Showing posts with label Psychology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Psychology. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 16, 2016

Freudian Slippage

Overheard at Lem's:



Trooper York said...
DBQ if you want to put it in Western Terms then Reince is Ransome Stoddard. Bannon is Tom Doniphon. Only this time he is going to get the girl.
Trooper York said...
To put it in psychological terms:

Reince is Trump's ego.

Bannon is Trump's id.

_______________

I beg your pardon? This equates Reince/Ransome as the Ego and Bannon/Doniphon as the Id.
Two wrongs in my book.

My understanding of Freud's original construct is:

More here

In that sketch, the "Environment" is the so-called Super-Ego -- the collective do-gooding force...the Church & the Law, etc. The Super-Ego informs the Ego from above; the Id impels the Ego from below.

Another view is the familiar meme:

Link to original

In that sketch, the devil (Id) and the angel (Super-Ego) inform the Ego.

In the film The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, the Id, the Ego, and the Super Ego of the Old West are portrayed by Liberty Valance, Tom Doniphon, and Ransome Stoddard respectively. Valance is irrational, impulsive, and entirely self-interested; Stoddard personifies The Law and Rules and is the Super-Ego. Tom Doniphon mediates the two forces and is the Ego.

The Ego is often derided as a bad thing: "Oh he's so egotistical." How did modern culture so lose sight of Freud's original intent? The Ego is not the selfish Id, nor is it the selfless Super-Ego.

To circle back and to correct Troop's analogy: Bannon is the bad-boy Id and Reince is the good-boy Super-Ego.

Donald Trump is caught between them; he is The Ego -- but you knew that already.

Tuesday, August 23, 2016

Amazon gift (surreptitious)

Have you by chance or by choice any incorrigible unreachable acquaintances stuck in their anachronistic political ways? The world changes but they remain steady. Say, by way of example, dead set and quite ossified, petrified, in inflexible political opinion? Say, by way of extending this example opinion formed in their callow youth and left unchecked and through blithe intellectual laziness left unchallenged as life goes on even so long as through their middle age? And even up to their senior years? And say, by comparison then, so stuck and so rock hard loyal as an average Bronco football fan or an average Red Sox baseball fan, or worse, both, harboring an ironclad sorely displaced loyalty so irrational that it can be characterized by and understood as prideful human stubbornness pure and simple? Resolutely unteachable?

Don't we all? And isn't it frustrating, maddeningly infuriating?

Of course it is.

Be of good cheer, there is a way out. For yourself, not for them. There are means to strike back. There are ways available to chip at the rock.

The idea is subversive.


Arizona Highways showed photographs of the petrified forest and gave me this idea. I did not think this up on my own. I awoke from a dream that told me to do this. 

What happens is the ground underneath the petrified logs erodes over time and the rock trees cannot support their own weight so they break into pieces. *ding* Dig underneath. 

Nothing you can say will change your acquaintance's mind. The knowledge you hold is met with their impervious hardened stubbornness, a matter of personal psychological pride that is actually strengthened and hardened by challenges. Such is human nature. They actually grin and smile with assurance your attempts are feeble compared to their proven record. You are contributing to their record and that gives them irrational pleasure.

"Here they go again, and here I go again." 

It is possible even that they happen to be too thick to read on important matters and politically carry on as children while maturing otherwise, and behaving sensibly in all other areas. So they are shown to be reachable, shown teachable, but not by you and not on political matters. They will read seriously only the things they select for themselves that conform to their particular selected political ... geology. 

They will not read Clinton Cash if you sent them a copy. Too many words, and too hard of a task for something they don't select for themselves. But they might flip through a comic book sent them anonymously. And Amazon allows you to do that. 

Here's how.

Clinton Cash is available in graphic novel form for dummkopfs. I meant to say just now, for people who prefer that way of grasping a subject. 

Buy an Amazon e-gift card for yourself to your own email and in excess of the amount of the book and send the graphic novel to them as a gift. 

To do this precisely, first add their mailing address to your Amazon list of addresses. To get the precise amount needed, on the Amazon page for the book check add the book to your cart and process part way, most of the way, to the point where Amazon calculates shipping and tax then back out and delete the book from your cart. So now you know the full amount needed for your new e-gift card specific for this purpose. Even if you already have a gift balance, you will now have a new one with a new code, although the amount is added to your total. 

*warning* If you underestimate the amount then Amazon will automatically draw from your credit card and your cover may be blown (or maybe not). Best to make sure you have the full amount covered so that no additional information appears.  

Amazon will email you confirming your purchase of eGift card.
Amazon will email you again with the number of the gift card. This is the number used for payment.

Go back to the book page on Amazon. 

Check the tiny unobtrusive box "This is a gift"  

Click "Add to Cart"  and process the order.

A new page appears, click "Proceed to checkout" 

You'll be prompted to send the book to your own address at the top of a list. Change it to the new address that you added at the bottom of the list. Click "Use this address." 

A new page appears with their address at the top. Make sure this is so or else the book will be sent to you. 

On that page you'll be prompted to pay the usual way. Instead use the box with words inside it "Add a gift card or promotion code" Enter the card number that Amazon sent you in their second email. 

A new page appears confirming this information. Lower on the page a new box appears "Add a gift receipt" Click it and a message appears

Hi  _____
Enjoy your gift! 
From your name. 

Erase the message. Unless you decide to change it to something like "Flip through this you silly dummkopf" or something similar in your own words. Maybe best to erase it and leave the message blank. 

Amazon will email you again telling you the order is processed. Check it to make sure all is right by you. 

The idea of this gift option at Amazon is to avoid having a receipt printed and shipped with the gift amount printed on it. While your interest may be to not print the sender. Not because you are mean-spirited, rather, because you know in advance information from you on political things will be automatically rejected by petrified stubbornness. It's a way to chip at the block. Who can resist at least flipping through? And it's likely to fail. But at least  it will make you feel a little bit better. 

Better living through modern psychology. That is all. This whole thing is actually a gift for yourself to make you feel a little bit better. Not for them. If they manage to get anything out of it then fine. But don't expect any real changes when your history with them shows that is not possible. At least you gave it a shot. In fact, Amazon might blow your cover and your acquaintance might become cross with you. But who cares? Let 'em, when they've been pissing you off all along. This is just a technique to counter obstinacy. 

A bit of psyops, as it were. And that's all. 

Sunday, August 7, 2016

Mr. Psychologist, I had another bad dream.

A nightmare?

Not really. But as close to that they come. Yes, a nightmare I suppose. They’re horrible. Another with a recurring theme that seems to indicate an unsettled problem illustrated wildly again. It has an impact emotionally. I don’t like it and I don’t see any satisfactory ending. I don’t see what I can change in myself to end this. 

What happens in this dream, in these type of dreams?

I’m with somebody I that I know, both male and female, and we go someplace to participate in something together. It is an innocent outing. Sometimes just a party. Sometimes an event of some kind. Once there I’m abandoned to the crowd. Separated, I’m not concerned with the person having more fun than I am. I’m concerned about the person or people consciously ditching me for whatever reason they have. Mostly preferring not being with me, doing something there without me, because it's more fun for them without me.  Now, within the crowd of people moving around going somewhere doing something that is not fully understood, I can hear the voice of the person or people I am separated from within the crowd, but cannot catch up, cannot rejoin them. And if I do then they ditch me again. Because their mobility is greater than my own and because they are purposefully ditching me. 

As the dream progresses the crowd of people are wholly indifferent, the separation becomes greater as it goes, the frustration more intense, my movement through a crowd or through the landscape or citiyscape, sometimes only a single house, becomes increasing difficult for various reasons. Even abandoning the project, returning home becomes more and more impossible by logistics or physical difficulty until eventually I’m forced awake, frustrated, angry, and deeply saddened all over again. And it’s a very poor way to start out the morning overcoming sadness, reliving the frustration, dealing with psychological anger about a projection that is entirely mental. And I see no real life solution. It appears I am vexed permanently with a feeling of being ditched, of abandonment, and of frustration. 

I HATE people leaving me. It is a deeply personal psychological wound. Even when it's a dream because the dream does overlap what is real. It does illustrate the real thing. 

The same thing does happen in real life and I hate it when it does. It affects relationships poorly.  

How does this make you feel? 

I just told you. Now I'm disgusted. I’m leaving! 

I think I might see a clue to your problem.

Piss off. 

Tuesday, December 1, 2015

"When we permit persons to self-select police work as their life's work, we have also invited some who might yearn to dominate, to mutilate and even to kill others"

I’m a trial lawyer. During a career of more than 60 years in the courtrooms of America defending the poor, the forgotten, the lost and the damned, I’ve shut out a haunting question: Are we safe from our own police?

This past year, the news media have drawn our focus to far-ranging, rampant police brutality. Just last week, we learned new details about the killing on Oct. 20, 2014, of Laquan McDonald, 17, a black youth who ended crumpled and dead on the streets of Chicago. His body was riddled with 16 bullets fired in about 15 seconds — 13 of those seconds, prosecutors say, while he lay prone and dying on the pavement. All the shots were fired by a single white cop while at least five other officers stood by.

...Please hear me clearly:

We need law enforcement. We want to be safe. We fear chaos and crime, and we’re willing to overlook occasional officer misconduct as the price we must pay for a predictable and safe society in which to pursue our lives. Moreover, at the outset I would be doing the police a gross disservice to argue that all officers are villainous crooks wearing a badge, and that the word “cop” and “killer” are synonymous. Such is not my belief. But what am I saying?

...When we permit persons to self-select police work as their life's work, we have also invited some who might yearn to dominate, to mutilate and even to kill others. That truth has long been recognized. What has happened in the lives of our officer candidates that causes them to seek power over others, especially over the powerless? Life-forming experiences usually come at an early age, and as adults we find ourselves still acting them out. The most conscientious law enforcement organizations now submit their candidates to rigorous testing in an attempt to identify the smiling, well presented individual who, at his or her core, is a latent killer. But any candid police department would surely have to admit that its testing provides little more than proof that it at least tried to identify and eliminate the most violent, sadistic candidates.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/11/29/killer-cops-loose-police-psychology-uncharged-murderers-column/76216998/

Wednesday, August 19, 2015

"Weird things start to happen when you stare into someone's eyes for 10 minutes"

"A psychologist based in Italy says he has found a simple way to induce in healthy people an altered state of consciousness – simply get two individuals to look into each other's eyes for 10 minutes while they are sitting in a dimly lit room. The sensations that ensue resemble mild "dissociation" – a rather vague psychological term for when people lose their normal connection with reality. It can include feeling like the world is unreal, memory loss and odd perceptual experiences, such as seeing the world in black and white."

"Giovanni Caputo recruited 20 young adults (15 women) to form pairs. Each pair sat in chairs opposite each other, one metre apart, in a large, dimly lit room. Specifically, the lighting level was 0.8 lx, which Caputo says "allowed detailed perception of the fine face traits but attenuated colour perception." The participants' task was simply to stare into each other's eyes for 10 minutes, all the while maintaining a neutral facial expression. A control group of a further 20 participants also sat in a dimly lit room in pairs, but their chairs faced the wall and they stared at the wall. Beforehand both groups were told that the study was going to involve a "meditative experience with eyes open."" (read the whole thing)

Wednesday, June 3, 2015

"Johns Hopkins Psychiatrist: Sex Change ‘Biologically Impossible’"

"Transgender is ‘Mental Disorder'"
Dr. Paul R. McHugh, the former psychiatrist-in-chief for Johns Hopkins Hospital and its current Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry, said that transgenderism is a “mental disorder” that merits treatment, that sex change is “biologically impossible,” and that people who promote sexual reassignment surgery are collaborating with and promoting a mental disorder...

He also reported on a new study showing that the suicide rate among transgendered people who had reassignment surgery is 20 times higher than the suicide rate among non-transgender people. Dr. McHugh further noted studies from Vanderbilt University and London’s Portman Clinic of children who had expressed transgender feelings but for whom, over time, 70%-80% “spontaneously lost those feelings.”...

The transgendered person’s disorder, said Dr. McHugh, is in the person’s “assumption” that they are different than the physical reality of their body, their maleness or femaleness, as assigned by nature. It is a disorder similar to a “dangerously thin” person suffering anorexia who looks in the mirror and thinks they are “overweight,” said McHugh. (read more)

Friday, August 30, 2013

How Men Have Become Less thrill-seeking, Study

The desire for adventure and thrilling activities has decreased in men over the last 35 years, according to new research.
A team from the school of psychology and neuroscience at the University of St Andrews discovered that men are less willing to take part in physical challenges such as skydiving than they used to.
The findings of the research led by Dr Kate Cross have been published in the journal Scientific Reports and was co-authored by Dr De-Laine Cyrenne and Dr Gillian Brown.
Researchers focused on the sensation-seeking personality trait which has been described by the university as the desire to pursue novel or intense experiences even if this involves risk.
A sensation seeking scale, version V (SSS-V) questionnaire was used to find out if people were willing to try various activities.
In the late 1970s more men were more likely to try parachuting, scuba diving or mountaineering than women, but over the years their desire for thrills has decreased.
The male average is now closer to the female average, backing up the argument that some sex differences in behaviour have decreased which is linked to cultural changes.

More on Sensation-Seeking...