manu0062: November 2011 Archives

The One Concept

Vote 0 Votes

Freud introduced the world to his compartmentalized view of the psyche quite sometime ago. Since then, genetics, and the theory of evolution has come a long way in helping the humanity to understand our existence. The spiritual community, with modern day devices like the internet, have come to broaden the perspectives of all of humanity; sharing Buddhist beliefs, Cristian, or tribal beliefs. We modern day men and women have an opportunity to connect all of the broad pieces of the puzzle to put into doctrine a deeper understanding of our world, a humanology. I feel one of the most important parts of this puzzle is embracing, and letting go of this compartmentalized view that Freud has conjured into existence.

The id is defined as the reservoir of our most primitive impulses, including sex and agression (From Inquiry to Understanding). Could what Freud was talking about be related to what Carl Jung describes as our Archetypes that have been passed down through ancestors and the universal consciousness (unconsciousness)? To me it sounds like evolution! Is it possible that these primitive impulses, sex, and agression form a part of our fundamental development as a species? As we have observed thanks to people like Robert Trivers, we are products of Parental Care Investments that have been made, along with mating competition. Logically, one would assume as we are forced to deal with errors in the coding of DNA, like Cystic Fibrosis, or Hemophilia that many modern day mental ailments could be related to our evolutionary pasts. How deeply have we considered that our evolutionary pasts have had an effect on our mental development? How much of this development could be linked to un-fit-social behavior?
Freud also compartmentalized with words like the ego, and the super ego. The ego being the psyche's executive and principal decision maker(From Inquiry to Understanding), The super ego is claimed to be our morality. What Freud has done is created a similar problem as did Rene' Descartes. Descartes said " I think therefore I am". I am sure many of you readers are familiar with the mind-body problem. To summarize, Descartes felt that the mind was a thinking thing; and that the body was not; therefore it was under the minds control. Later Eve Cole Browning, a more modern figure, came to express her views which I will summarize. I do however invite you to read about her ideas on the mind body problem at ( ). In all basicity what Browning said was that our bodies give us information on how to survive and function on the daily. Through our eyes we perceive, through our touch we are learning, and through our smells understanding our environments. When a woman has a baby, it is far more than her brain giving her cues; her body is telling her how to react. Browning makes a terrific point that DesCartes did his Methodological experiments in solitude. Humans have evolved in groups, which is the first fault of his experiment. Now that I have drawn these conclusions in regards to DesCartes, Browning, and firstly Freud I will lay out my theory to the matter. What Freud did was similar to Descartes. They separated a fundamentally inseparable piece of machinery. This is similar as to what religion does with the soul principle. Yet regardless whether you feel you have a soul, an ego, or id. The most important part of the puzzle is to understand that they all work as one fundamental piece of equipment. We are one, and whole. Separating these parts of a whole being is schizophrenic in its own right. When one embraces this conflict of an angel, and some devil lying on your shoulder, one is set up for fundamental confusion and at best failure. More modern days views must come to embrace the One concept. The intrinsic inter-related reality that exists within our world today. This can only be understood by knowing that we are effects of causes, and their causes upon causes. It is a line of descent, that is, if there were a bottom too it!

My main points that I would like to convey in this blog are that much can be gained by studying one part of the body. Much can even be learned by imagining that there is some parent called the super ego, and that there is some ravaging beast ready to spring. But mostly, what can be learned is that these are flawed ways of thinking. Not only are they un-realistic, but they cannot be refuted. How can you disprove or prove wether we did have some type of compartmentalized reality in our Psyche. You cannot, and more so it is non existent. I however, myself, have learned through torturous self help books based upon Freudian theories that there are many facets to my being. Yet, the fundamental confusion was extinguished as I was delivered from dualism (DesCartes), and compartmentalizing(Freud). I have adopted the inter-related scientific truth, called evolution, to which there is evidence. I hope that other Psychologists look into the cognitive possibilities, that many modern day problems in the psyche of man/woman are related to our evolutionary processes. We are a product of that evolution, along with the "good" and "bad" that accompany its process!

Life-Span Perspective

Vote 0 Votes

I would like to introduce you to the life span perspective created by Paul Baltes a Developmental Psychologist. The life-span-perspective reads that "human development is multiply determined and cannot be understood within the scope of a single framework" (Human Development a life span view 5th ed., Robert V. Kail, John C. Cavanaugh pp17).

Multi-directionality: Development involves both growth and decline; as people grow in one area they may lose in another and at different rates. For example people's vocabulary ability tends to increase throughout life, but reaction time tends to slow down.
Plasticity: One's capacity is not pre-determined or carved in stone. Many skills can be learned or improved with practice, even in late life.

Historical context: Each of us develops with in a particular set of circumstances determined by the historical time in which we are born and the culture in which we grow up.
Multiple causation: How we develop results from biological, psychological, sociocultural, and life-cycle forces(Human Development a life span view 5th ed., Robert V. Kail, John C. Cavanaugh pp17).

As we have been learning, correlation doesn't necessarily mean causation. When creating a diagnosis we should consider the social-biological-psychological framework before forming any opinions. Social constraints are extremely important. Where we find ourselves in society can tell us a lot about why we act the way we do. For example, our society typically assigns different jobs to different sexes. This is changing ever so slowly, but you will still see many ads selling play kitchens for little girls and tools for fixing for the boys. Other social contexts may present questions like: What is the patients relationship like with his/her parents? We may also have to consider cultural differences when making assessments. What is true in one culture isn't necessarily true in all.

When considering the biology of a person, we may want to understand the family history. Have there been genetical factors involved? Other questions may be what is the diet of the person with whom we are working with? These questions are fundamental, but often overlooked when doing a diagnosis. Depression can be a horrible reality for many people. One may want to look deeply into the problems of people with depression, but what if the problem is more on the surface like a vitamin D deficiency. Biological questions are equally important when considering our assessments of patients.

The Psychological framework as we are seeing can be approached in many ways. All of which are most important. The Life-Span Perspective is a developmental point a view that can be applied to all walks of life. Whether it is Cognitive, Behavioral, or Neural Psychology that we are studying. I hope that you will take the LIfe-Span Perspective into consideration. If we can embrace the whole dominion of a human being we may closer reside to solving the complex problems that we find with in the race.

About this Archive

This page is an archive of recent entries written by manu0062 in November 2011.

manu0062: October 2011 is the previous archive.

manu0062: December 2011 is the next archive.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.