((((((((Dinah)))))))), posted by 64bowtie on August 11, 2004, at 3:38:31
> Many Babblers have a phobia against thinking
Please don't jump to conclusions about others or post anything that could lead them to feel accused or put down.
The last time you were blocked, it was for 2 weeks, so this time I'm making it for 4.
Anyone who has questions about this or about posting policies in general, or who is interested in alternative ways of expressing themselves, should see the FAQ:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
Also, follow-ups regarding these issues should be redirected to Psycho-Babble Administration.
Thanks,
Bob
Posted by JenStar on August 13, 2004, at 11:11:22
In reply to Re: Re: First let me... » ((((((((Dinah)))))))), posted by 64bowtie on August 11, 2004, at 3:38:31
hi Rod,
I don't think your ideas are confined to 'life coaching' -- a book on therapy I was reading lately seemed to echo this philosphy, albeit in gentler words:You wrote:
"Like I've said many times in many posts, I hear cogniphobia! Many Babblers have a phobia against thinking; seeing themselves as they are in their mind's eye, and accepting what they see. I can't see any reference equating phobias to pathology. Cancer is pathological. Phobias are faulty beliefs based on flawed information, being enacted out physically, much to the clients discomfort and despair. When confronted about their fear of thinking is done successfully, phobics overturn years and decades of conflictedness and confusion within minutes. I have witnessed hundreds of successful encounters and done a few myself, where the conditions were right. Pathologies like those of a Charles Manson or a Jeffry Daumer, don't get fixed by coaching"
A book I read recently reminds me of your ideas. It's called Reality Therapy in Action by William Glasser, M.D. Glasser believes that many serious psych issues can be 'cured' by helping the client see that they have choices and that they are not trapped into a cycle of chronic behavior. He cites examples of how he helps correct people with OCD, who hear voices, suffer from alcoholism without drugs.
He does also posit that relationships are the basis for many issues, but what interested me most was his emphasis on personal choice and how you can overcome many 'pathologies' with different actions, mindset and choices. He DOES say "in fine print" (so to speak!) that there are some things that cannot be fixed through choice & talk alone, but he chooses to focus on the things that CAN.
Have you read this author? What do you think about him? Am I right in finding similarities between your ideas and his?
ON the one hand I found the book sort of inspirational and "bootstrappy" -- reminds me that I have choices and I am actually choosing some of my more destructive and depressing behaviors, even if it's easier to believe that I'm "locked in" and can't change them. On the other hand, I felt he kind of took it too far and didn't give enough credit to 'broken brains' and their difficulty in getting fixed.
I have to say, though, that I did initially feel a bit offended when I read your line about "cogniphobia" here in babble-land. I don't believe it's a phobia, exactly -- more of a basic human nature trait to stick to the comfortable and the known. A lot of people here are genuinely trying to work on issues, and struggling to make progress, and I think it feels a bit demoralizing to have the struggle trivialized or marginalized, categorized as a blindness.
I think some of the deeper psych issues -- whether they are actual pathology or just a lifetime of choices that have solidified into a way of life -- make it very hard to 'choose' mental health and sunshine, even if we logically want to and know we should.
Do you REALLY think it's congiphobia? Really? Or were you just using that word b/c it comes close to describing us, and because kind of sounds cool... (it IS a cool word!)
Anyway, I believe you got blocked for using "cogniphobia" but when you return I would really be interested in hearing your thoughts.
Yours in thought...
JenStar
Posted by AuntieMel on August 13, 2004, at 15:51:48
In reply to Re: Re: First let me... please read, Rod! » 64bowtie, posted by JenStar on August 13, 2004, at 11:11:22
As much as I miss talking to Rod, this is at least one block that I can understand within the PBC rules.
It wasn't the 'cogniphobia' part of it, it was the 'Many Babblers have a phobia' which, by the rules could cause someone to feel accused.
It's fires' block that I can't seem to get a complete explanation of. It was called deemed 'jumping to conclusions about others' and 'insensitive' when he seemed to me to be just excited about a bunch of psychologists causing a rucus at a convention by saying things that fires had also believed.
Maybe Dr. Bob is right - I just want to know why it was blockable when that was what the whole thread was talking about anyway.
Time for a weekend, me thinks. Maybe laying slate tiles this weekend will help put things in perspective.
Mel
Posted by Larry Hoover on August 20, 2004, at 13:23:04
In reply to Bootstrap? Bootstrap Method?, posted by 64bowtie on August 9, 2004, at 2:49:17
I waited a while to answer to this post, well, for a couple reasons, but the main one was I wanted to understand why reading it raised my emotions. I think I know, now.
> That said, why would I stoop to that level? Why would I be arrogant, aloof, insensative, detached, and condescending and remain here?
I can't imagine why you would even ask the questions themselves. I am mystified. Can you better explain your intention?
> My motives, feelings, and behaviors have been to inject
There's one of the emotional words....none too subtle....
> results orientation
....presupposes the orientation of others?
> where I find placation oriented discussions that historically turn a blind eye to anything unfamiliar.
Raises a false dilemma. I don't see that the critical factor is familiarity. Also assumes characteristics of others.
> So, I'm unfamiliar. Doesn't mean I'm bad or corrupt or to be avoided.
Shakespeare said, "Methinks she (or he, as the case may be) doth protest too much." It seems you defend, when you are trying to explain. Why?
Again, the issue isn't (un)familiarity.
> Please don't say I'm wrong outright. I am just parachuting in with knowledge and success that is off many radar screens. Perhaps I have information you don't even know that you don't even know that you can't even guess at.
Perhaps. Or something not relevant? Are there other possibilities to consider?
> There is continuing scrambling to push me in to categories this way and that, probably because I threaten stability in an already unstable environment. I'm not whining, wah, wah, wah.
When one comes across a sentence such as this one, it implies a comparison with an unknown but inferred group or individual. Who *is* whining, and going wah, wah, wah?
> I am asking for information from everybody.
Somehow, that question arises as a novel concept in the context of what I've already read.
> Is bootstrap a valuable label to you, or a derogation of my intentions, or something else, or nothing at all?
The key question, I suppose, though really four questions in one. Each answered separately, below.
1. No. If bootstrap was all I had to do, I'd have done it long ago. Quite to the contrary, inappropriately bootstrapping myself has caused me substantial grief and disability. There are times when bootstrapping is the wrong tactic, and for some, it may never be appropriate, ever again.
2. I am unclear of your intentions, and I do not know how your own theory derogates (sic) your intentions. I'm not even sure what you're asking.
3. It may be appropriate to some of the people some of the time.
4. It is only nothing to those who already do it, and never knew there was another realm of existence.Lar
Posted by 64Bowtie on September 13, 2004, at 0:08:42
In reply to Re: Re: Bootstrap stuff » tabitha, posted by 64Bowtie on August 10, 2004, at 3:30:27
Lar,
Thanx for being patient. I heated up a portion of the site and Dr. Bob does what it takes to cool things off. I'm not dodging the issues you thoughtfully addressed. I'm just dropping a quick line for now and will take them one at a time later this week. Hope you will be patient with me.
I'm not very concerned about the bootstrapping accusations like it may have sounded that I was. I was mostly confused about how I could say "X" and it was interpretted and evaluated as "Y" and "bad". I was trying toooo hard when Dr. Bob needed to cool things down. I realize that my frenetic postings seeking acceptance and understanding were no darn good for anyone.
To clear up one point: I have no interest in promoting a scheme involving "pulling one's self together by their bootstraps". Is that final enough??? I was accused of that and I overreacted to the accusation. What a mess that all caused!
Lar, I am not replacing any therapy for anyone at anytime. Because of the sharing here at Babble, I have a much better and clearer sense of who can use therapy and when. I admit, in 20-20 hindsight, I was confused on that issue. I am pleased to say That I am better grounded now. Thankfully, I won't attempt to coach folks who clearly can better benefit from good therapy. I might have bit off more than I could chew before. What I will do is encourage them to pay close attention to their therapy process, get some wellness, and let me help them from that point, if they choose.
Believe me, please. I see myself in many posts from various Babblers, only 20 to 25 years ago. I was a mess! Today, here I am! Take from whatever I have become. Once you've gone on the path to wellness, you can then coach others. I do.
Hope we are OK for now...
Rod
Posted by 64Bowtie on September 13, 2004, at 1:58:56
In reply to Re: Re: First let me... please read, Rod! » 64bowtie, posted by JenStar on August 13, 2004, at 11:11:22
Jenstar,
> I don't think your ideas are confined to 'life coaching' -- a book on therapy I was reading lately seemed to echo this philosphy, albeit in gentler words...
>
<<< Thanx for your post... I hope I don't come across defensive... I hear you relating the theorys of a certified therapist. He employees his theorys inside his practice. I never use my theorys to do therapy, ever. I am motivated by my theorys to develop awareness of tools in clients. I may argue from a point of view that these are good reasons for using certain tools. The client uses the tools to help themselves and will be able to use these tools for the rest of their lives, whether working with a therapist or not. These are all common sense abilities, I just remind folks that they have them and can use them, and when. I don't "vacuum clean" the bad stuff people seem to feel stuck to. That's a good job for a therapist, not my job.> You wrote:
>
> "Like I've said many times in many posts, I hear cogniphobia!
><<< Whether anyone wants to give me credit or not, I invented the term "cogni-phobia" in the year 1999 in my writings. I noticed that there is a common thread through all phobias in that phobics are more afraid to think about the uncomfortable feelings than they seem to be when confronted with the actual scarey occurrence. I deduced that "cogni-phobia" is sort of a grandfather phobia underlying all other phobias. Once you confront the scarey feelings in a safe place with guided imagery, the scarey feelings are reported to suddenly seem silly. I as a coach don't trivialise the awfull feelings, the client suddenly does it on their own. This is an awakening; an epiphany for the client. They do it. I don't.
> Many Babblers have a phobia against thinking;
<<< This is where I overstepped the bounds set by Dr. Bob. I did it to myself and got blocked. Maybe I would have gotten smartenned-up by a one or two week block, Dr Bob has his system, and I accept his judgement.
> ...seeing themselves as they are in their mind's eye, and accepting what they see. I can't see any reference equating phobias to pathology. Cancer is pathological. Phobias are faulty beliefs based on flawed information, being enacted out physically, much to the clients discomfort and despair. When confronted about their fear of thinking is done successfully, phobics overturn years and decades of conflictedness and confusion within minutes. I have witnessed hundreds of successful encounters and done a few myself, where the conditions were right. Pathologies like those of a Charles Manson or a Jeffry Daumer, don't get fixed by coaching"
><<< Unfortunately this part was overlooked, which cleans up my mistake.
> A book I read recently reminds me of your ideas. It's called Reality Therapy in Action by William Glasser, M.D. Glasser believes that many serious psych issues can be 'cured' by helping the client see that they have choices and that they are not trapped into a cycle of chronic behavior. He cites examples of how he helps correct people with OCD, who hear voices, suffer from alcoholism without drugs.
> He does also posit that relationships are the basis for many issues, but what interested me most was his emphasis on personal choice and how you can overcome many 'pathologies' with different actions, mindset and choices. He DOES say "in fine print" (so to speak!) that there are some things that cannot be fixed through choice & talk alone, but he chooses to focus on the things that CAN.
>
<<< Do you think therapists have an exclusive right to techniques of this kind or that? Can I borrow the motive to encourage the client without employing the proceedure and not be guilty of therapy?> Have you read this author?
<<< Not yet...> What do you think about him?
<<< ???> Am I right in finding similarities between your ideas and his?
<<< I hope I've provided the clues...> ON the one hand I found the book sort of inspirational and "bootstrappy"
<<< He may be "bootsrtappy". Please don't lump me with him.> -- reminds me that I have choices and I am actually choosing some of my more destructive and depressing behaviors, even if it's easier to believe that I'm "locked in" and can't change them. On the other hand, I felt he kind of took it too far and didn't give enough credit to 'broken brains' and their difficulty in getting fixed.
>
> I have to say, though, that I did initially feel a bit offended when I read your line about "cogniphobia" here in babble-land. I don't believe it's a phobia, exactly -- more of a basic human nature trait to stick to the comfortable and the known.
<<< I invented the term for a specific trait which is not comfort seeking, but more general avoidance.>A lot of people here are genuinely trying to work on issues, and struggling to make progress, and I think it feels a bit demoralizing to have the struggle trivialized or marginalized, categorized as a blindness.
>
> I think some of the deeper psych issues -- whether they are actual pathology or just a lifetime of choices that have solidified into a way of life -- make it very hard to 'choose' mental health and sunshine, even if we logically want to and know we should.
>
> Do you REALLY think it's congiphobia? Really? Or were you just using that word b/c it comes close to describing us, and because kind of sounds cool... (it IS a cool word!)
>
> Anyway, I believe you got blocked for using "cogniphobia"
<<< I got blocked for alluding to Babblers doing it. If I had used some other universe category of folks, I probably wouldn't have been blocked.> but when you return I would really be interested in hearing your thoughts.
>
> Yours in thought...
> JenStar
>
<<< Here I is, Jenstar!Rod
Posted by JenStar on September 13, 2004, at 10:49:29
In reply to » JenStar » Re: Re: bootstrappy???, posted by 64Bowtie on September 13, 2004, at 1:58:56
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Psychology | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.