Musings

And I vacillate between which I feel more strongly.

Two people very dear to me frequently describe themselves as a “bleeding heart liberal”. Noticing that yesterday set me off down another cognitive rabbit hole ...

Never really intended to have one, much less create it myself. But after a conversation with Lobo this morning, one fell in to my mind—and it seems practically perfect in every way.

Dear friend and fellow LRT Knight Carl Bussjaeger offered an amusing peek at some psychobabble ... and in poking around, I found the other psychotic babble, which is not so pleasant.

I’m not sure if whatever cheer you seven gain from my recent slump being so short–lived will offset my returning to a theme that some may find tiresome. Be that as it may; it’s a topic that is only going to be increasingly important unless (or until) the collapse comes.

Catching up on some blog reading lately, I came across something that was so suffused with irony I can’t help but remark on it ... even though I have misgivings about doing so.

I’ve debated talking about this news item for a few days; it’s the kind of thing I don’t want to feature much (if at all) any more ... yet the story is so outrageous that I cannot get it out of my head. The seductive allure of power in the financial sector and the short–sighted hubris of local politics combine, to appalling effect.

I’ve been doing a lot of reading lately—both on– and offline—with the frustrating result that I cannot credit the source where I encountered a most unusual view of the unconscious. I do not think terribly highly of Sigmund Freud’s conceptualization of it, sexually suffused as it was. That said, he did expand the thinking on the mind and its workings back in his day; and his ideas continue to reverberate in psychology and medicine.

The idea that I encountered, however, is completely foreign to anything I’ve encountered in psychology. That’s part of the reason why I’m sharing it here. I’m curious as to others’ thoughts on it.

That includes armchair social scientists, o’course (otherwise I’d likely be left talking to myself).

Surely it’s no surprise to the seven regulars hereabouts that I have long been an enthusiastic user and recommender of “positive” (humanist) psychology. I think the idea that one can be remade has appealed to me for a very long time; and of course the emphasis on individual uniqueness and personal fulfillment speaks deeply to me.

However, in reading the introduction to an older book of this sort, a dreadful thought struck me; and I don’t know how to resolve it.

Perhaps I can get it out of my head by inserting it into others’.

Hoo boy ...

If your response is “helping, of course!”, I have to ask: Are you sure? I was, but it turns out I was wrong. And evidence suggests I’m not alone.

I have a lot of conversations with folks who understand the growing problems and potential for disaster. Many of them are already well down the road to preparations for survival, many have just started, and most are somewhere between. Unfortunately, a few still cling to the idea that - if "we" ALL just would pay attention and DO SOMETHING - the old US Constitution could be resurrected, we could elect the "right people," and the police state would be gone.

I’ve been thinking a lot about these concepts, especially since I have adopted a modified yin–yang symbol as my avatar on a couple of fora. In particular, I’ve mused over how to classify ideas and things in my life into this duality; it’s been an interesting exercise. It is by no means complete, but I offer a few of my observations for your amusement/consideration, and welcome any interested individuals to play along, either in the comments here or on one’s own blog. In the latter case, please drop a link here so we can find your thoughts.