We are undoubtedly too ill Orn, as are the bees. Greed, not necessarily individual greed, seems a good candidate on cause.
On 17 Sep, 16:05, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > “…Which makes me wonder if anyone is able to give a reasonable answer > to the perplexing issue as to why psychotherapists and psychoanalysts > were saddled with the not so flattering term of "shrinks." ….” – gibbs > > shrink > O.E. scrincan (class III strong verb; past tense scranc, pp. > scruncen), from P.Gmc. *skrenkanan (cf. M.Du. schrinken), probably > from PIE base *(s)ker- "to turn, bend." Originally with causal shrench > (cf. drink/drench). The meaning "draw back, recoil" (c.1300) perhaps > was suggested by the behavior of snails. The slang sense of > "psychiatrist" is first recorded 1966, from head-shrinker (1950). > Shrink-wrap is attested from 1961. > > http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=shrink&searchmode=none > > Again, my guess is that you know the origin of the term as well as the > associations with how a shrunken head was prepared including the > cutting open and subsequent boiling of the head and later > reconstruction to something similar in appearance to the original yet > a clearly changed head. Oh, and I have no doubt that the head was the > focus of attention when it came to psychoanalysis because most people > hold the belief that it is the locus of ‘self’. > > And, to assign a ‘poor experience’ to anyone who uses colloquialisms > along with having a personal view of the ethics involved your > profession, to me, expresses the underlying ignorance and associated > defensiveness found therein. While such an attitude of derision > against ‘shrinks’ could have been founded upon mere prejudice and lack > of good or even any experiences, and while at least one in four of us > here in the US will suffer from mental illness at some time this > lifetime, the western model of the human psyche is perceived by many, > me included, as a hodgepodge consisting mostly of superstition, > mythology and ignorance. And, all too often produces no positive > results. > > Yes, having a counselor can lead to greater health…agreed. And, all > too often reliance upon Big Pharma is the mode of the day rather than > a coherent approach based upon a true understanding of what it is to > be a human being. Oh, don’t get me wrong, I assign a similar ignorance > to the population in general too, not just those who have studied > specific theories and methods of practice. Also, it is my > understanding that you are not one who is allowed to dispense drugs > and you may be very effective. I don’t know. > > On Sep 17, 6:13 am, [email protected] wrote: > > > > > Them is fightn words. I imagine you miust have had a poor experience with > > one of those you > > > refer to as shrinks. Which makes me wonder if anyone is able to give a > > reasonable answer to the perplexing issue as to why > > > psychotherapists and psychoanalysts were saddled with the not so flattering > > term of "shrinks." > > > The truth is - when therapy works - it always expands not contracts. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: rigsy03 <[email protected]> > > To: "Minds Eye" <[email protected]> > > Sent: Thu, Sep 17, 2009 6:49 am > > Subject: [Mind's Eye] Re: Newton's Spiritual Laws of Motion... > > > he healer is already in place- one's rational mind/brain. I tend to > > hink of shrinks as snake-oil salesmen. But that is a different topic, > > sn't it? > > On Sep 17, 12:55 am, [email protected] wrote: > > I believe that every one should work on forging a solid identity. I like > > what > > oseph Cambell has to say about this in his book The Hero with a Thousand > > Faces. > > e says the modern hero is a person who dares to take a trip into his or her > > nner space, identifies their inevitable splits and dedicates themselves to > > econcilling them. Any one can do this but patients have the added advantage > > of > > opefully having a relatively objective guide. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: ornamentalmind <[email protected]> > > To: "Minds Eye" <[email protected]> > > Sent: Wed, Sep 16, 2009 3:06 am > > Subject: [Mind's Eye] Re: Newton's Spiritual Laws of Motion... > > > ibbs, do you also believe that non-patients should/n > > eed to work on > > forging a solid identity...'? > > hanks. > > On Sep 15, 7:42 pm, [email protected] wrote: > > I believe that science and spirituality can mix in the process of a > > patient > > orking on forging a solid identity if by spirtuality is meant connecting > > with > > asic 'spiritual' concepts of faith, hope, trust. love and persistence all > > ssociated with the consciousness of a one year old child. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Vam <[email protected]> > > To: "Minds Eye" <[email protected]> > > Sent: Tue, Sep 15, 2009 10:24 pm > > Subject: [Mind's Eye] Re: Newton's Spiritual Laws of Motion... > > > ustin is right, elsewhere, when he says that mixing religion or > > pirituality and science belittles both. Not because they cannot be > > rought together in the same frame but, in my view, because it calls > > or an > > extreme sharpness to learn in one and apply in the other, > > nterchangeably, all the way, untill there remains just one. > > Sadly, Neil, your post merely follows the stereotypical mode : > > eligion vs science. It adds nothing and only seems like one more > > ailing against. I can see you are ' for ' ' something,' but with such > > hought patterns I believe you may be doing no good to your cause, > > hatever it is ! The methodology ( to me, today ) seems extremely > > egressive. Entertaining ? Perhaps, to one who is looking for that. > > I hope you get the job in Dubai. I know it would change your life > > 20 uch, for the better. But, you ? > > > n Sep 16, 4:18 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > Science has overturned many fables (though not necessarily the power > > of fable) - I often wonder how we might expose the liturgies > > of > > capitalism for what they are and thus discover what was working given > > that it wasn't. Instead the bwanking priests are still blackmailing > > us along old religious lines - if we don't pay their ransom (tithe) > > they won't do the chanting that ensures our prosperity. They are > > saying this to us even after all their runes and litanies have just > > failed and we have had to empty our social confers to save them. What > > we haven't done is formulated a science of living without their magic > > wand. I actually think Pat is wrong here, though one can see in Vam's > > exegesis notions of f > > orces very familiar in relational physics. > > Physics was never my bag, but my colleagues in it always seemed the > > most religious and inclined to a certain rhythm even if even more > > appalling social misfits than I. These days they are seeking all > > kinds of Indian rhythmic mathematics to see if it somehow sways in > > harmony with the universe they can prod. Even quarks sound like > > mystical history - originally 6 there are now just two, clinging > > together because they are so=2 > > 0much more attractive to each other when > > apart. Bwankers in sack-cloth and ashes and worker control of capital > > through government directly and openly consulting the people - now > > there's something to pray for. > > > On 15 Sep, 17:54, Vam <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Gunas are fundamental to Sankhya philosophy, also termed Sankhya Yoga. > > > Krishna himself says in Bhagwat Gita that, among all yogas,=2 > > 0he is > > > Sankhya Yoga. And, among all yogis, he is Kapil muni, the stalwart > > > Sankhya yogi. > > > > Gunas takes our realisation of our self beyond the ego, where most of > > > our understanding stops, for the ego is nothing but constituted of > > > gunas. > > > > Even Prakriti, the nature both primordial and individuated, is nothing > > > but constituted of gunas. Only Purusha, or the Witness - Self, is not. > > > > The most popular and well - known of all yogas, Patanjal Yoga, is > > > entirely based of Sankhy > > a principles. > > > > There is never, without exception, when all three gunas are not > > > present in any being or thing. Only occassions when one may > > > predominate, while the other two are dormant or attenuated. By one's > > > choice of realisation, and in thought and action, one may cause the > > > predomination of one. > > > > In Prakriti, or the penultimate realisation, all three gunas are=2 > > 0in > > > complete balance, annulling the effect of each other. > > > > Each guna becomes a means to liberation, in correspondingly > > > appropriate situations. > > > > On Sep 15, 4:32 pm, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > When I got home last night, it dawned on me that Sir Isaac > > > > Newton’s main goal and deepest interest was to discover how spirit > > and > > > > the universe interact; which is why a huge percentage of his writings > > > > were alchemical—the scientific findings were, more or less, a by- > > > > product of his overall search for a Theory of E > > verything, which would, > > > > necessarily, include spiritual phenomena. I then had the thought > > > > that, perhaps he had intended his ‘Laws of Motion’ not just to > > include > > > > physical bodies, but spiritual bodies, as well. Now, his laws have > > > > been expressed in many ways, but, at home (which is where I am at the > > > > moment of writing this), the only book that I found (I’m s > > ure there > > > > are a couple more, but I couldn’t find them and went with what I > > found > > > > first) that has them listed is ‘The Hutchison Encyclopaedia—1997’, > > not > > > > the best source, but, I think, it’s good enough. > > > > The first law states that 0unless acted upon > > ... > > read more » --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
