info wrote:Aren't we always?
Not in print generally. Who's this 'we'?
Extreme examples of schizos. Tell me what you learnt about schizophrenia from reflecting on contemporary mass-murderers?
That they are working-out childhood issues of rejection and that they have no method to communicate or think and low self-esteem.
Did you know that schizophrenia is not even one percent of the world population. What revolution do you think will come from this?
Myself.
Glad you recognise this. Will you be able to manage not to do this?
It's called drama triangle. Is it okay to play victim and rescuer? Acording to Bern playing Oedipus triangulation can be fun. Others advise playing no games. I'm not totally sure. I'm thinking about what Rosenberg would say... He says don't play games, but do play. Hmm...
No, in the old days it was called the first signs of madness.
Yes. I feel I have some amount of insight into the games I play. Do you want me to tell you your games?
'Feel' free. Don't you think you could have more than 'some insight' into the games you play? 'Some' seems so limited. I also think you need more than your 'feelings' as a judge in this matter.
The problem with you is...
You are way too...
Ok. I think you, Auk, know anyway. Way too rational, no ability to think horizontally or symbolicly. i.e. not very schizo. But too quick to anger. Too quick to play rescuer and the Man. Other than the high authoritarianism and rage, you wouldn't score too high on a psychoticism index; you can't understand art, you are low EQ.
Funny that, as I've taken a few of these EQ tests and I score higer than average upon all of them. Whats your score? I'm very pleased I would not score high upon a psychoticism index but I'll find a test if there is one online and let you know. I think you are correct about my rationality and my lateral thinking and it was something I addressed quite a while back as I realised it was an issue. As such and because I'm mainly rational I found methods that whilst maybe not being what you describe(how would I know?) would help me in situations where it was required, so De Bono's methods of thinking 'creatively' have stood me in good stead so far. What methods have you found to address your lack of rationality?
My turn, I think you are the classic bourgeois adolescent showing all the signs of blooming mental instablity due to unresolved emotional and sexual issues, this is reflected in an over-estimation of your intelligence to hide a sense of helplessness, hopelessness and worthlessness. Hence you fixate upon those you consider have made a mark upon the world but choose those who would allow you to vent your represssed anger and rage in acts of violence to compensate for your feelings of impotence. Presumably due to some perceived or real 'violence' inflicted upon you in your past, probably an only-child with an inability to empathize with others. See how pointless such analysis is in this format?
Objecivity is the scale of the web.
Which means what? The Internut is not life despite what you think.
Notice how you've been talking to yourself all along?
Yes but in my case all my expressions are to another, whereas your writings are at times clearly to your own voices?
And in answer, yes, I am also aware that I can carry on a multiple person internal dialogue; as you say, it's called 'talking to yourself'.
Only when the voices are not others.
I appreciate your concern for my welfare. Thinks are ok for me. Really. And you? Anger, frustration, and a malaise like isn't there something more... alive? By the way, "you need help" is one of the games Bern describes. Check it out, it's interesting stuff.
I doubt it as Freud was a fraud and a cocaine addict. You mistake my concern, its for those you may hurt not you. But things are obviously not okay with you as your thoughts and words demonstrate. What would you consider being "more... alive"? I think you need to stop reading the books of the fraudians and start addressing what it is you want for yourself?
