Dienstag, 27. Dezember 2016
Just red to take critique general, not personal. This is appropriate. What hasn't function does not deserve respect? Often felt this way and I do take this personal. The reasons are in part obvious. Now I have to write an essay about the Rorschach. I am not seeing any connection with the psychological apparatus. It is not so the content of the interpretation, but the category where it falls in that is. This is very object-centered regarded so. Typical for the time where it is developed. I mean that people use their imagination subjectively and this is completely normal. Culture can be of influence, since culture is dependent on understanding. The influence is not of importance here. Categories and concepts. Relations! Guide both. Categories by membership. Concepts by vague logic (analogy or metaphor). But of course it are inkblot presentations so perception and projection interact with those processes, or this is the objective. I have a book called Visual Thinking but still need to read it. That will not be accepted anyway. I want to know what happens at first sight or in the combination of these 10 inkblots. I don't understand the use: writing an essay.
Samstag, 24. Dezember 2016
According to Freud rules have a hostile basis. Often. It is correct that when you show love in a miserable way you are better to show hate in a disguised neutral form. When you show dependence and guidance within it it is like you are aiming to be an equal (a friend till the end). Also it is so, for Freud, that impulse is connected with experience. Also perception is an impulse according to post-modernists, which gives clarity to the dangers of psychoanalysis for people in danger (people without network). In some way experience needs to be anchored to the mind, or better stated the ego. Own self-regulation and normal progress into the life as interaction of you and "other" is essential. This form of unconsciousness is most healthy but also easy boring or depriving for the ego as such. It is the ego which must create the unconscious after all. So people can go nuts in a situational way. Because their planning means seduced conduct, by image, by confusion. So many things that are cultural and this is situational context almost every time. It is an excuse. Excuses ain't bad I seem to say. Well, sometimes this is the area to intervene. While you cannot intervene this after all. You need excuses to exist and to be creative. Even if you are only a listener on the stage. We react in a formational way/form. We are giving love to be prone to seduction. We are listening to hate in the present to be constructive. We are listening to love, when love is real-made pleasure. We build on what is good and listen to everything to see reality. There's no need for a soul out of love. There's only need for a soul out of hate, when growing out of the other's helplessness and sadness. Things are just what they are and content is only a structure to what things are. Are things so direct? Do we need to see weakness as no good because others can help? I think not, but there's to see how things evolve. Yes, seeing things now seems ever easy, it is about accepting, but wanting to see things later, is in fact not always so easy because you need something valuable. Love cannot be constructive because this ain't not the way of life. It must become the way of life to be happy. Of course it can seemingly become the way of life out of expressive needs (impulses inside and outside). So it grows as an experience into role and trust. What is of value is deeper seen what gets solved. I forget to say, that our experience is often love, when succeeded. You would be crazy to love something substitutive. As if you don't know how things progress. Your prediction is made out of residue, this happens never when in progress. This is pure regression and makes you unable to see reality of the present. Things that don't mean anything for the life, mean nothing for the life's progression, when they have influence for life and actually do not, they are bad influence because you make a progression of life which ain't real, a regression. A simplicity of leading a life? Loving so many things. Devotion is very essential and very real, but it needs some history. Not so much more.
Donnerstag, 22. Dezember 2016
Your psychological nature is nervous and secondary. Before you take action, you cautiously ponder over things and you review all possible alternatives and reactions. You strive systematically to find the best possible response to any given problem. Above all, you are a perfectionist and you have no rest until you optimize a situation, in each and every area, be it professional, pragmatic, aesthetic or in pleasure. You do not accept spontaneity and, to fully enjoy life and go further, you consider that demanding the best is the least you can do, even though it is detrimental to the rough forces associated with your instinct. Intellectual elements intervene before both the physical ones and your feelings: it is one of the essential clues to understanding your personality.
With this Ascendant, you come across as cerebral, clear-sighted, focused on details and on numbers, analytic, serious, competent, reasonable, modest, tidy, organized, spruce, industrious, provident, honest, loyal, reserved, shy, helpful, willing to progress, talkative, logical, hardworking, tactful, patient, precise, concrete, spiritual. You can also be narrow-minded, calculating, irritating, petty, hung up, anxious, cold, repressed or sarcastic.
Very bright he must have been. Quite many things make sense and it is just far ahead in the scientific repertoire. It is a mythical figure of course. What makes sense for me right now is the principle of lust. That aggression and distraction are part of the normal repertoire of the healthy human unless it becomes dominant. In this case it is really perverse. Classes exist, that is so, see how people meet up and communicate and how they gain pleasure into this. When slow and fast meet up, there's just an impossibility of equal further contact when you want to keep it pleasurable. Sadomasochism quickly emerges into such a context. God thank there is respect for that. But some way, there's a choice to keep things nice and neat. The division bell of Pink Floyd makes me think of the possibility to let the high hopes give a chance. But with a view of something rather conceptual and abstract into the realism. Being ashamed of status is something which is crazy and narcissistic like into projection and identification in the other. It is also very partial, and puts for me too much exclamation on role as such. Personality is more than role. Horoscope is who you are (personality, body), ascendant is what your soul is (character, feeling). I don't know what to believe here but I see an analogy. The source of my intention is found, it's structure makes the distinction between the individual and the situation, while the connection between situation and collective is resisted. The purpose of this all is again like in previous writings here (I fall on them) a self-centered transference. Wanting to be secure for what I bring or do. Lust is all about doing and narcissism is trying to do better. Sometimes you do better of course and there should be enough respect and love for this because there is nothing wrong to it. This is a step forward towards the fact that situation is basis, in a deep individual matter. Regarding people as pretentious because they have or strive for success and aggressing them is a rule of the street. Which quickly becomes an aim for power. Every mission must be love and love cannot be build with power, but this is not realistic to live by. Objectives are met, goals ain't us and them.
Mittwoch, 21. Dezember 2016
It sounds obvious that laughing is an escape of tension. So it often works at least. I wonder if reaction formation is rather typical in this way. Reaction formation is a form of dealing with anxiety (as final defense) which is the form per se that shows irony and 2-sidedness. So laughing may be due to certain unconscious impulses inside yourself. At least when there is some rebellion in one or the other unpleasant situation. Jews are connoisseurs into humor they say, maybe that's why laughing is typical and relativity is king in their conception. Freud claimed that the essence of being jew is beheld within his theory and he 'ever' claimed being against jews is the best resistance after all (this while joking). I thought this over after thinking about doctors that I like. Recognizable, it is.
Interesting theory with value for artificial intelligence studies. Of course this is a cognitive theory and has repercussions for the brain. Shortly explained this theory states visual perception happens in steps. First detail is processed, second structural detail, then contour and finally the relations in 3-dimensional space. In some way there is suggested that recognition is a process which gets input from this final step. In this way we are able to orient ourselves, estimate distance, and fill in when concrete visual information is imperfect. So we develop an observer-independent representation. It is in fact a computational top-down model. Most part of the process exists by calculation by the brain.
-- Yaneer Bar-Yam
When I puzzle about the consequences of recognition and identification as a result we deal with a process which is of course also responsible for bias. A lot of importance in our psychology is present into the instantaneous reality of experience. So recognition may play the fool with this input, when more personal processes come into being. Of course this means also that stable accepting life is better than doing this actually. But in some way we make an exception on the rule and put trust into it. Recognition is perception, so far I was, and also the idea that thoughts without content are empty and intuitions without concepts are blind seems to fit this rumination. In other words, your perception is core business after all, while your cognition is the rescue squad. It is your perception which is king and with more depth you have to wait in space. Kant was right and philosophy would been wrong to follow his principles as guidance for philosophy. Since philosophy is the skill of the mind, not the eyes per se. Kant was a philosopher so therefrom his funny contradiction. You need to see... .
High complexity means reality/truth is hard to recognize. Still, consequences of decisions are real.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions <= unintended consequences. Doesn’t mean bad intentions / indifference gets you elsewhere