I have chosen to try using Adsense on this website, so that I may make some revenue from advertised products related to psychology.
It was a long debate inside of me, whether or not I should commit to this program and what ramifications it may have no my web site.
The way I see it:
pros I'll probably want to write more since there is more incentive to develop the topics I discuss
cons you'll probably consider me a slightly hypocritical - I often talk about the dangers of supporting worldwide/local advertisements for organizations that often do things I personally do not approve of ( for example inadvertent destruction of the environment ).
However - there is a chance that this Adsense program may prove to be beneficial. Let's call this a test.
I mean after all, we are living in a complex world where we must deal everyday with people, ideas, and ideologies that we don't like, that do not make sense to us, and so on and so forth. The goal is, I think, to openly communicate with such people/ideas/ideologies to the greatest extent possible, to figure out whether we can arrive at a fruitful compromise.
In some ways - my decision is this type of communicative action in progress.
peace.
Saturday, October 27, 2007
Saturday, October 20, 2007
psychology up front
As usual - I have spent some thought on the efficacy and method of action of psychotherapy.
I was hanging out with my friends lately and I noticed that some of them do not really recongize psychological issues the way my colleagues and I usually do. For example, most people I know that are not employed as psychotherapists think of psychology in some type of surface-like statements:
1. It affects how you think right?
2. You recognize colors and sounds with different parts of your brain.
3. It matters if you were the baby in the family.
4. "He/she is obsessive-compulsive, bi-polar, etc."
5. And on and on.
The interesting thing is that some of these opinions/ideas actually carry a bit of accuracy in them. Psychology does affect the way we think, and the brain has complicated ways to recognize colors and sound, and the experience of being the youngest sibling is also significant.
However, what I am really curious about is the fact that feelings, internal experience, and in-depth questioning of meaning and being are not usually considered under the headers of psychology.
Is this because of the way most of us learn about psych - in a university class that requires small psych experiments, magazines like Newsweek and Time, or the news? I strongly believe this is true - most people that have had exposure to the real depth of psychodynamic psychology can appreciate many more elements of this part of human existence.
I think what I'm really curious about - how can we make this kind of exposure more widespread - how can the knowledge that psychotherapists consider the bread and butter be more well known throughout the population. And perhaps more importantly - would this actually be beneficial, and is it more relevant/pressing than other types of knowledge - religion, science, etc?
All in all - I think we have to keep on learning throughout our life, in many different subjects and settings. Deep psychology should be part of that learning.
right? =)
I was hanging out with my friends lately and I noticed that some of them do not really recongize psychological issues the way my colleagues and I usually do. For example, most people I know that are not employed as psychotherapists think of psychology in some type of surface-like statements:
1. It affects how you think right?
2. You recognize colors and sounds with different parts of your brain.
3. It matters if you were the baby in the family.
4. "He/she is obsessive-compulsive, bi-polar, etc."
5. And on and on.
The interesting thing is that some of these opinions/ideas actually carry a bit of accuracy in them. Psychology does affect the way we think, and the brain has complicated ways to recognize colors and sound, and the experience of being the youngest sibling is also significant.
However, what I am really curious about is the fact that feelings, internal experience, and in-depth questioning of meaning and being are not usually considered under the headers of psychology.
Is this because of the way most of us learn about psych - in a university class that requires small psych experiments, magazines like Newsweek and Time, or the news? I strongly believe this is true - most people that have had exposure to the real depth of psychodynamic psychology can appreciate many more elements of this part of human existence.
I think what I'm really curious about - how can we make this kind of exposure more widespread - how can the knowledge that psychotherapists consider the bread and butter be more well known throughout the population. And perhaps more importantly - would this actually be beneficial, and is it more relevant/pressing than other types of knowledge - religion, science, etc?
All in all - I think we have to keep on learning throughout our life, in many different subjects and settings. Deep psychology should be part of that learning.
right? =)
Thursday, October 4, 2007
FReak oF natuRe
Dear reader:-:
has it ever struck you that reading blogs is like reading someone's conscious public mind - I mean do most people write things that they are unconscious of, does the blog space permit information that is free-flowing and not full of restrictive filters which we all have to use to live day in day out?
I'm just curious, because to be honest with you, it seems that the blogosphere has encouraged more sharing of personal information, more public display of thoughts, fears, wishes, etc. But in what form are we reporting this information - do our pictures, stories, jokes, whatever, betray our intimate memories thoughts and fantasies? I sometimes think they do - and sometimes they dont.
I've been reading a good deal of psychotherapy blogs in the recent months, and what I have noticed are somewhat dry, though well written and informative, thoughts on paper. What does this mean about the online, text, email universe? Does it permit one access to another person's inner being?!
Maybe that is not the point, or that is not required in all communication. Surely this is true. However, does it not seem funny that even our most emberassing moments told on paper do not compare to the actual experience of the event. Maybe in some way the written communication serves as a better, more articulated version of story; or an elaboration of one side of what happened.
But in essence - can a real even ever be described accurately? The whole of human experience, which may include sight, sound, smell, taste, thought, emotion, bodily sensation, how can we convey this information to each other? A good deal of it is missed in casual conversation. However, when we focus our attention on it - much more can be revealed.
So my question to you faithful reader - what is it that we are trying to focus on in this blogspace? I sometimes think this is a private room where I can spill out the recent psychology-related thoughts I've been having. However, in truth, I hardly ever write the actual epiphonies that happen to me>> partly because they are hard to translate onto paper.
So what can I say for myself- well I think this is a nice forum to present some preliminary ideas, to get out my thoughts that some of you may comment on. I am not sure if this is a thought forum or a place to read one's ideas.
In either case, I'm happy that you are reading and travelling along with me.
much thanks, AfroBside
has it ever struck you that reading blogs is like reading someone's conscious public mind - I mean do most people write things that they are unconscious of, does the blog space permit information that is free-flowing and not full of restrictive filters which we all have to use to live day in day out?
I'm just curious, because to be honest with you, it seems that the blogosphere has encouraged more sharing of personal information, more public display of thoughts, fears, wishes, etc. But in what form are we reporting this information - do our pictures, stories, jokes, whatever, betray our intimate memories thoughts and fantasies? I sometimes think they do - and sometimes they dont.
I've been reading a good deal of psychotherapy blogs in the recent months, and what I have noticed are somewhat dry, though well written and informative, thoughts on paper. What does this mean about the online, text, email universe? Does it permit one access to another person's inner being?!
Maybe that is not the point, or that is not required in all communication. Surely this is true. However, does it not seem funny that even our most emberassing moments told on paper do not compare to the actual experience of the event. Maybe in some way the written communication serves as a better, more articulated version of story; or an elaboration of one side of what happened.
But in essence - can a real even ever be described accurately? The whole of human experience, which may include sight, sound, smell, taste, thought, emotion, bodily sensation, how can we convey this information to each other? A good deal of it is missed in casual conversation. However, when we focus our attention on it - much more can be revealed.
So my question to you faithful reader - what is it that we are trying to focus on in this blogspace? I sometimes think this is a private room where I can spill out the recent psychology-related thoughts I've been having. However, in truth, I hardly ever write the actual epiphonies that happen to me>> partly because they are hard to translate onto paper.
So what can I say for myself- well I think this is a nice forum to present some preliminary ideas, to get out my thoughts that some of you may comment on. I am not sure if this is a thought forum or a place to read one's ideas.
In either case, I'm happy that you are reading and travelling along with me.
much thanks, AfroBside