I hardly think of Cleopatra, the Virgin Mary or Elizabeth I (etc.) as having a limited role in their society, however. HuffingtonPost has a current article about the increasing unhappiness of women- post militant, liberated feminists- in contrast to a much happier male- as time/years go by although health issues weren't mentioned and I would posit women have an edge in that department. I think therapy stepped in as a form of religion in modern times- instead of being a sinner one was screwed up; the therapist took on the role of the priest/ confession and one's ego and dramatic changes became a petite god issuing absolutions. It turns out having control over one's reproductive/sexual functions has liberated no one nor turned out happier families/relationships. As we cared for parents, husbands, lovers, children and ran mini-dynasties of well-ordered homes and gardens, checked off domestic arts and skills with talent and grace, kept our looks and body parts in tact, our mind and curiousity sharp- the toughest order was freedom- probably an existential threat. Plus women have an historical reputation for envy and competition based on different standards than males and entrance into the public, professional world of men has not really changed that. An older ugly man with money/power will always trump an older woman but one has to wonder who has the last laugh sometimes.// One bothersome thing about therapists and many doctors is their over-generous, often dangerous prescriptions which is really a newcomer to the human system. Add enviornmental issues, poor food safety, modern stress, continued abuse and enslavement of women in some societies, etc. and it's no wonder that the overall picture of women is disturbing. Oh- there's more...:-) lol
On Sep 18, 5:00 am, Justintruth <[email protected]> wrote: > Maybe its the lobotomies or electroshock or peri-haldol that was beingty > administered back then when the term was coined, or perhaps it was the > way they interpreted the dissatisfaction of women with their limited > role in society as being a sign of neurosis instead of a lack of > liberation. Or was it the doors that lock from the outside. Or was it > they way the represented the foundation of their discipline as > scientifically valid and as a valid basis for treatment - their > "freudian theories"? Or was it simply the lack of results? Or maybe > its because of the fees they charged? > > The truth is that often therapy does not work but hey... you must have > heard it I know but.... the difference between a neurotic, a psychotic > and a psychiatrist? The first builds castles in the air, the second > lives in them, and the last collects the rent? > > ... some therapists did good work but at the time that phrase was > coined there was a lot of very bad therapy... > > 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 by a net force, a > > > > body at rest stays at rest, and a moving body continues moving at the > > > > same speed in the same straight line (direction)”. Now to me, that > > > > just screamed out “That is the Western scientific version of the > > gunas > > > > of Hinduism”. Vam, I expect, may want to set me straight here with > > > > respect to a few details I gloss over, as his knowledge of Hinduism > > > > far exceeds mine, but, I’ll describe this as I see it. The three > > > > gunas are: Sattva, Rajas and Tamas. They are spiritual qualities/ > > > > forces that, together, express the ‘net spiritual forces’ that affect > > > > us. Sattva is usually depicted as simple (!), clarity of mind,=2 > > 0Rajas > > > > as a disruptive, disturbing influence and Tamas as dullness and > > > > lethargy. In this analogy, I see Sattva as representing an > > > > individual’s truest sense of self, their own unsullied consciousness, > > > > and Rajas (the general disruptive, interactive force) and Tamas > > > > (spiritual inertia), is how one i > > ndividual experiences another > > > > individual’s Sattva. Whilst it is true that one can be affected by > > > > another’s Sattva, it is harmonic enough as to not distress the soul > > as > > > > do the other forces of R > > ajas and Tamas. Tamas is what keeps a > > > > depressed person depressed and why it’s harder to motivate a > > depressed > > > > individual than one who is not depressed. So, too, a mind/soul filled > > > > with Tamas will tend to remain at rest (and depressed and slothful > > > > and, in extreme cases with the right combination of Rajas, self- > > > > harming) until acted upon by sufficient Rajas (and/or Sattva [but it > > > > takes more Rajas at first!]) such that it can, once again, achieve > > its > > > > own Sattva. Too much Rajas can make an individual aggressive, like a > > > > bull in a china shop and is what keeps the manic, manic. Sattva is > > > > the quiet forward motion with no external forces impinging on it. > > (Too > > > > much Sattva usually leads to moksha and is not considered > > > > problematic!) > > > > So, to paraphrase Newton’s first Law: A (more) Tamasic soul will > > > > tend t > > o remain Tamasic until acted upon by Rajas (and/or Sattva) and a > > > > (more) Sattvic soul will continue to be Sattvic until acted upon by > > > > Rajas (and/or Tamas). (I inserted the word ‘more’ in there to denote > > > > that20each soul is, in most but the rarest of cases, comprised, to > > some > > > > extent, of all three gunas.) And, we have a sound spiritual concept > > > >20(that’s been recognised by Hindus for millennia) that is an almost > > > > perfect corollary to Newton’s first Law. > > > > Looked at another way—probably Newton’s alchemical way—Sattva > > > > becomes Salt, that perfect combination of opposing (with respect to > > > > charge) elements that forms a > > > ... > > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
