Psychology Articles

The primary challenge that human beings are facing is only one major conundrum: the ignorance about The Psychological Thought Process, a.k.a., the CONSCIOUSNESS OF MANKIND.

The vast destruction that permeates the entire world originates from this psychological entity [Ego]. Every human being comprises this self-destructive fragmentary process. The Ego cannot be completely eliminated by force of any kind; nor can it be vanquished by willpower. The only reason why the bulk of humanity accepts that there is no other way to live except to serve this fragmentary egotistical process (which goes by many names or labels) is because it doesn’t want to know the truth about its root nature. As a matter of fact, our Ego is the result of psychological blindness or ignorance that it purposefully maintains/defends. In a word, Ego doesn’t want to end. And, so long as Ego goes unchecked/unaware of its manner of functioning on a whole, then there will be more of what you hear about on the news and in your communities all around the world. However, there is absolutely nothing preventing human beings from resolving this peculiar conundrum except for themselves. In other words, people desire to be ignorant about their own thought process [a.k.a., the Ego]. Therefore, people are willingly, yet unknowingly, self-destructive victims due to their conditioning, which they defend with their very lives.

For centuries Humanity has been led (by his own thinking) to believe that the only way to live happily is by assuming that we must follow or believe in something or other. But, just what are we following? Belief leads to conflict, always. Conflict is the negation of happiness, isn’t it? The Ego (our psychological thought process) pretends that it has the answers through the conjuring of various beliefs, dogmas, opinions or ideals of some kind. And, that at some future point there will be a Great Reward for adhering to ones beliefs. So that is all in the limited field of TIME. However in the meantime, confusion and sorrow reigns, right? Also one might take note of the fact that this thought process has existed for thousands of years and has yet to make good on its promise of peaceful living. This illusion of bringing about something new, something that is fair or something that will be beneficial for the entire human race is always referenced as ‘the greater good’ or ‘a noble cause’, but always in the future. And, in the name of that pretext human beings proceed to slaughter one another – claiming that, “In the end there shall be salvation”; isn’t that so? Hence, Mankind has been perpetually repeating this, primitive psychological vortex. Ergo, there has been no fundamental change at the root level of Human Consciousness.

When there’s a problem of dealing with material necessities then one must take action. You use thinking to develop skills or business so that you can pay your bills and provide for food, clothing and shelter. When thought is used for physiological survival purposes, then there is no problem. After all, we would parish as a species were it not for our technical ideas that we use to take care of our biological needs through technology and whatnot. Thinking is the accumulation and recall of knowledge. Then that storehouse of knowledge is put to use to resolve material problems. That is the innate function of the Human Mind.

However, that is not where the human race took a wrong turn and became delusional and irrational – NO. ‘Thinking’ used to bring about psychological answers or so-called spiritual answers is where hell on Earth came into being. Psychologically, the problem lies in the way we think. So instead of approaching this process (by positively projecting our beliefs, ideals, opinions or desires) to resolve psychological thinking; how about we take a radically different approach – an approach that is not a ‘positive’ assertion of what we believe the truth is? How about we approach the Whole Nature of psychological thinking through negation [by finding out what is false in order for the Truth to shine through]? In other words by seeing what is illusory about Human Consciousness, as a byproduct, one may discover what is real and is no longer caught in this illusory, restrictive and fragmentary process. If this psychological thinking has repeatedly proven that it causes suffering, fear, frustration and stress, then instead of positively asserting that we know the answer to break free (that has been tried for centuries and has failed), how about we ask the right questions to discover what is false? After all, the truth lies in seeing that a false thing is a false thing, correct? From this point on, let us explore if it is possible to be free of our consciousness/ego by raising fundamentally crucial questions to expose the fallacy of psychological thinking, of which every human being contains.

[*Note: There can be no unbiased investigation into this problem when there is a presence of Authority (i.e., something or someone that is blindly followed without question). That being said, I'm not your Authority. I'm not important. I'm simply a mirror that is reflecting what is actual, not according to my liking, but just the way it is - regardless of my personal desires. Therefore, everything that I say has no meaning at all if you are not interested in inquiring for yourself. If you are interested you will be skeptical and allow these questions to awaken a state of intelligence or wisdom. Otherwise, reading this to debate it is meaningless. So I'll be putting forth vital questions that will penetrate the heart of our conditioning, if you truly want a happy/peaceful life.

May we begin our inquiry by asking, "What has happened to human beings after all of these thousands of years?" Haven't we, as a species, become coarse, brutal, hateful, enslaved by so-called religious beliefs with their various divisions and, thereby, creating enemies? Aren't human beings living in a world of confusion, wars and ultimately self-destruction? Don't we constantly yearn for either an ideal, belief or a person to lead us out of this chaotic mess (by following political leaders, religious leaders or other kinds of leaders who claim they have the solution but that it will always take TIME - isn't that what they all have in common right)? And if you are real honest ask yourself, have these leaders helped Humanity to deeply bring about a radically different way of living without confusion, conflict or fear?

Now in order to understand the Whole Nature of our Consciousness mustn't one ask, "What is it that we are trying to Become?" What is it that each one of us are trying to do or achieve and gain an end? What is it we all want? No matter if one is educated or not; aren't we all striving after control? It is natural to become something in this world. If one does not know how to drive a car, we spend time acquiring knowledge and practice driving. So one is Becoming a driver. If one wishes to be skilled at anything profession it will take time and practice to Become proficient at it. So that distinct kind of Becoming is natural and necessary, of course.

On the other hand, is it natural or inevitable that human beings must Become Something Psychologically? In Becoming Something doesn't it involve TIME (i.e., I was this yesterday but tomorrow I will Become totally different)? One is violent and strives to Become 'non-violent'. Isn't it the premise that by telling oneself that one is NOT violent and believes in that self-assertion then one has Become other than violence? And, even if it were possible to 'achieve' non-violence, wouldn't there be a craving to pursue further 'achievements' of yet other psychological goals? Thus, wouldn't one be trapped in the perpetual pursuit of trying to Become Something and, in the interim, one is never satisfied?

So are we trying to Become More Enlightened? What is it each one of us is trying to 'achieve'? Is this not an important question to ask? We are predisposed to Becoming Something (inwardly), right? Haven't we made the error of thinking that just because we are suppose to Become Something that is on the level of technical skills that we are also suppose to carry over 'achievement' into the Psychological sphere? So what is it deeply that we are trying to 'achieve'? But, IS THERE ANYTHING TO ACHIEVE, PSYCHOLOGICALLY? So whenever we achieve something along the lines of skill or talent, we go on to use that as a mark of status, prestige or social superiority above our fellow man in order to magnify our sense of SELF-IMPORTANCE so that we can dominate others, right? If you're aware of all this within yourself, haven't you also noticed that each 'achievement' is separate from the other? So no matter what you psychologically 'achieve', it will mean nothing when it comes to trying to achieve something else, psychologically. So doesn't that process leave one craving more and more - never quite feeling completely fulfilled, right?

For example let's say, "I am Poor/Uncertain [inwardly] and I want to be Rich/Certain [inwardly]“, right? (Richness consists of Accumulating ‘psychological’ Knowledge.) Does that not mean that one is always struggling to Become What one Projects (based on the principle of REWARD or PUNISHMENT)? Reward is where you come to a point where you can say, “I’ve done it!”, right? Doesn’t PSYCHOLOGICALLY PAIN occur when one isn’t able to achieve the ideal that one has setup for oneself? Does this not constitute Failure?

*[Reminder: the writer isn't offering you any opinions, beliefs or ideals. One is merely examining the entire nature of Human Consciousness. We're journeying into our psychological thought process by just looking at it and seeing it as it is, not as we wish it to be. Just to find out what will happen if we watch this process unfold without any domination. What you discover is all that matters. I'm unimportant. Don't accept anything that I say but instead, test it for yourself. Question your own mind by observing it. You aren't being instructed on 'what' to think but, rather, 'how' to think, and that is a big difference.]

Isn’t the key ingredient to Becoming Something “TIME”? Politicians are always saying that it will take TIME to end war or provide the basic resources for everyone, right? But after all these centuries of Time, hasn’t there always been war and poverty? WHAT IS [PSYCHOLOGICAL] TIME? Isn’t it important to understand the nature of Time? Physical Time is the sunrise and sunset, or the days of the week or the weeks of a month, or morning, noon, evening and night. But, there is also the Time that says, “I am this and I desire to Become that”. Or, society is this and it will take Time to change it. Don’t most people rely upon Hope? Isn’t Hope a form of Time? Things are awful and frightening right now but, in the future, it will be better – one Hopes, right? (That is Time.) The remembrance of past experiences is Time. Isn’t the accumulation of knowledge within the field of Time? Also, knowledge can never be complete; so isn’t it always accompanied with ignorance? Isn’t Cause-and-Effect Time? So isn’t the Human Consciousness conditioned by Time (being repetitive, mechanical, conforming to an ideal)? And, will it take Time to be free of that conditioning? Or, is Time the problem?

Why do we fail to make the connection between this false psychological Becoming resulting in inequality, animosity, aggression and violence? We all say that we want happiness and a peaceful world, yet how quickly we shrink away from investigating and truly understanding our own egotistical self-centered activities. Wouldn’t we rather rationalize everything that we do? Wouldn’t we rather pretend to ourselves that we are moral, kind, loving and peaceful (and all the while we do horrible things in the name of the so-called ‘greater good’)? When we hurt others don’t we try to erase that immoral action away by doing something superficially charitable so that we can still maintain that we are good, decent and compassionate?

Does intelligence or love have a ’cause’? If there is a ’cause’ for intelligence or love then they are limited by Time, as well. If we continue along the lines of Time (which is cause-and-effect) then there can never be a radical change in Consciousness, right? Therefore, ’cause’ will ultimately produce its own effect, which is still conditioning and which also maintains conflict. All Human Consciousness is controlled by conditioning (ceaselessly projecting ideals, dogmas, superstition, propaganda, etc.). Psychologist have said that conditioning can never end. All that one can do is modify it, which means you can’t leave its prison; you can only modify it and perhaps dress it up – but, isn’t that still a prison? We are questioning if our psychological conditioning/programming can be fundamentally changed without using Time. That is the primary challenge of our human existence, isn’t it?

However, wouldn’t there be a radical change in conditioning if one were to “discover” the cause of the Whole Nature of Conditioning? For instance: One feels lonely (this is the cause) and the outcome of that is to isolate oneself further by concentrating on a belief/ideal (this is the effect). The very ending of the cause is the ending of loneliness, right? What is causing us to feel this deep sense of separation from all outward and inward relationship (which is loneliness)? Despite being surrounded by friends and family why does one still feel isolated and cut off – alone? If anyone explains the reason why, it will not be the truth for you. The explanation isn’t the reality, right? For example if see a meal in a commercial, will that image make your hungry stomach full? No, of course not. Similarly, if I tell you the answer to end your conditioning will it end it? No, of course it won’t. So one is faced with finding out for oneself what is the ’cause’ of loneliness? Do you use thought (which is the outcome of knowledge which is limited) to inquire into this question? If you do use thought it can never be complete about anything, right? So thought is always limited. Do you inquire into the question by the exercise of thought? If you use thought to find out, you can only find out the superficial cause because thought is fragmented. Therefore, ‘Thinking’ can never get at the root ’cause’ of conditioning, right?

Is there another instrument to inquire into this complex problem (of psychological thinking)? We are so used to using thought for everything in our daily life that we often assume that there is no other instrument. Isn’t that how human beings have been educated, conditioned (programmed)? But, that instrument is incapable of delving deeply, profoundly into human conditioning due to the fact that it is a fragmentary, limited process, isn’t it? It is very important that one is very clear about this, because if you are not, then you will be condemned to be enslaved by conditioning/confusion for all of your life, which is typically what happens to most people, anyway.

The ’cause’ is that conditioning has brought about uncertainty, hope, isolation/loneliness, confusion and fear. And, the ‘effect’ is that Man has invented an idea called “God”. If thought is not the instrument to inquire with, then what is? This is not my personal question. This question is for anyone in the world who is really serious about totally ending conditioning. Is the “other” instrument, if it exists, the invention of thought? Thought cannot examine the universe and its extraordinary order because thought itself is limited. So the question is: “Is there a way of Observation that is unlimited”? So can one deeply OBSERVE this total sense of loneliness/isolation with all of its destructive consequences?

Where there is loneliness/isolation there must also be various forms of conflict, antagonism, hatred inevitably leading to battle. So what is the instrument, which is not thought or unconsciously invented by thought and say, “Yes, that is it!” Therefore, one must be very, very clear that it is not the activity of remembrance, which is thought.

So we have to go into the question of Observation.

Observation may be the instrument, but we are not asserting that it is. Because an assertion is dogmatic and one may accept it and then there is no meaning. On the other hand, one is objectively investigating, without bias, whether Observation is the instrument to inquire into our conditioning of isolation/loneliness. But we know for an absolute fact that thought is Limited, utterly! Thought is not your thought or my thought – thought is thought and it is Limited under all circumstances, period. If one is clear about that then one can posit the other question. Only when you SEE for yourself the reality that thought is Limited then you are mentally free to inquire, “Is there another instrument that is not put together by thought?” But if you are confused, then you will be playing a [self-deceptive] game. Is that clear?

If we are clear on this point then, “Is there an Observation (without the word, without association or without remembrance of various past experiences)?” Hence, is it possible to Observe without the past? Is it possible to Observe the Whole World as It Is – not through an opinion as an American, British, Russian, Asian, etc. nor through the views of a particular religious sect or a particular race, not as a political activist nor as a terrorist, which are all various forms of conditioning that are all biased as well as Limited, right? Instead, can one simply Observe the whole movement of conditioning? Can one Observe conditioning, which is loneliness, without the accumulated memory of experience? Can one look at the world around oneself as well as within as though for the first time – afresh? Isn’t that what is meant by Observation without the past?

So can you Observe what I am pointing out without being distracted by what the history is about the Author? Are you inwardly free to really Look at yourself as you are? Observation requires Attention, does it not? Observation is not done just to please yourself or to accommodate your past memories – but to Observe every single movement of thought, and that is all. Can one do that? Find out for yourself. Don’t rely on anyone else to discover it for you, because that is impossible. When you listen to a song, can you listen to it without thinking about the name of its composer? Can you simply Listen to the song without any form of association? Is there not great beauty in that listening, as if for the very first time? Similarly, can one Observe our conditioning (whether it be the conditioning of yourself or another) in that fresh state of Observation? This is very important to understand or else one is forever lost.

Is loneliness brought about by self-centered activities? Is it the case that I feel lonely? Or rather, is Loneliness Me? I am Loneliness, right? Loneliness is not over there and I am Looking at it as though it were an entity outside of me. But instead, Observe the fact that I am Loneliness. I cause Loneliness whenever I pursue my own desires to Become Something, psychologically. So hasn’t the outward activity of isolation and the inward activity of loneliness brought this about? The key here is: Can one Observe the ’cause’ without wanting to transform or change or control it? Just Observe it as you would Observe the flow of the ocean. You cannot change the depth of the ocean nor it its magnificent nature. So can you Observe the ’cause’ – the ’cause’ being the whole way of our life, which is a direct result of our thinking? If you can objectively Observe the ’cause’, then that very Observation is the ending of the ’cause’ and therefore the ‘effect’ is Loneliness is completely gone, as well.

So from that shall we inquire together the question of fear (i.e., the fear of public opinion, fear of what others will say about you, fear of being exposed for some wrongdoing one may have done in the past, fear of growing old and eventually dying, fear of not fulfilling ones dreams and the fear of not being loved and fear of not loving). There is fear that one might lose my mate, fear of what my mate thinks of me. Fear of being lonely. Fear of getting hurt so instead you want to hurt another. We carry this hurt all throughout our life. In not wanting to be hurt, we build a psychological wall around ourselves. Then there is the fear of not Becoming that which you desire to Become. Fear is like a vast tree with many branches and chattering leaves. And, isn’t it our conditioning to be forever preoccupied with one form of fear or another? But one of our greatest fears is the fear of tomorrow – will I lose what I desire or will I get what I desire or will I be able to keep what I have gained already? Also, don’t we fear having no significance or importance in life? Don’t we worry that our life might end up having no meaning? But if one is honest does a life based on conditioning have any intrinsic value or meaning? Isn’t a conditioned life smothered in strife and conflict – never being content with what one is? Aren’t we always seeking the so-called ‘better’ and never quite reaching a point to being at peace with ourselves? So fear has multiple forms/expressions, doesn’t it?

Fear is not your fear or my fear – it’s fear! You may translate fear in one way and I may have another way of expressing it but, basically, it is fear, nonetheless. And if one is sane one understands that fear must end. Not ending fear by tearing off the branches or the leaves of the various expressions of fear, but instead find out in reality what is the root ’cause’ of all fear, psychologically? There was a time when people did not know what was causing the disease known as Scurvy Then it was discovered that Scurvy was caused due to a lack of vitamin C. So the discovery of the cause put an end to both the cause-and-effect (of Scurvy). So once you discover for yourself what causes fear, doesn’t fear end?

Now, we are concerned with inquiring into what is the ’cause’ of fear, which is common to all Mankind? This is important to discover for oneself. Human beings have lived with fear for thousands of years; and he has escaped from it – distanced himself from it, rationalized or justified it, but he has not resolved the cause of fear. But fear remains at the core of our Consciousness (whether it is at the conscious level or hidden deep down in the unconscious layers). So let us discover what is the ’cause’ of it. If YOU discover it, then hold it and Observe its entire nature as if it were a precious jewel.

This leads us into the question of what is Intelligence? Surely, it isn’t the product of thought, which is fragmented, limited to cause-and-effect. Regardless of your economic status or the level of your education, the nature of Becoming is the same process for everyone – so it is neither yours nor mine. Thought can never have that extraordinary capacity of Intelligence. Intelligence has NO ’cause’; just like Love has NO ’cause’. Can you see that where there is ’cause’ there can be NO Intelligence/Love? Therefore, Intelligence is inquiring into the Whole nature of fear through the act of impartial Observation.

So we come back to asking, “What is the ’cause’ of fear?” Is it thought? Is it Time? Is it Desire – Desiring to be free from fear? So are we looking at the ’cause’ with Intelligence? Or, are we trying to make an effort to Look/Observe (because you want to be free from fear or you want to be happy, etc., etc.). If one is making an effort to Observe then that is a ’cause’ and so there is no Intelligence, instead there is only fear. So, Desire, Time and Thought; they are not separate – they are interrelated. Therefore, they are one. So, is that the ’cause’? Desire, Time and Thought is one unitary movement that is ‘causing’ fear. For example, “I am not free of fear right now, but I will be eventually.” That is based upon desire-time-thought which is one unitary movement which is producing fear, isn’t it? There is the fear of being dead. One is not dead but one will be dead. So there is this an interval between living and the end, which is time right? Effort has a ’cause’, fear has a ’cause’. However, Intelligence or Love has NO ’cause’. Although Desire, Time and Thought may appear to be different they are within the same field of psychological ’cause’ movement. This whole movement of fragmentation, contradiction, conflict and fear is defensive.

*[Reminder: You are using your ability to Observe for yourself the truth about what we are exploring together. Please don't accept anything that I say. It is up to you to go into this. Be aware of your conditioning as it reacts to what is being said here. Watch it and learn. Do you detect fear urging you to either reject or accept all of this? Do you sense your reluctance to just Observe?]

Now, you have discovered for yourself the ’cause’ of fear, right? So what is your action, or non-action? And, upon discovering the ’cause’ of fear aren’t we conditioned/programmed to automatically think that we must take action to change what we have discovered? So what action does one take? One either tries to erase it, forget it, analyze it, tear it to pieces; “I must ACT!” Once discovering the ’cause’ of fear one is compelled to feel that it is unbearable so one must get rid of it or somehow go beyond it, transmute it or do something about it. But who is going to do something about it? Surely, Desire, Time and Thought is YOU/ME, isn’t it? Isn’t it apparent that YOU ARE Fear? You might try to separate yourself from that; but, you are that, nonetheless. If you are perpetually seeking illusion/ideals, then you are fear and you are the enemy of Mankind. If you are nationalistic, bound to a certain religion/certain dogma, seeking an illusion of freedom then that is fear and you are that.

What happens when one actually realizes and sees the fact that I am fear? I’m not separate from fear. Is the mind then fresh whenever it perceives the reality about itself without struggling to change that reality according to what one prefers? Therefore, the ’cause’ of fear is myself, isn’t it? So hasn’t our inquiry revealed that the ’cause’ of fear is Desire, Time and Thought, which is the entire composition of my consciousness? The content of your consciousness is the common content of the Consciousness of all Humanity. So our inquiry into the entire nature of fear isn’t a selfish activity. One isn’t just concerned with being free from fear but, it is the ending of the whole structure of human fear (of which I am a part); do you understand? So when we Observe fear we are considering the Whole Nature of Human Fear. But if you are looking at it as though it were your personal fear, then you have to examine why you think it is your personal fear. Then you will find out that if you think it is your personal fear then that is limited or fragmented. If you like to live that way that is your business – no one is going to force you. That is what humanity has done; living in separate compartments fighting and destroying each other.

So this observation has led you to this investigation, which is a very careful examination into the nature of fear. Can the mind, which is accustomed to escape into beliefs, ideals or opinions; which is conditioned to rationalize; which is molded to escape into some other form of entertainment; can that mind break the pattern through Observation without any movement of its past conditioning? This requires your application. Then when you so Observe; that is, when you give complete, total attention to the ’cause’ (not because one wants to escape) – when there is complete attention of the ’cause’ what happens? That very Light of Attention dispels the ’cause’. And, so there is a total ending of fear.

Don’t ask, “How about occasionally if it comes up again?” Can this ending be perpetual? That state in which you realized the nature of fear when I point it out one has captured it for a second. Then one wants to know; “Can that second continue?” Isn’t that Desire asking that question, which is Time and Thought? So you are back in a circle again. You see our mind is so used to continuity. I have had happiness so it must go on for the rest of my life. So, Observe without any movement of thought. Give complete, total energy and attention to Observe the jewel that one has caught – the jewel being the ’cause’ (of the nature of fear). Where there is a ’cause’ there is also an ‘effect’ so in motiveless Observation, the ’cause’ ends, as well as its ‘effect’. So you have to see the whole movement of Consciousness, not just its fragmentary movement which you are pursuing. Now that we’ve discovered the false you are free from all conditioning.

Although I am a student who has undertaken a special journey that a man named, J. Krishnamurti has invited the entire human race to investigate, I am NOT a disciple/follower of his. Everything that I write is from my own impartial observations about human consciousness. I have no degree in psychology. None of that is necessary to free oneself of ones psychological conditioning/programming. We are all capable of examining our mind as it reacts in our daily life. Since just about everyone is programmed, it’s almost impossible for anyone to understand what it means to observe ones conditioning, because whatever you find out, you are programmed to use your thinking to change it. And, all thinking will only reinforce conditioning, which is fear.

If you would like to understand why the world is drowning in confusion, then you may explore/inquire into this matter at its very root, if you intend to end this destructive process (which dwells within all human beings). Here is a place that can assist you in your journey: http://www.jkrishnamurti.org/ Please note that this is NOT something to believe in nor is it possible to see the truth through this teacher’s eyes. If you do not find out the truth, then nothing you see or hear will create a real change in human consciousness. This is not like a subject in school that you memorize. This is about impartial, objective OBSERVATION of the Entire Nature of Psychological Becoming, if unchecked, will destroy Mankind. However, most of the human race is engaged in that endeavor and think that anyone who is not is crazy. Be aware that this isn’t something that you are used to dealing with. I live what I write about, this is not a product of thought/theory.

The well known English writer George Allen Knot has authored a scientific book called “Journey by other ways”. In this book of fiction Knot has penned such a vehicle that helps man travel thousands of miles within a few seconds. This aircraft travels with the speed of light and one fictitious person in the book drops many travelers at their desired destination on the way. This fictitious vehicle is neither made up of any metal nor is any technology like engine etc attached to it. Instead some scientists with the help of their potent power of resolve (Sankalpa Shakti) arrange subtle atoms in such a manner that the travelers of this fictitious vehicle become weightless. The fictitious pilot merely makes a powerful mental resolve that “I want this vehicle to reach a particular far off place” and immediately this vehicle speeds ahead with the help of subtle ‘technology’. To even say that the vehicle ‘moved’ is erroneous because within seconds it moves speedily like light to its destination (which is thousands of miles away).

This book of fiction is so imaginative that one may read it with wonderment for some time and then leave it saying “it is a mere figment of the respected author’s imagination”. And yet Woodland’s (USA) Dr. Zio Bernhardt actually experienced something of this sort. In that as per his power of resolve he reached his destination. In a well known American Journal of Parapsychology Dr. Bernhardt writes: At that time, my son was fighting a war in Vietnam (in the year 1971 A.D). Once seated in my residence I strongly felt that my son was in danger. I felt as though he was shouting aloud to me. Immediately when this deep thought flashed in my mind my body became extremely lighter in weight even than air. From Woodland in USA I reached a far off unknown place within a second. This was the place where my son was waging a war for the army.

Dr. Bernhardt continued: In that far off place raged an intense inferno. My son John was trapped in a tent and on top of him was a very heavy truck. Immediately I removed the truck from John’s body and after dragging him out of the tent I made him stand up.

Immediately my body now started regaining its original form and weight. When I opened my eyes I felt I had woken up from a half sleep semi conscious state. My wife seated besides me was checking my pulse. I asked her: Tell me, what happened? She replied: I felt as though for sometime you had become abnormal! I then related my amazing experience to her but according to her it was merely some bad dream. And yet inwardly I failed to agree with my wife’s observation. After 6 months John returned home since he was on leave. John later told us about how he was trapped in a blazing inferno while fighting the Vietnam War and that miraculously he managed to escape the jaws of death.

After hearing what John had said Dr. Bernhardt was convinced that as soon as he intuitively and with the help of telepathy got knowledge of this near fatal accident in Vietnam, his own subtle body reached there so as to save John from dying thus. The question he asked himself was: Could it be possible that with the help of ones subtle body one could travel any where at will? Spiritual Sciences give an emphatic answer saying: YES! Today slowly but surely even Modern Sciences’ attention has been strongly drawn in this direction. Many such incidences have been recorded the world over wherein not the physical body but the subtle body was fully active.

The subtle body can be separated from the gross visible body as has been the experience of many people the world over. Some years back an experience of the world famous actress Elizabeth Taylor had been published. Elizabeth Taylor as written in that publication was to undergo a major operation. She was made to lie down on the operation table and was anaesthetized. The operation being a serious one continued for some time and when it ended the surgeons suddenly realized that Elizabeth Taylor’s body lay lifeless on the operation table. Her breathing had stopped, blood pressure was falling perilously and her heart beats were very faint. After great effort the medical team revived Elizabeth Taylor. When she regained her composure she said: I saw my self being operated with my own eyes!

Elizabeth Taylor was actually unconscious due to the influence of anesthesia administered to her for the operation. The doctors were wonderstruck and hence asked her: How could you see your own operation being carried out by us? Elizabeth Taylor replied: I too was seeing my physical body lying on the operation table just as I can see the body of another person (meaning she was a witness or Sakshi of her own body). I saw my entire gross body i.e. head, face, mouth, nose etc. I actually felt that I had ‘come out of my body’. I felt I was seeing my body just as I would be seeing the body of any other individual. I felt that my own body was separate from me. At that time I felt that my body was very light in weight akin to a bird’s feather.

Since the doctors suspected that Taylor had temporarily entered a dream state they asked her: Tell us, what exactly happened during the operation? Taylor described each step of the operation. Not only this but she also described what apparatus and materials were used for the operation and in what sequence! Amazingly she also described how the chief surgeon had yelled when a particular apparatus was missing and what words he had exactly uttered.

After hearing Elizabeth all doubts were dispelled. A point to note is that anyone well versed with Indian Spiritual Philosophy will not be surprised at all to read incidences like those mentioned above because Indian Spirituality has always maintained that apart from the gross body (Sthool Sharira) there exists a subtle body (Sookshma Sharira) and a causal body (Karana Sharira). As against this such incidences can certainly amaze Westerners. It is not as though Westerners do not know about the soul being separate from the body because saints and great philosophers of the West too have deeply studied Spiritual sciences. No doubt they accepted the existence of a subtle principle but because flourishing Modern Sciences scoffed those findings as ‘blind beliefs’, intellectuals the world over failed to give due importance to this subtle principle.

And yet despite their non acceptance miraculous incidences explained above continue to take place even today. This has forced modern material scientists too to accept that man’s consciousness is not eternally bound to his gross body of flesh and bones. This is because the conscious principle/subtle body can move about everywhere without the gross body moving an inch. The great Psychologist Dr. Themla Moss has proved that “All individuals without exception can separate their conscious/subtle body from their gross body and within a second can travel to regions thousands of miles away”.

In order to prove the existence of that subtle conscious body which is beyond the material laws of nature, Dr. Moss enumerated many real incidences. One such incidence took place in 1908 A.D. There was a meeting of the House of Lords in Great Britain. A ‘no confidence’ motion was set against the government at that time and voting for the same was to take place that very day. The opposition Party was very strong politically and hence it was most required that all government members of the House be present and that none remain absent. And yet one very important ruling party member Sir Cornrush was very ill. There was no way he could get up from his bed at home and yet he was very keen on attending the voting session at the House of Lords. He pleaded with the doctors to allow him to attend the voting session but the doctors refused to do so point blank. Thus he failed to attend the voting session. And yet in the House of Lords many members saw Sir Cornrush taking part in the voting session. On the other hand doctors attending to the ailing Sir Cornrush insisted that he was resting in his bed at his residence.

Regarding one more incident Dr. Moss writes: A session was going on in Victoria House of British Columbia Parliament. At that time one of its honorable members called Charles Wood was very ill. The doctors had given hope for Wood’s very survival too. And yet Charles Wood was very keen on attending that Parliament session. The doctors refused to allow Wood to even get up from his bed and hence in despair he continued resting there. And yet very amazingly other members of Parliament actually saw Charles Wood seated in Victoria House for the session. During the said session many photographs too were taken and when they were developed one could see Charles Wood clearly in them!

The world famous philosopher, thinker and psychologist Dr. Carl Jung himself has experienced his subtle body separating or ‘coming out’ of his physical body. This experience has been elaborated further in his famous book “Memories, Dreams and Reflections”. In an incident in the year 1944 A.D. Carl Jung got a heart attack. It was a very dangerous attack and according to his doctor, Dr. Jung was face to face with death. Dr. Jung writes about this experience as follows: While I was being administered medicines and injections for saving my life I experienced many strange things. Even now it is difficult for me to decisively say whether I was unconscious at that time or whether I was undergoing a vivid dream. And yet what is crystal clear is that I actually felt I was ‘hanging’ in interstellar space. Further my body felt as though it was as light as a cotton fiber. From the place actually where I was I felt I was seeing Jerusalem which was thousands of miles away as though I was seated in an air craft flying in the sky with the city flying past below on earth. After this I manifested in a worship hall. There I felt my body to be so weightless that I could go about anywhere without any hindrance. Immediately I saw a ’shadow’ hovering above me. This ’shadow’ said: Now you must re-enter your physical body. I hence carried out its command. Now my experience was that I was no longer independent to move about as before. But what is very important is that this vivid experience gave me inner wisdom and thus all my previous doubts were dispelled totally. Now I realized what actually takes place after any human being dies.

Without doubt today Modern Material Science has concluded in one voice that what we call ‘matter’ is not an ultimate independent unit of this cosmos. Instead great scientists proclaim that a miniscule atom of matter is also the result of many more subtle particles. When these subtle particles were analyzed during high leveled research studies the Philosophy of Consciousness commenced.

In the year 1968 A.D., renowned Russian scientists like Dr. V. Inushin, Chekov, N. Norovov, N. Korarova and Guadulin carried out important experiments. After completing their research studies they accepted that all creatures of the world not only possess a gross physical body (made of flesh, bones etc) but that they possess a subtle conscious body too.

These eminent Russian scientists called this subtle body as “The Biological Plasma Body”. While elaborating further they said that it not just merely a collective unit of preliminary units of life which in turn arise from activated electrical molecules but that it is a well managed and self controlled principle. It thus manifests its own magnetic arena.

Spiritual Sciences proclaim that subtle consciousness can never be ‘grasped by any gross principle and that it is only a subjective experience. It is but natural that in future Modern Science which has analyzed this gross material world at great length will realize that consciousness can never be pin pointed with even the most advanced technological apparatus and that instead they will have to dive deep into the recesses of their soul/psyche to gain a first hand subjective experience.

While researching into the Biological Plasma Body renowned scientists have also analyzed their underlying principles. Soviet scientists have conducted many experiments in order to study the designing/structure and function of this Bio-plasma. Later they concluded that Bio-plasma predominantly exists in the brain region. Further functionally it is most active in the Sushumna (subtle spine) and muscular cells.

The Bhagwad Geeta compares this human body to a tree wherein the branches are at the base and the roots are at the top end. Scientists have proven the existence of a vital force which is not cosmic consciousness/soul but is energy of the level of the subtle body. It is also called the electrical energy of the human body. It is present in all creatures without exception.

Prof. Dr. Heraldwar of Yale University’s Neuro Academy has proved that every creature be it a mere ant too is covered by an ‘electro-dynamic’ aura. Later another scientist of this very University named Dr. Leonard Ravitz continued research studies on this line. According to his findings this ‘electro-dynamic’ aura can be influenced with the help of the brain. If we make a parallel study, Indian Spiritual Science has given us the path of Dhyana-Dharana or Meditation-Concentration as elucidated in Yogic texts.

Now it is virtually a water tight conclusion that Modern Science too is heading in this direction and that too with great success. A point to be noted is that this success was already attained if we study ancient Yoga Philosophy texts. Mythological (Puranas) and other spiritual texts describe so many examples which can only be called miraculous and mind boggling.

When we understand the infinite potency of subtle principles it just does not seems impossible that Rishis, Munis, demigods, demons etc traveled to far off galaxies, planets etc in a matter if micro seconds via their will power (Sankalpa Shakti) or a subtle medium. It is a great possibility that in future scientists find a way to reach other planets, galaxies etc via a subtle medium instead of inventing hi-fi technology which uses up billions of hard earned dollars. The famous electronics specialist Dr. Nichovson has gone on to say that the electronic medium will become so powerful in the next fifty years that with its help scientists will be able to travel easily in interstellar space. Suppose a scientist wants to solve a problem seated billions of miles away in another planet a scientist from Earth will tell him: Please wait for just a minute because I will myself come there and solve it! All this will happen only with the help of the subtle body.

It is important to note that each individual does not possess merely one body made up of flesh, blood etc. This is because within this gross visible body exist 2 more bodies called subtle body (Sukshma Sharira) and causal body (Karana Sharira). Between these 2 bodies the subtle body is more active and influential. After death the physical body disintegrates but the subtle body’s existence persists. It is this subtle body that paves the way for a fresh new body which is called ‘birth’ by us all.

After one dies although the physical body disintegrates ones mind, psychic imprints (Sanskars) and good deeds/bad deeds continue to exist and enter a new body called rebirth. This subtle body also harbors memory of previous births/incarnations. Hence many a times people identify and remember their past life family members, dear ones etc. It is this subtle body that ‘transports’ ones mind, psychic imprints (Sanskars) and good deeds/bad to the new body (rebirth) after death of the previous body. In reality when we die a certain type of state of ‘rest’ ensues wherein it is as though a living being is warding off the ‘tension’ and ‘hard work’ performed in the previous body. It is like a business man, executive, teacher, house wife etc who after a hard long grinding day, goes to sleep at night for a well deserved rest. Next day when they wake up they feel rejuvenated and look forward to another hard day’s work. In the same way after death when the subtle body ‘rests’ for some time before being reborn it manifests enough capacity to toil hard in the next body called rebirth. Of course there are certain living beings who take up a fresh new body (birth) after giving up the previous body (death) without any rest or pause. Generally such re-born individuals tend to be relatively weak both in body and mind.

In any birth the subtle body is as functional as the gross body. When we go to sleep at night and visualize vivid dreams know for sure that it is the subtle body which is at work. It is only the subtle body that is solely responsible for divine vision, hearing far off sounds, seeing far off objects, thought movements, knowledge of the future (prophecy making), visualizing demigods etc. Via Yoga steps like Pratyahar (mastering the 5 sense organs), Dharana (inculcating a one pointed focused mind), Dhyana (uninterrupted meditation) and Samadhi (trance or super conscious state) the aspirant makes his subtle body sacred and potent. This subtle body is the fount of Ridhi-Sidhis (Divine Powers).

As soon as death overtakes us our physical body gets destroyed immediately. On an average it takes some time before one gets a fresh new body (birth). Between death and a new birth a living being exists solely due to the help of the subtle body. Even after one is reborn with a new gross body, the subtle and causal bodies too simultaneously continue to exist in it. They are the root source of Extra Sensory Perceptions or ESP. Via devotion, meditation and other spiritual practices it is the subtle and causal bodies that are made more one pointed and taintless. If these 2 bodies are made potent our physical body exudes radiance, valor, divine aura/light and divine wisdom. Zest and zeal in ones life is but the manifestation of a radiant subtle body.

Heaven and hell are also manifestations of the subtle body. Wisdom, good/bad psychic imprints, good/bad qualities, inclinations etc have a direct relationship with the subtle body. Ghosts etc too are dependent on the subtle body. It also is responsible for the manifestation of divine experiences, Divine Powers of Yoga (Ridhi-Sidhi), dream interpretations etc.

In order to prove emphatically the existence of the subtle body, many incidences have been described in Ancient History, Mythology etc. Adi Guru Shankaracharya entered the corpse of a dead King Amrook to gain wisdom of married life. Ramkrishna Paramhans, even after giving up his saintly mortal coil had given Darshan (sacred vision) to his disciple Swami Vivekananda. Puranas describe such examples virtually on every page.

The founder of Theosophical Society Madam Blavatsky was known to lock herself in a room and yet appear in the midst of others who were outside the room with the help of her subtle body. In fact she would even give spiritual discourses. Similar incidences have been described with reference to Colonel Townsend. Amongst well known Yoga aspirants Harvetelman, Lindars, Andrew Jackson, Dr. Malth, Jelt Carrington, Duravel, Muldon, Oliver Laws, Pavers, Dr. Mesmer, Alexandra, Davidnit, Brunton etc have mentioned their experiences and practices which were based on proving the existence of the subtle body. J. Muldon had successfully demonstrated the separation of his subtle body from his gross physical body. Based on these experiences he has authored a book called “The Projection of the Astral Body”.

In India Swami Vishudhananda and Swami Nigamananda have given us all proof of such tangible experiences. It is said that once Tailang Swami was put in police lock up by an English Police Officer for roaming around naked in Varanasi. Next day to everyone’s astonishment Tailang Swami was roaming around outside the police lock up. Such descriptions are also found with reference to great saints like Mahindranath, Gorakhnath, Jalandharnath, Kanappa etc.

Following is a list of names of great Western Philosophers and Seers who not only belive in the existence of the soul but also agree that the soul persists even after the physical body dies and deteriorates: Ralph Waldo Trine, Midney, Flower, Ela Wheeler, Bilcox, William walker, Atkinson, James, Kenny etc. Great Seers of past times like Carlisle, Emerson, Kant, Hegel, Thomas, Hillman Dyson etc too have a similar viewpoint.

Our actions via the gross body and thoughts of the mind get ‘printed’ in the subtle body which are called psychic-imprints (Sanskars). Man’s nature and character are but the sum total of his thinking and activities spanning over innumerable incarnations. The more this nature is adhered to, to that extent those types of psychic imprints get etched in our psyche. In turn these imprints mature and ripen so as to create our good/bad destiny and fruits of actions. In this manner it is the subtle body that has designed the process of giving man the fruits of his past deeds or misdeeds.

If we eat unwholesome food, breathe polluted air and act undesirably our physical body undergoes diseases and illnesses. In the same way vile thoughts and vile actions “pollute” the subtle body and thus loses its power and potential. A man who foolishly insists on pursuing the thorny path of tainted thinking and actions is always seen to be weak and full of cowardice. As a result a day comes when he becomes a mentally ill and diseased patient. By itself the subtle body pervades our gross body just as butter in milk. Despite this it is more concentrated in the brain area. Vile/tainted thinking induces imbalance in our mind, brain and subtle body. This results in ones inner personality getting tainted and diseased. This in turn manifests externally as obstacles in the way of man’s material and spiritual progress.

AUTHOR: Shriram Sharma Acharya founder of the International Gayatri Family was a great Yogi seer and incarnation of God who wrote volumes of scientific literature mainly on spiritual subjects for world welfare and peace. For more scientific e-books visit: http://www.shriramsharma.com/ and http://www.dsvv.org/ DESCRIPTION: Free e-books on Future Scientific Religion, Gayatri Science & Kundalini Yoga correlated to Neurosciences-ESP, Endocrinology, Anatomy, Psychology & Sociology for 1) material & spiritual prosperity & 2) uniting the world peacefully as a family.

Top neuroscience psychologists researching the female brain can easily blame it all on “neurohormone oxytoxin” when it comes to the differences between the “mommy brain” and “mate seeking brain” or rather the time periods between mates. Of course, these realities of the changes in the human female brains is of value to better understand and then use such attributes to excel at various things. Now that I’ve got your attention, let’s discuss this for a moment.

Knowing that the single woman brain operates different than the married, and child bearing brain could be useful to success in teams in sports, business, government, and it would thus, make sense to take advantage of this. All women should understand their brains to take advantage of their strengths during these times. So, I ask;

How can we use these cycles and knowledge of the various chemicals running through the brain to improve trust, empathy, and improvement during negotiations to prevent political impasse?

In an educational setting how can we modify class assignments to improve retention knowing these things, modifying the delivery to tie-in with these facts? Does this mean we should have different ways of teaching for male and females – especially females with regards to their (life or relationship cycle)?

How is the female brain able to cope with radical changes during let’s say dating, advertising for a mate, new born, loss of new born (still births), loss of mate, divorce, etc? Is this a time for intervention? Are women taught about these emotional times to counter-act the radical changes?

Do creativity break-thrus happen during transitional periods? How fast is the death of creativity upon a new birth? Are we certain that it’s lost, or does the creativity go into motherhood?

Are there diet strategies which can be induced to level out the shift, or is that biologically dangerous for the offspring, and “attachment theory” – Can the same chemicals in the brain during these biological brain transitions be mimicked to use for team building, or focus on a certain “highly important” project, mission, or activity? Not necessarily “marrying ones job” but sort of.

Does a woman with 10-years of child-baring yes, as in a white mother prior to 1920’s with 8-10 kids, or a Mormon Mom with 10-kids or a Mexican Mom with 10-kids – wouldn’t it completely and permanently re-wire that brain for life, and wouldn’t those moms be better empathetic team builders, almost to the point of the inability to jump out of that role even if they wanted too?

Would this make them better Human Resource Professionals? Or start-up company “corporate moms” to keep the team as a family unit as it grows through various market hard-ships. If you were building a PERFECT Public Relations team, wouldn’t you thus, want a 10-year veteran mom for corporate relations, a few single women for creative content, and a couple married women to help tweak the message when marketing to baby boomers?

I mean these realities have so many real-world applications correct? Or is this far too “stereotypical profiling” which is definitely a common charge of many in field of psychology? If we could overcome the political correctness and discuss these things, we’d have happier and more successful females in our society. We should be talking about this, not sweeping such realities under the carpet. We need more study, if nothing more than to allow people to help themselves. Please consider all this.

Recommended Reading;

“The Female Brain,” by Louann Brizendine, Broadway Publishers, New York, NY, (2007), pp 304, ISBN: 978-07679-201-00

Lance Winslow is the Founder of the Online Think Tank, a diverse group of achievers, experts, innovators, entrepreneurs, thinkers, futurists, academics, dreamers, leaders, and general all around brilliant minds. Lance Winslow hopes you’ve enjoyed today’s discussion and topic. http://www.WorldThinkTank.net. Have an important subject to discuss, contact Lance Winslow.

When planning the Phantom Self project, I felt eagerness mixed with apprehension – which is one way we typically feel when future events loom in our lives. I think about other people’s futures with more equanimity. I have great difficulty feeling the same way about your future as about my own. It is like trying to imagine that my left arm belongs to someone else – a bizarre, difficult feat of the imagination – yet there are cases in neurophysiology which report that experience in otherwise sane individuals.

We are attached to the saga of ourselves as ongoing subjects of experience. We readily imagine we will somehow continue to exist, to have experiences, even after the death of our biological organisms. Many of us who do not believe in an afterlife nevertheless have no trouble imagining one. I picture myself floating up, out of my body. I see grief-stricken family and friends around the bed. I hear their conversations – I try to take part and realize I cannot be heard. Later, I leave the earth and find myself in some other place – hopefully a pleasant one – where I may again meet people who were my friends when I was alive.

Such ideas are impossible to disprove. But there is little or no scientific evidence for them. The notion of an afterlife strikes me as wishful thinking. Let’s assume I am not something that can exist independent of a living body. Then what am I? To try to answer that question, I will introduce a thought-experiment. A thought-experiment is a method used by philosophers to clarify concepts. The experimenter describes a hypothetical situation, then asks, “What would we say about that, if it happened?” As thought-experiments go, this one is plain vanilla. It does not violate the laws of physics; in fact, it is so in keeping with current technological trends that it could become reality within a few decades. And then we’ll have to decide what to say about it.

We are getting very good at capturing information about the world in electronic form. Consumer-grade digital cameras acquire images in breathtaking detail – better than my aging eyes. Digital sound and video recording are commonplace. 3D shape capture – a field I worked in for years – continues to improve. Motion capture is used to great effect by the video game and animation industries. Automated chemical analysis is another burgeoning field. And our ability to capture detailed information about the human body is improving at warp speed. From old-fashioned Xrays and EEG’s to biometrics, PET scans and functional MRI’s, we can measure countless attributes of our living organisms, not just static qualities like fingerprints but dynamic information about fleeting brain-states. The BC Cancer Agency can now sequence a person’s entire genome in about two weeks. This time is dropping by an order of magnitude every five years. If that trend continues for thirty years, we’ll be doing it in a second.

By the way, a full genome can be stored in a very manageable 1.6 Gb file.

Now suppose that in, say fifty years – by 2059 – we’ll be able to create the equivalent of the transporter technology of Star Trek. I visualize it as a scanner that can capture enough information about physical objects to allow them to be rebuilt at another location. Things transported this way look and taste the same as the originals. The technology works for animate as well as inanimate objects – living creatures continue to live after digitization and reconstruction. They know their names and addresses, recognize their friends, and can recite the same poetry or sports statistics.

Consider the advantages of information-based teleportation compared to airplanes.

First of all, planes pollute – one transcontinental flight uses up a person’s carbon allowance for an whole year. Secondly, flying is less and less pleasant. Not only are we bums in seats, we’re bums that are security risks, who must be put through the ritual humiliations of the Department of Homeland Security. Third, air travel is unreliable. Although the risk to life and limb is small, the risk of missed flights and lost luggage is huge. Fourth – going back to number one, carbon – rising fuel costs will inevitably raise ticket prices to a deterrent level. People will again decide not to fly because it’s too expensive.

Think about the convenience and potentially low cost of travelling as information. No taxis to airports fifteen miles out of town. No need to show up two hours ahead or take off your shoes. Just visit a transporter facility in your neighborhood, pick a cubicle, get scanned with all your stuff and – after a few minutes or maybe an hour to transmit a gargantuan slug of data over the internet – you find yourself in another cubicle in your destination city. If it’s in another country, you’ll still have to go through customs and immigration.

A fail-safe system with plenty of data integrity checks to ensure that big, complicated files are successfully copied without losing a single bit. If you lived in 2050, would you use teleportation technology? If other people used it, if the safety record was good, I bet you would. The alternative will be trains and ships – nice, but expensive and slow – or teleconferencing and Second Life – useful, but not like being there. And here comes the sharp point of the thought experiment. People will only use teleportation if they expect to survive it. They will use it – therefore they will expect to survive it.

If I am teleported to Australia, the living, breathing person who emerges from the terminal down under will be regarded by society as the same guy who entered the terminal in North Vancouver. Testing our concept of ‘the same person’ against the thought experiment of teleportation, I, for one, come down on the side of, “Yes, that would be me.” Being teleported is not the same as dying. Everything important about me would be preserved. This leads to the conclusion that what’s important in personal identity is not substance, but attributes.

The material substance of my physical organism stays in North Vancouver, where it may be decomposed into its constituent molecules. The organization of my organism is transmitted to Australia, where it is reinstantiated in a new substance.

The shift in thinking from substance to attributes is subtle. It is also abstract. What does it mean? Being attributes rather than substance means that we are less like musical instruments than like tunes – less like computer hardware and more like software. Beethoven’s 5th is the same piece of music when played by different orchestras and heard in different concert halls. It is instantiated in a variety of media – in sheet music, Ipods, and human memory. Firefox is one program running on millions of computers.

If we are attributes, not substances, what difference does it make?

For one thing, it changes our relationship to death. If I am a substance, then the death of my physical organism means one of two things. If my existence depends on my body remaining alive, then the death of my body is the end of me. Or, if I can somehow exist independently of my body, then death is the beginning of a radically new phase. But if I am a collection of attributes, then death is something else – it’s like a terminal hard drive crash. A nuisance, but not a catastrophe if you have a backup.

If we are attributes, then change matters. Change is a bit like death and rebirth, but need not be so radical; mostly we change gradually, preserving enough to make us recognizably ‘the same’ from one day, or year, to the next.

Am I the same person I was at age five? Certainly there are similarities. I remember thinking ahead to starting Grade 1 with the sinking feeling that I was about to lose my freedom for a very long time. On July 1st of 2009, I felt that I’d made it through. Again I have the opportunity to do what interests me. On the other hand, there are lots of differences between me at age five and me at age sixty-one. Same person? Is it a clear question?

If we are attributes, then our relationship to our future and past selves is not radically different from our relationship to other people. It is different in degree, not kind.

Each of us plays an important causal role in determining how life will be for our future selves. What I learn today may become a memory or skill I retain for a long time. If I fry my brains with crystal meth, the future Gordon may regret it.

We also affect the lives of others, and the world around us. Beethoven’s music and Shakespeare’s plays are recreated in thousands of minds, centuries after their deaths. Every conscientious parent and teacher conveys a wealth of information to the children in their care. And we all influence each other as we interact, willy-nilly, in countless ways.

I hated the third President of a company I once worked for. He was a former Xerox executive who fired a close friend of mine (the first President). I plotted to get him sacked, and eventually succeeded. A year later I was writing in my journal, and caught myself using the word, “Boom!” in the same odd way he did. I had picked it up from him. And although I tried to stop, a couple of years after that I was still saying “Boom!” in that way. A bit of his personality entered me, and stuck around. Like a tune stuck in my head. Like a software virus.

Our brains are wonderful at storing memories, mannerisms, habits, skills, emotional responses to various kinds of events – all the qualities that make us who we are. When our brains stop working properly, we may be so transformed as to be recognizable only by face, fingerprints, and dental work. The continuity that healthy brains provide lets us carry out projects that take a long time, like becoming a surgeon or raising a family. This gives us a very good reason to try to preserve the life and health of our biological organisms.

But our brains’ capacity to store information is not our only means of influencing the future. We also write things down; and what we write can be read by others. And we talk. Many tasks are too big to be accomplished by a single individual. Leaders are people who share a vision, inspire others to work towards a common goal. Asking others to support your cause is not unlike exhorting yourself to get on with some personal project.

The idea that we are attributes, not substances, casts a new light on the diversity that exists within individuals. I know a couple who fight bitterly and often when they are alone together – but can instantly transform into gracious, delightful hosts when company arrives for dinner. Voice tones change from harsh and hurtful to pleasantly modulated, light and musical. It’s as though different spirits came to inhabit their bodies – the angry ones displaced by the benign ones. But what are these spirits? Brain-states triggered by a change in circumstances. Like sad and happy tunes played on the same instrument, or different programs run on the same computer.

If we are attributes, not substances, then the immortality we can aspire to consists in our effect on other people and on the world at large. When I die, I lose the highly integrated continuity engine that is my central nervous system. If I have lived without putting my stamp on the world I lived in, without reaching out to others – then it is indeed a death, but maybe not one that makes much difference. But if I have communicated to others what I really think and feel, transformed some part of the world, those effects do not suddenly stop when my brain dies. I live on, in the only way I can live on.

And while my organism is alive, it’s more or less the same thing. My influence on my future selves is like my influence on other people. I can be helpful, or I can cause trouble. I can prudently look out for their interests, or be wasteful and short-sighted. I have an influence on what will happen both inside my skin and outside it. The skin is not such a very important boundary. It is an important boundary of the biological organism, but if we are attributes, skin does not limit us. Information can flow across skin.

I can feel a reaction kicking in – “Wait a minute! I am a biological organism! I’m a human being, flesh, bones and guts.” That idea is hard to shake, and grips us at the first hint of threat. I suspect the sense of physical self is grounded in millions of years of evolution. It’s easy to imagine a living creature without a sense of the boundary between itself and the rest of the world – the skin line. Such a creature would be at high risk of injury, and would have lost in the Darwinian struggle against other species more attuned to protecting and nourishing their bodies. Behind my sense of physical self is a major biological imperative.

The imperative applies not only myself at this moment, but myself at other times. The success of the human species depends on our propensity to worry about ourselves and our families in the future – to lay in provisions for winter, plan for our children’s education. We bound our lives with a visceral sense of self, which shapes and motivates a huge amount of what we do. A threat to self always gets our attention. Opportunities to acquire stuff are rarely ignored. Greed and fearfulness often dominate our behaviour. Some of us think that domination is excessive. But we are all subject to it.

I suggest that we acknowledge our feelings, and move on. We have many urges rooted in biology. We have learned to curb some of them. Especially in Canada, most of us are pretty good at inhibiting our aggressive impulses. We disapprove of unbridled violence; we recognize the need to suppress aggression in order to have a civilized life. We are much less likely to suppress our selfish impulses.

There is a popular idea that all actions are motivated by self-interest, including ‘altruistic’ ones. This is a reductivist notion with no explanatory power, which serves mainly to mask important moral distinctions. Yet it has currency in our culture. Why? I suspect because acting out of self-interest is so deeply ingrained in us that we have trouble imagining an alternative.

It’s the strong – and I believe, irrational – hold that the idea of the self has over us, and particularly its role in motivating action, that led me to characterize it as the ‘phantom self’. Like the Phantom of the Opera, the self has a powerful voice that demands to be obeyed. Like an amputee’s phantom limb, it is a vividly felt presence – but there is nothing really there.

This project will only succeed if it becomes a dialogue. I invite any interested reader to leave comments, particularly critical ones. Ideas thrive on argument.

Visit the Phantom Self website.

Sigmund Freud was an Austrian neurologist who founded the psychoanalytic school in psychology. He was born on May 6, 1856 and died on 23 September 1939. During his life time of 83 years, he has found many novel theories in many fields. Dream analysis is one of the most interesting teachings among them. As it is a huge subject, this article is about what we can basically understand about the scientific literature of dream- problems by reading his book “Interpretation of dreams” which was published in1913.

When we hear the word “dream”, a feeling that cannot be expressed in words comes to our mind (mental processes). It is something that we cannot feel in the real world or in our waking state. There is a mysterious feeling about dreams. Because of that, we have become very curious about knowing what actually makes us to see dreams and how it happens.

People who were in the past also had this enigma about dreams. They had their conceptions of universe and of the soul. By mixing the idea of dream with these kinds of conceptions, they believed that dream is something supernatural which predicts the future and also believed it as a message from god. They thought of two classes of dreams. One is the dreams which influenced only by the present or the past. The other one is on the other hand, the ones which determine the future. This belief was there for many centuries.

But in the later periods, the scientific interest in the phenomena of dreams was improved.

There is a problem about the relation of the dream to the waking state. After we woke up, we feel like the dream we saw is from another world, though it is not. We feel like that because the dream is something entirely different and alien from the things that we concern in the waking state. Or else, there can be some few elements we had in the waking state. Our normal behavior and the consciousness are entirely lost in the dreaming state, therefore the dreams brings out the complete unencumbered isolation of the psyche. Also at least a little part of it has to be somewhere in our real experiences.

Sometimes we can see the dreams which we feel that we have never known in the real world. It can be about a place or a person or anything that we cannot reminisce that we have known in the waking state. Not only that, but also there can be so much of knowledge in the dreams that we cannot remember in our actual life. That is the knowledge and the memory of our unconsciousness. The things which we see in our dreams can be the materials which were entered to our memory in our childhood. Most of them are caused to product interesting “hypermnesic” dreams.

When concerning about the stimuli and sources of dreams, it says that a dream is a result of such a disturbance which occurs to disturb our sleep. Dream is a reaction of our mental processes against that disturbance. There are four categories of stimuli.

1) External sensory stimuli.

It means objective stimuli. For an example, a strong light may fall upon eyes while we are in a good sleep. As it disturbs to our sleep, it can be a stimuli for a dream. In our dreams it can be made us see as we walk alone the beach in a sunny day.

Sometimes we can see different dreams for the same stimuli. It is because there are some memory images in our mind at that particular time we get the stimuli and the most suitable image which goes with the objective stimuli is taken to produce the dream.

2) Internal sensory stimuli.

A dream cannot be produced only by the external sensory stimuli, because the entire external sensory stimulus which comes while we sleep, cannot make a dream or support to originate a dream independently. There has to be some internal facts too. Therefore we have to consider about the internal sensory stimuli also. Subjective sensations which we see or hear in our waking state are important in dream illusions. The subjective stimuli are independent of external accidents. They are, so to speak at the disposal of the interpretation whenever they are required. The main proof of this stimuli is that the hypnogogic hallucinations. They are very obstructive but changeable pictures which people see while falling asleep. Some may linger for a while even after we opened our eyes. If someone wakes up shortly after having that kind of an experience, it will be oft possible to trace in the dream pictures, the ones s/he saw before falling to the sleep. It also can take as a “hypnogogic” hallucination. Not only that, but also auditory hallucinations may also occur and then can be in the dreams.

3) Internal (organic) physical stimuli.

Our internal organs are reminds us their existence. That also causes for a creation of a dream. If there is a disease, it can become a source of most painful sensation. Psyche become more conscious of its physicality than the waking state and it receives some stimulating which are originating in the parts of our body. Diseases of heart and lungs may be subject to the nightmares. Stimuli proceeding from the interior of the organism, from the nervous system, apply at most an unconscious affect on our mood during the day time. But, at night, that effect of the impression which was had at the day time is no longer active. The impressions that came up are able to force themselves to get our attention. They are drowned by the other external affects at the day time.

4) Psychic sources of excitation.

People dream of what they do in the waking state and of their interesting things. That interest is not only a psychic bond, but also joining the dream into the real life. If an interest which we have during our waking state, together with the internal and external sensory stimuli that occur during sleep, enough to cover the whole etiology of the dream. But the interests in our waking state are not very influential to say confidently that every one who dreams are continuing these interests of the waking state.

We all have experienced that dreams are forgotten after waking. They fade away when we woke up. We can recall it after waking but most of the times we cannot remember the whole complete exact dream. Sometimes we know that we have dreamed during the sleep but do not remember what we dreamed of. But the dreams manifest a peculiar power to be in the memory. Some dreams are last in the memory for a long time such as for 35 years, without being forget a little part of it. And also without losing the freshness of that dream.

This forgetting is a complex phenomenon. The factors which cause to forget in the waking state are can be the cause to forget the dreams also. In waking state, we forget such a lot of things, may be because they are slight to remember or there can be a slight amount of emotional feelings. But we can remember the strong important things obviously. This is true for the dreams also. In dreams, most of the scenes are lack of order and lack of sense. This also causes to forget because we easily forget the things which are not in an order and lack of sense. The relationship of the dream to the waking state is also important in forget dreams. If that dream has a great relation to the waking state, it will not be forgotten. Also when we are waking, our attention suddenly rushes to the sensations of the real world. Therefore, only few dream-images are capable to be in the memory by force with that rush. But the people who are specially interested in dreaming, can remember the dreams more easily and also they dream more than other people.

As we know, the hypnogogical hallucinations (even in their content) they are identical with dream pictures. Transformation of an idea into a hallucination is not the only departure of the dream from the corresponding waking thought. It can make a suitable situation from a hallucination. It shows us something as in actual.

In this book, “Interpretations of Dreams”, Freud discusses about the ethical sense in dreams too. He considers about the dream as a sub problem, to what extent the feelings and the moral bonds of the waking state affect the dream life. Some writers assert that there is no influence to the dream life from the moral obligations. But some, on the other hand emphasis that the moral bond which are related to man persist even in the dream life. Of course there are such immoral dreams that no one denies. But we have to know how they originate. All the ones who consider about this problem, have recognized a special psychic source for immorality of dreams. We are not responsible for our dreams. Dreams take us to the reality of our lives. But if someone can cleanse his/her mind morally before s/he sleep, that person might not see immoral dreams.

Since dreams have become something biological, there were many incomplete theories about dreams, such as; “Dream is something which was sent by god to the man…” Scientists’ and medical writers’ most favored theory is that only a fragment of psychic activity paralyzed by sleep finds expression in dreams. It can be identified as the most popular theory of dreams.

The relation between dreams and mental diseases is another important section that Freud has discussed here. When we talk about this relation, we have to concern about three things.

1. Etiological and clinical relations as when a dream represents a psychotic condition.
2. The changes that the dream life undergoes in cases of mental illnesses.
3. Inner relations between dreams and psychoses, analogies that point to an intimate relationship.

After having an idea about these things, an abnormal morbid phenomenon can be considered as an increase from time to time recurring normal dream state. The unequivocal agreement between dreams and mental diseases goes to characteristic details also.

According to Freud; “It is very probable, however, that a modified conception of the dream must also influence our views regarding the inner mechanism of mental disorders, and hence we may say that we are working towards the explanation of the psychoses when we endeavor to elucidate the mystery of dreams.” (p.102)

Freud has explained this subject in a really interesting and a broad way with a lot of experiences as examples. When we study about these things, our curiosity and the interest of the subject are developed. It encourages continuing the study.

To understand the place of mind from the Buddhist point of view, we must first of all look at the Buddha’s views on the cosmos (universe). According to him, the mind is to be understood in a vast cosmic space.

Biologically humans are weaker. Other animals are born armed for their survival. But human on the other hand, has mind for everything, but not as a weapon. In fact religion is brought out as a component of understanding mind for the existence of human kind.

Buddha realized that mind is not a thing or an entity with a separate existence but that, which arises on conditions.

“Dhuran gaman eaka charan – Asareeran guhaasayan

Ye chiththan sanna messanthi – Mokkhanthi maara bandhana”

This famous gatha describes the nature of mind. It says that mind travels alone, travel long journeys. It doesn’t have a body. Lives in a cave; It’s our body, Mind gets free and detached from “Mara Bandhana” when it liberated from “Mokkha” (foolishness). As Lord Buddha pas preached, mind is colourless, immaterial, and invisible. In other words, mind in Buddhism is an ever changing, constant, quick-moving process. Buddhist view on mind refuses the materialistic aspect of mind. In Buddhism, the mind is treated as an ever changing process of thinking and meditating. It’s said that mind is most of the time out of our control. We should not let our mind to control us instead individuals have to control their minds.

The whole process of thinking is mind, which is the mental process. Thus its status is supreme. Thinking and consciousness are components of that total mental process. Mind as inner world processes is a Buddhist development. Mind is conceived not as a substance but as a process.

The Buddha insisted that the mind is the most significant aspect of the individual. The “patichcha samuppaada” implies that for the individual the twelve links are of a mental character.

Mental and physical factors are conditioning factors and they are relative interdependent and there is nothing absolute and independent. There is no first cause. So mind is not the first cause. It runs through birth as an interdependent interconnected and relative factor. The mind really refers to sensation, perception and thinking or volition in patichcha samuppaada.

Buddhism maintains that all stimuli of senses make the individual move in two directions of attraction and repulsion. One has to attain a position of neutrally through self acquired culture. Both these processes of mental stirring (anarodha and virodha) underlie the genesis of the life process (bhava). In the absence of such activity of the mind, the individual gains no momentum for the regeneration of bhava. All mental and spiritual endeavors of Buddhism aim at bringing about this neutrality.

Mind is where all our emotions and desires are stored. So by attaining “Nibbana”, a person can get rid of all these. Nibbana is the ultimate aim of a Buddhist. It is the ultimate state of mind of an individual who has completely got rid of craving. Here too, the key factor is the mind. Man can put a stop to rebirth by avoiding what is evil, by doing what is good and by purifying his mind by meditation.

Sensation is experienced by the mind. These are sometimes pleasant, sometimes painful and sometimes neutral. Perception means recognition of names of beings, things, places sound, writing etc. Thinking means here volition which are neither good nor evil or thoughts based on the past and imagining of the future, creating good or bad kamma. Consciousness means sense awareness of sound, smell, tastes, forms, feelings and mental objects at the moment.

These four components of the Nama dharma are the creations of the mind. If an individual is not alert and careful he becomes the decisive factors of the mind and obscures the truth. Then falsehood will prevail and cause the mind to defile.

According to Buddhism, a cultivated mind gives spiritual liberation peace, security and happiness. The mind develops wisdom which discriminates right and wrong, good and evil, selflessness and selfishness by being aware of right understanding and right mindfulness at all times. By cultivating the mind, one can eliminate the cycle of rebirth and attain nibbaana the absolute really selflessness. This object can only be achieved by adhering to the Noble Eightfold Path, which embodies morality, mind culture and wisdom (sila, Samadhi, panna). All three aspects can be achieved only through a cultured mind. A cultured mind leads to progress, happiness and nibbana, while an uncultured mind leads to degeneration, destruction and continuance of sansara and suffering.

The development of mind is two-fold.

Development of mental concentration (tranquility or “Samatha bhavana”)
Development of wisdom or clear insight (“Vipassana bhavana”)
The ultimate objective is to reach the unshakable tranquility and purity of mind, which is the foundation of insight leading to deliverance from the cycle of rebirth and misery.

With regard to Buddha’s attitude towards psychology, it is fair to conclude that “Abhidamma” is psychology, as he places a great deal of emphasis on the importance of the role of the mind. We need to recognize the fact that mind is the forerunner of all mental states. Kamma which is the pivot on which Buddha Dhamma revolves is generated by speech, body and mind. It is also a mental factor (cheithasika). The importance of the mind in Buddhism in the five aggregates (panchakkandha), where four of the five are mental components. Of the thirty seven factors of enlightenment the majority of factors listed are mental. In the eightfold path which is the essence of Buddhism all the right factors are “cheithasika” (mental factors). They are beautiful mental factors. Thus the supreme role of mind is stressed. Buddhism based its philosophy on suffering, its diagnosis and cure and treatment. It can be interpreted as psychiatry a branch of psychology. An important role is given to speech in thinking in Buddhism, which is now collaborated by research in psychology. When these facts are evaluated one must conclusively accept the important role played by the mind in Buddhism. A new awareness of inner world mental processes is also a Buddhist development. Buddhism’s preoccupation with analysis of mind resulted in a remarkable revelation of the mental processes.

Thus Buddha Dhamma is teaching of the mind, the operations or processes of the mind, and the deliverance of the mind, it is taught that it is the root of all behaviours. It had an object to serve, the outlook of the individual as merely as an impermanent complex, with no essential reality. In the Nikayas, the outlook and the individual is predominantly one of mind in its manifold workings determining levels of behaviour. In the “Sutras”, the individual is presented as beyond human voluntary control. These prove the power of mind, as explained in Buddhism in various contexts.

Religions have their starting point. Buddhism begins with the Buddha’s search of mind. Buddha’s doctrine is a teaching deep-rooted in psychology. His theories are absolutely unique in the history of religions. Over the decades psychologists have studied the course of mental activities of sensations, perception, speech, thought, consciousness and mind. These studies have forcibly made us aware how close these are to Buddha’s teaching, and yet how far they are. But the similarities are more striking.

Abstract:

In this paper I want to review the investigations from the Citizens Committee for Human Rights in Mental Health. It is this organisation in the United States and other countries that have consistently brought the dangers of psychiatry to the attention of the general public who by and large are the victims of a marriage between pharmaceutical companies and their paid distributors of lethal drugs, psychiatrists. This alliance has been based on the greed for money, profits and kudos all in the name of a science that as one leading authority called – “hokum”

Introduction: A Short History

The history of psychiatry is strewn with the deaths; torture and misadventure that would make any sane person wonder why it has been allowed to continue to practice this black art for so long. Of course the anti-psychiatry movement has been around for almost as long as the profession itself. How did this all begin? You have to go back to the days of the asylums that grew up in the early part of the 1800’s particularly in England and the USA. These places were no more than prisons for the mad, those souls that could not function within the societies norms that dictated how one should act and behave. The head of the asylums was a medical doctor, the first psychiatrist. This man caged the mentally ill in cells, with no heating, little food but rotten scraps and in order to cure them of their madness the inmates were tortured by flogging, burning, immersion in water and many other inhumane acts called treatment. The down fall of the asylums started in England with the York Retreat a Quaker run institute for the mentally ill run on very different lines from the asylums that were government institutions. In the York retreat the inmates were given jobs to perform, were helped by keeping simple rules and rewarded for following them.

They received humane treatment that would lead them to God and sanity. While the York retreat had some success it was still based on control of the mad. Later as the years went by and the 19th century ended the rise of the huge mental hospitals arrived. Psychiatry had new weapons to defeat the mentally ill, this time with brain surgery called lobotomies, hydro-treatment, fire hoses to spray patients with forced jets of water, wet blanket wrapping, where patients would be bound in wet sheets on a bed unable to move for hours, insulin injections, to cause artificial brain seizures and of course electric convulsive therapy – shocking patients with bolts of electricity in order to numb the brain into not remembering why they had problems in the first place. As the 21st century arrived the cost of these hospitals became so burdensome to governments they closed them down and in their stead introduced “care in the community” which ironically did not care at all and most mental health patients became homeless and the new beggars in our streets. It was not until the early 1900’s that finally Freud introduced his “talking cure” a humane way to try and understand the plight of the mentally disturbed and a way of giving them insight and a possible cure. Of course you had to have money for this treatment much as you do today.

Psychoanalysis is for those who can pay the price. As the century blossomed so did Freud’s theory which was to become many types of therapy from behaviourism, cognitive, transactional and many more variegation of his original idea. In fact without Freud there would be no modern psychology as we know it. From about 1960 a new ear for psychiatry emerged. All those barbaric treatments that never worked were about to be replaced, not by another type of institutions but by a chemical straightjacket that came from the pharmaceutical industry. Now drugs were the new form of treatment, suddenly the lowly carer of the insane, and the psychiatrist could become a real doctor and prescribe psychopharmecutical drugs to all. So an era of drug pushing began, where new mental disorders were manufactured in order to sell more drugs. Early in the century Krapelin invented a small book called the DSM (diagnostic statistical manual of mental illness) in this book he gave lists of mental symptoms that if added up in one person lead to a label for their problem, such as depression, anxiety, mania, hysteria, homosexuality, immoral behaviour and much more. As the years went by the profession of psychiatry kept adding to this book and inventing new labels in order to match a drug to manage it.

Today we have the DSM IV version with the next one almost completed as number V. Over the years it has discovered all sorts of new ways to classify human emotions as being mentally ill. Bipolar disorders, ADHD in children, PTSD for soldiers (shell shock of WW1) and many others. While these labels may have some usefulness and have been recognised as genuine problems for a few people, now of course according to psychiatry we are all mentally ill, if not at this moment but in our lifetime. So they divide populations into existing clients of drugs and potential clients of drugs. Today mental health is not a profession, not even a scientific medical branch but simply a marketing arm of the pharmaceutical industry that pays millions of dollars annually to keep the myth of mental illness alive and expanding.

The Evidence;

Here I would like to list some facts that speak for themselves.

• 100 million people worldwide are on psychotropic drugs
• In addition to crippling scores of people daily, every month psychiatric drugs kill an estimated 3,000 worldwide.
• 70% of all psychiatrics drugs are prescribed by general physicians.
• 374 mental disorders are listed; almost all with out a single scientific test to prove they actually exist biologically.
• Psychiatric drugs in 1966 were 44 but by today that has risen to over 180.
• The top five drugs gross more money than half the world’s nations.
• Drugs make over a third of a trillion dollars a year.
• 20 million children around the world are prescribed psychiatric drugs (USA 9 million alone). Most under 5 years old for non-scientific problems.
• Every 75 seconds someone is involuntarily committed a mental institution in the US alone.
• Electric shock therapy is still in use even though it causes memory loss and has little long term benefit to the patients. This is straight forward abuse of Human Rights.

All the above were researched by the Citizens Commission on Human Rights and backed worldwide by some of the most eminent psychiatrists and psychologists today.

The long list above is only the tip of the psychiatric abuse saga. It is a profession based on money and more money. Most drugs in the market are only tested for less than eight weeks in clinical trials before being given FDA approval by a panel of psychiatrists paid for by the very drug companies they are supposed to be regulating. Not a single medical drug on the market today is free of side effects which of course are the real effects of taking dangerous drugs for often fictisous mental illnesses. You cannot solve a life issue my masking it with drugs and expecting to feel better. The issue is still there – so you have to take the drugs for a lifetime in order to never think about your real problems. Of course with the side effects of one drug you are prescribed many others all to combat each others effects – so most people with a diagnosis of mental problems end up on a cocktail of drugs for life. It is amazing the amount of money people spend to chemically anesthetise themselves when a tiny proportion of that cost could be spent seeing a counsellor, psychologist and therapist and actually dealing with their issues and never having to take a drug in the fist place.

Conclusions

Psychiatry, disables, kills and creates drug addicts. Simple really when you add up the costs to society. Do they still have a place in modern medicine at all? Well yes, they could concentrate on helping severely disturbed people with understanding, kindness even when they may have to assert some control over that individual for a short time. However for the vast majority of patients taking psychotropic drugs they could stop them tomorrow (or at least phase them out to minimise withdrawal effects) and start going to see a therapist. I would recommend a counsellor skilled in Cognitive Behavioural Therapy for depression and anxiety, Transactional Analysis for parenting, communications skills, stress at work and many other day to day issues that require some practical skills insight. For personality problems with anger, emotional turmoil, long term unhappiness and dysfunction then a psychoanalyst would be perhaps your choice. Most psychologists who treat patients in counselling are Eclectic this means they borrow from many styles of theory and practice to use the most appropriate approach based on each clients needs. The list is endless but any therapy that helps you to become stable, responsible for your own actions and gives you the insight into choices is better by far than a life time of drugs and unhappiness.

If you feel the need – go see a therapist today – find out how to get away from dispensed drugs and start to find a purpose in life again.

References:

Citizens Commission on Human Rights – 2009 – Psychiatric Violations of Human Rights
DVD Making a killing – Exposure of Drug Companies links to Psychiatry

DSM-IV Statistical Manual of Mental Illness – Version 4

R. Gross (1996) – Psychology – Theory of Mind and Behaviour – refs to historical notes. Hodder and Stoughton Publications (Words 1622)

Dr. Stephen Myler is from Leicester in England, an industrial town in the Midlands of the United Kingdom. He holds a B.Sc (Honours) in Psychology from the UKs Open University the largest in the UK; he also has an M.Sc and Ph.D in Psychology from Knightsbridge University in Denmark. In addition to this Stephen holds many diplomas and awards in a variety of academic areas including journalism, finance, teaching and advanced therapy for mental health. Stephen has as a Professor of Psychology many years teaching experience in colleges and universities in England and China to post 16 young adults, instructing in psychology, sociology, English, marketing and business. He has been fortunate to travel extensively from Australia to Africa to the United Sates, South America, Borneo, most of Europe and Russia. Stephens favourite hobby is the study of primates and likes to play badminton. He believes that students who enjoy classes with humour and enthusiasm from the teacher always come back eager to learn more.

We’ve all come across people who just seem incapable of modifying their perspective based on new data being presented. Most of us still mouth the words that additional education (or indoctrination/propaganda as is often the case) is what is needed since surely this person will turn around if his/her consciousness is sufficiently expanded with additional data backing your perspective. However, all too often deep inside we know that some people are “hopeless”. This conclusion concerning failure of propaganda is reached from all over the political, cultural, and religious spectrum at one point or another. It thus becomes fashionable to outright dismiss “inconvertible” individuals and opposing zealots (on political and religious fringes of any given population) as nuts and crazies.

Personality theory in psychology allows us to better categorize individuals in society without resorting to name calling. Myers-Briggs typology in particular offers a better construct (compared to useless terms like conservative and liberal for example) to predict how an individual will act politically and socially. Myers-Briggs research combined with biology and brain scan techniques also offers us hints at understanding the underlining anatomical basis that predisposes a person to be either a disagreeable radical or a gentle follower.

There’s been little relative popular attempts to scientifically explain why the bulk of the population is always a warzone between the extreme fringes. It’s just assumed that it will always be this way just like there will always be criminals and extremely altruistic self-sacrificing givers. This assumption seems reasonable and obvious but gives rise to two other creeping and unsettling assumptions:

1) The human population is relatively fixed along a bell curve type continuum. Perhaps this is better visually represented by a sphere with a number of spikes extending from it. The moderate population is the bulk of the sphere and the zealous “radical” factions (whose opinions differ dramatically from the statistical average) are the spikes extending from the sphere’s surface (as well as into the interior to some degree which would represent silent sympathizers). It is irrelevant to label the spikes as extreme left, right, etc. All that is important is that a relatively fixed minority of the population (lets say 10-20% range) will be:

a) prone to modes of thought that are tangibly different from majority’s

b) prone to action and lifestyle based on these thoughts

Authors like Friedrich Hayek for instance, observed that in 1920s Germany roughly a million workers swung their support between communists and Nazis based on who was winning. It was noted that the two seemingly opposing ideological parties clashed with one another the most because they were very often competing for recruits in the same psychological pool of young people. Considering how many overexcited Americans called both Bush and Obama the new “Hitler” in recent years, we can easily imagine how an aggressive drooling at the mouth anti-war protestor from a big city could have been an equally excitable protester at a teabag rally if only he was born in a small town and into a different culture.

2) Since the ratio of intensely active people (prone to being perceived by population at large as “wingnuts”or criminals or radicals or genuinely informed and committed activists, etc) to more relaxed apathetic majority seems to be roughly fixed across all societies and globally as a whole, the explanatory basis for such a dynamic can only be biological. Just like there exist (and can further be bred) aggressive dogs and peaceful friendly dogs, there exist aggressive people, natural Buddhist-esque peaceful people, etc. A person who is an aggressive pit bull equivalent (and who wants to impose his views of the world onto others the most) would differ in his relatively extreme ideology depending on what part of the world he was socialized in. Psychiatry has shown us that people are born with different ratios of neurotransmitter production and quantitative as well as qualitative differences in the types of chemicals that affect their mood and cognition. We now understand that people differ a lot more in terms of brain architecture than they differ in terms of things like body type, skin color, fast twitch/slow twitch muscle ratio, etc.

The reason why these assumptions are unsettling is not because there is a degree of fatalism involved (“he will be a radical of one stripe or another no matter what” or “he will be socially lazy, shallow, apathetic, and uninvolved no matter what). Obviously with modern socialization methods and pharmaceutical modification (with psychological genetic and cybernetic modification to follow in near future), an individual can be shaped more than ever before by society and by himself. The assumptions are unsettling because if the broad direction of our views, opinions, and political/cultural/religious affiliations are largely physiologically determined at birth, then societal progress becomes enormously more difficult. Societal progress can be defined here as one zealot faction (that is seen by majority as the most “correct” in its socioeconomic policy perspectives and formulations of what humans should do next) dragging everybody else along behind it as has always occurred throughout history.

Obviously people will disagree on what constitutes progress (some actually thought arrival of Reagan was progress) but if majority of people are physiologically predisposed towards the status quo, progress of any sort becomes a lot harder in a democratic society. In the past, one intense dedicated fringe of the aristocratic elites dragged the other nobility along behind it (since majority of nobility would also have a soft apathetic bulk) and thus dragged the rest of the population behind it as well. We also had scenarios of power vacuum developing and one intense fringe political faction overpowering the others (as in the case of Bolshevik and French revolutions) and filling the leadership position to then drag the rest of the serfs behind it.

In today’s democratic structure however, protection of the status quo is a lot more preserved since the moderate bulk of the population has a political voice and thus a way to provide the ruling elites with legitimacy. The moderate bulk of the elites now also has ever more sophisticated consent and perception manufacturing methods to influence the newfound voice of the majority. For a small number of dedicated activists, pushing society along towards desired version of progress against the forces of social inertia is now harder than ever. The powerful activists now need to sway both the fellow elites and the people simultaneously.

Let’s finally get to the Myers-Briggs part of the article to see what we are now dealing with.

The most widely used way to get a glimpse of people’s underlining neural physiology has been the Myers-Briggs psychological questionnaire (one of the better versions found online for free can be found here). Over the past few decades, the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator has been utilized to collect enormous amounts of statistical data on personality types found within the human population. The statistical type breakdown (I am using a combination of 3 different sources on the %. Don’t mind the catchy positive nicknames each type and group cluster has been given. What matters here is the number within a population.) so far has been as follows,

Protectors (SJ)

ESTJ – Overseer, supervisor = 11.8%
ESFJ – Supporter, provider = 11.7%
ISTJ – Examiner, inspector = 9.8%
ISFJ – Defender, protector = 9.9%
All SJs = 43.2%

Creators (SP)

ESTP – Persuader, promoter = 8.4%
ESFP – Entertainer, performer = 10.3%
ISTP – Craftsman, mechanic = 6.4%
ISFP – Artist, composer = 7.9%
All SPs = 33%

Intellectuals (NT)

ENTJ – Chief, fieldmarshal = 3.2%
ENTP – Originator, inventor = 3.7%
INTJ – Strategist, mastermind = 1.5%
INTP – Engineer, architect = 2.2%
All NTs = 10.6%

Visionaries (NF)

ENFJ – Mentor, teacher = 3.4%
ENFP – Advocate, idealist = 4.2%
INFJ – Confidant, empath = 1.2%
INFP – Dreamer, healer = 2.4%
All NFs = 11.2%

Each of the personality types (the well defined strong ones at least who haven’t self reported to be a mutt of 2 or more different personalities) can be seen as a specific brain type. As mentioned above, the physiological neural difference between 2 people of vastly dissimilar brain types is a lot more significant than how a person looks on the outside. That is because the brain type determines a mental and emotional predisposition of a person for the rest of his life. People classified as “bipolar” or “anti-social/sociopathic” for instance, have neural structures that will make them lean towards some things more than others during their entire lives.

We can see from the statistical breakdown that SJ (left-brained people with parietal lobe strength) predominate in the overall population. The second biggest group are the SP (right-brained with parietal lobe strength). Together they are almost 80% of the population. The SJs tend to be conservative, authoritarian in outlook, conventional, focused on concrete “what is”, and protective of the general society. They don’t rock the boat too much and defer to tradition. The SPs tend to be fun loving, crafty, entertaining, and have uncanny ability to focus on “what is” (with their parietal lobe) in order to fix and modify it.

If you look at the cute nicknames given to different brain types, you can see that the human herd pretty much needs all of them if it is to evolve and survive. Some types are needed more than others in the great scheme of things. The SJ and SP groups for example are conveniently numerous. SJ population provides a great amount of soldiers, policemen, social workers, self sacrificing charity givers, accountants, and status quo protectors. In other words they keep the herd safe even if it means stagnating the herd through using their positions in the executive to slow down rapid change. SP group provides us with artisans who improve quality of life for the herd through provision of entertainers, artists, dancers, singers, and resourceful improvising mechanics. SPs can be said to exist to entertain SJs and keep them on their toes by having more fun than them.

It’s easy to see how SJs lean republican and SPs lean democrat overall. The jokes that democrats have better sex lives than republicans begin to acquire an element of truth (considering the different approach left and right sides of the brain take in deciding on how to deal with the here and now). However, the two large groups are united by their concern with all things as they are in the now. That makes the two groups friendly and status quo leaning by default. An ESTJ born in Brooklyn may identify as a traditionalist democrat whereas an ESTJ born in West Virginia may identify as a traditionalist republican, but both are more likely to seek similar professions and get along if they hang out together. Brain type identification provides a lot more material to predict a person’s behavior and views on the world than simple political identification.

The overall theme emerges that people with neural computers that predispose them to either protect the status quo or be apathetic about it (since they are busy pursuing hedonistic adventures) are the supermajority that are not as interested in “what can be” (as the less numerous NP and NJ groups tend to be). A point must be made here that not one group is more important than another and that even their numerical breakdowns seem amazingly appropriate. It would be turbulent for the herd to have for example, more ENTJs/INTJs than ISTJs/ESTJs since the problem with authority that NJs have (due to their desire to be the authority themselves) would create unsustainable infighting and not allow enough people who follow orders. Each brain type has a very key social niche and function and over thousands of years there evolved an intricate genetic balance and ratio. There are of course also multitudes of physiological “mutts” who are a hybrid of all and can’t be “pigeonholed” (the most common complaint brought against psychological typology in general).

Interestingly enough, the Hindus have spent thousands of years evolving classification of human beings into 4 broad psychological varnas or classes. Each was considered as important as the other (all parts of the same body) with their own particular temperaments and duties.

Some brain types are literally made to create new theoretical constructs on how society should be organized and which steps it should take next (INTPs, ENTPs,). When balanced by the emotional consideration and input of INFPs and ENFPs (since strong T theorists are prone to being too rigidly rational and thus not take into consideration the emotional impact of their constructs) new paths for society can be developed that would be acceptable to SJs and SPs combined. However, as explained above, these people will always be outvoted and marginalized by politicians who mobilize the other more numerous groups. “Think of the children!” is a call to arms for ESFJs and ISFJs for instance whereas being tough on crime, national strength, and defeating foreign enemies is the bread and butter of ESTJs and ISTJs.

This dynamic reinforces the need for proportional representation in our system of governance. Proportional representation is practiced in most European Union countries to great effect. This way each brain type cluster can get a political party of their own. The marginalized 20% of the population can get representation and even serve as coalition kingmakers. New voices can be heard in the discourse. Today the 20% of population has to either join the big parties they don’t like and “radicalize” them (seen by the tail wagging the dog phenomenon of militants dominating today’s Republican party and driving moderates out of it) or abstain from the process thus depriving society of valuable input. In proportional representation, each batch of brain types seen as “radicals” can find a party to call home and really support. They would also have more political representation to vent out their frustration and to institutionalize their presence and views. Citizens can then pick and choose which vision of progress to support and which to leave behind.

Here’s a short primer on Cognitive and Behavioral Learning Theories

Behavioral learning theories suggest that learning results from pleasant or unpleasant experiences in life while cognitive theories of learning suggest that learning is based upon mental processes. However, in an admonishment against being too closely guided by any one set of pedagogical principles, Johnson (2003) suggests that a fixation with process oriented educational theories among those in the politics of education has not served the education community well by aligning practitioners into separate camps.

A behavioral view in psychology has held that exploratory analysis of cognition must begin with an examination of human behavior (William & Beyers, 2001). Behavioral theory has benefited from the work of early researchers such as Pavlov, Thorndike, and later on the work of B.F. Skinner. Work relating to the development of behavioral theories in educational psychology has allowed theorists to explore ways in which human action could be controlled through manipulation of stimuli and patterns of reinforcement.

Cognitive theory as it relates to epistemological processes within the individual is based upon the idea that learning comes about as a result of processes related to experience, perception, memory, as well as overtly verbal thinking. Since the 1970s, information processing theory has been a dominant focus of study for cognitive theorists. Although the list of theories associated with cognitive theory is an expansive one to say the least, for the purposes of this paper, it is appropriate to mention several contemporary theories on cognition including: information processing theory, schema theory, and situated cognition theory.

Informational processing is based on a theory of learning that describes the processing of, storage, and retrieval of knowledge in the mind. Factors such as sensory register, attention, working memory, and long term memory play a significant part in this theory of cognition. Schema theory offers that human beings interpret the world around them based on categorical rules or scripts; information is processed according to how it fits into these rules or schemes. As an epistemology, schema theory focuses on meaningful learning and the construction of and modification of conceptual networks. Situated cognition theory postulates a social nature of learning situated within a community of practice in which knowledge is socially constructed.

An important component of this type learning, apprenticeship, is informed by social learning theory. Situational cognition as a theory posits that the individual is not a passive vessel, but rather, is an active self-reflective entity; as such, cognitive processes develop as a result of interaction between the self and others.

Another loosely related concept that relates to social cognition is the construct of reciprocal determinism. This is a behavioral theory under which it is theorized that the environment causes behavior and at the same time, behavior causes the environment Under this theory, personal factors in the form of (a) cognition, affect, and biological events, (b) behavior, and (c) environmental influences, create interactions that result in a triadic reciprocality (Pajares, 2002).

References

Johnson, B. (2003). Those nagging headaches: perennial issues and tensions in the politics of education field. Education Administration Quarterly, 39 (1), pp. 41-67.

Pajares, F. (2002). Overview of social cognitive theory and of self-efficacy.

Williams, R. & Beyers, M. (2001). Personalism, social constructionalism, and the foundation of the ethical. Theory and Psychology, 11 (1), pp. 119-134.

Liston W. Bailey is an educator and training specialist living in Virginia.

Millions of women in their 30s, 40s, and beyond are raptly following the romantic escapades of 18-year-old Bella in the teenage romance series known as Twilight. What, we may wonder, is the emotional yearning that drives them?

Feminists loathe the fact that Freud described many of his female patients as suffering from hysteria. Though I consider myself a feminist, I’ll take the risk of saying I think hysteria aptly explains grown-up women’s frenzy over Twilight. Recently I’ve been asked if the Twilight phenomenon bears any relation to The Cinderella Complex. In that book, published in the eighties, I documented women’s psychological fear of independence-their deep-seated wish to be saved. Feminists at the time took issue with my theory, and yet here we are, a quarter of a century later, with something akin to mass hysteria reflecting women’s fear that without the love of a powerful man their lives will be meaningless. Considering the enormous gains women have made, both professionally and financially, how could romantic illusion continue to be so powerful?

As a psychoanalyst I’ve begun thinking clinically about Twilight Twitter. One aspect of women’s identification with young Bella, I believe, is her self-abnegation. No sooner does Edward show an interest in Bella than she shrinks back. “I couldn’t imagine anything about me that could be in any way interesting,” she says.

“I know exactly how she feels,” accomplished women tell me. And yet Bella’s is the plaint of a girl with few interests and curiosities about life, much less herself. In spite of herself, she gets the boy (or, in this case, the vampire). Women find doubting Bella’s romantic success reassuring. Also, oddly, they’re compelled by the idea of her ungratified sexuality. (I can imagine Freud in his grave stroking his beard and saying, “I told you so”. Repressed sexuality, to his way of thinking, lay at the root of women’s hysteria.)

A core issue for hysterics, as psychoanalysts understand the phenomenon today, is the damaging experience of never having been taken seriously. It causes such individuals to be without an anchor, feeling “virtually weightless and floating, attracted here, repelled there, captivated first by this and then by that,” as the noted psychoanalyst, David Shapiro, wrote. Little seems rooted in deep interest or purpose. The resulting sense of insubstantiality can leave those suffering from hysteria vulnerable to the influence of others. Shapiro described it, way back in the 60s, as a “Prince-Charming-will-come-and-everything-will be- all-right view of life.”

Anyone who doubts that many women still think this way this has only to check out the OMG sensibility flooding blogs and chat rooms. OMG, Edward is too beautiful, too fabulously strong, even “gentlemanly”. Bella is so lucky to have snared him; now, Cinderella-like, the poor girl can look forward to a lifetime of happiness. Never mind the danger implicit in dashing Edward’s creepily long eye teeth, he is the prince.

When working in therapy with women who are preoccupied by adolescent dreams of romance, my hope is to spark in them a curiosity about themselves-to get them to begin wondering if there mightn’t be some powerful thoughts and feelings of their own lying beneath the surface brush fires that distract them. Eventually, if things go well, they come to experience themselves as substantial, interesting, and beautiful, and are no longer inclined to gravitate toward media images of male power.

If there’s a main reason for women’s preoccupation with Twilight’s young Bella, I believe it’s this: society still doesn’t take women seriously. As a result, many women don’t take themselves seriously.

The cultural conditioning of girls persists. Think of the madness surrounding “princess parties” if you want evidence that romantic notions continue to be foist on them. It’s Barbie reincarnate, only the princess is if anything more ephemeral, weightless, even less aware of her own substance.

In the seventies we worried about Barbie’s influence on our daughters and tried to diminish her power over them. Today’s mothers actually love the princess. They spend millions so their daughters can flit about in miniature gowns and tiaras looking and acting like one.

My concern is that as long as society keeps insisting on a de-fanged image of femininity, girls will continue finding it hard to connect to their own core and will grow up enthralled by “harmless” stories of romantic obsession.

In placing so much attention on romance, women only feed the fantasy that they need some idealized Other to make the world go ’round. In the end, they are left yearning, the glass slipper of adult love having utterly eluded them.

NY psychotherapist Colette Dowling, LCSW, has a private practice in the Chelsea neighborhood of New York Ciety. She can be reached at 718-594-0201, or at dowlingcolette@earthlink.net.

For more articles on women’s mental health visit Colette’s website: http://womens-wellbeing-and-mental-health.com/new-york-psychotherapist.html.