User talk:Frater5

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome to my talk page!

You are invited to leave me messages and corrections.
Please, be polite and assume good intent.

If I do not respond to your message or I delete it, it is probably because you violated one or both these rules. Otherwise, let 'er rip!

Archives
2006 (May) 2006 (November)

Contents 1 The Turning Tide 2 Clinical Psych Phrase 3 Smile 4 Rating the ToK

[edit] The Turning Tide

I've been a practicing Thelemite for a year now, but am deeply concerned with the fascist policies of the US, and indeed governments around the globe. Do you think the tide will be turning soon, and how do you think all of this fits into the "Aeon of Horus" and so forth? --72.226.218.165 02:03, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, that's a big question. I am not much of a prognosticator, so I can't really say what will happen with any given government. My general opinion is that the meta-direction of humanity, viewed at the scale of centuries (and even decades), shows a steady increase towards individual freedom. With this inevitable movement comes the equally inevitable reaction. The War of the Aeon is not against governments per se, but against Old Aeon beliefs and values from which spring oppression and tyranny. Personally, I believe that the recent election of the numerous progressives this midterm is a sign that people are waking up from the neoconservative dream...while no political party is perfect, they are a definite movement back towards sanity after the nightmare of the GOP-ruled congress. I'm not sure if this is the answer you are looking for, but in these regards I'm certainly no wiser than yourself. –Frater5 (talk/con) 04:02, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Clinical Psych Phrase

Hi,

I wanted to touch base with you and apologize if my tone has been too harsh. I feel strongly about this issue, but I don't mean to offend anyone who is editing with good intent and I do think that is what you have been doing.

When I came to your User page to leave that message I saw you are a fan of Positive Psychology - me too. What a breath of fresh air after decades of DSM classifications and mysterious diagnosis arising from strange theoretical orientations ("I wanted to WHAT with my mother?"). I had the opportunity to assist Nathaniel Branden twice a week for over a year back in early 90's when he ran two groups based solely on developing positives. I wouldn't have missed that for anything. Branden knew Fritz Perlz and was fond of many of his therapuetic techniques (but not so much the underlying theories). Steve 22:24, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

I appreciate your kind comments and the smile. While you have seemed aggressive, I wouldn't say harshly so. In cases like this, it is usually possible to find a good solution. If I were you, I'd start a section on the talk page with your perspective and an invitation for suggestions. I'm a reasonable guy, but others aren't, and you are treading on an area of practice that the field has been working very hard to protect. Because of this, you will fare much better, I believe, with an invitational stance, rather than a provocative one.

Re: Positive Psychology...I am indeed a big fan. I am in the camp that thinks that PosPsy shouldn't try to develop as an independent orientation of practice, but should infuse itself within existing practice models. I believe that as it does, it will begin to chip away at the pathology-model of mental health. Even at CIIS, which is a progressive school, I still hear wacky psychoanalytic theories taken seriously. Hopefully, the data will eventually be so overwhelming that psychologists will have to jettison past-oriented insight-focused therapies, especially those built upon Freud's fictional drive theory. I just don't understand how any educated therapist can take any of that as sound science...it boggles my mind.

I agree that it would be a mistake to try to make PosPsy into it's own orientation. It is more fundamental - like something that arises out of a good theory of human nature. The ability to define pathology and treat it is a good thing - the big mistake was seeing humans as ONLY pathology and never recognizing that one could work on positives. Amazing that it took so many decades! I've found valuable things in almost every theoretical orientation, even Freud (I like his and his daughter's list of defenses - but I don't agree with the structure, theory or the ineffectual treatment techniques). The funny thing is that the DSM will end being a great help by giving a common agreement between orientations. They disagree on cause and on treatment, but are forced to see the similarities in symptom sets. That means the research data will force people to chuck technologies that don't work and to question theories that contradict the data. Those orientations that can't or won't integrate PosPsy will loose credibility and support. Rational, intelligent orientations will take to it like a duck to water. Steve 04:37, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Anyway, thanks for the kind comment. That's doing wiki right. –Frater5 (talk/con) 03:58, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Smile

[edit] Rating the ToK

Hi. I'm trying to get members of the Psychology Project to get together and rate the both the quality and importance of the Tree of Knowledge System. Hope you're interested. Have a great day! EPM 19:15, 17 February 2007 (UTC)