Are most psychologists incompetents?

[Faceless]

6 hours ago, Erlend K said:

I would say that spiritual development implies increased cohesion/unity among our fragmented, competing mental sub-systems.

My original reply was meant to point out the contradiction of “Spiritual development” as it implies time/thought/an entity who acts in accordance to the idea of being separate from that which it strives to develope. A means to achieve, or attain. This all implies division/duality, as the doer and what it does. This is a contradiction to start and any movement in this direction as it implies positive action on behalf of the doer, which is illusory. Any action from this is contradictory.

Again just to be clear as this can be confusing, when there is this movement of time/thought that implies the self. This is a dualistic movement in that it implies there is a doer/doing, but this is an illusion and a contradiction taking place. Evolution, growth,  and expansion imply a movement of cultivation and therefore again another contradiction of progression of the doer/time.

These are all movements of time “the psychological entity that seeks and strives” But this is all rooted in a false division between the i and it’s motive to self improve. An illusion securing and illusion. 

Does that make sense? 

 

6 hours ago, Erlend K said:

This manifests (at least in the Buddhist path) as increased equanimity, mindfulnes and concentration

Equanimity as in composure or self-possession? 

If so, this also implies a dualistic movement “contradiction or fragmentation” as does any movement of concentration, “THOUGHT”.... Any movement of self-control, self-possession, self-command, and so on are implications of this division of the controller and the controlled. This is a contradiction because they are one and the same movement. 

6 hours ago, Erlend K said:

but the first hand descriptions I have heard sounds nothing like schizophrenia. 

I agree, schizophrenia does imply contradiction, and fragmentation, therefore not a sign one who is holy.  Not a manifestation/expression of that which is whole.

6 hours ago, Erlend K said:

Complete unification of all mental systems would be Samadhi, wich ends/pauses of the internal struggle among these competing systems. 

Can we integrate “merge” such competing systems, implying, “strife,volition, will, which implies duality?? Where there is contradiction there must inevitably be conflict between opposing mental systems. Don’t you think? 

 

Or as you suggest here.....

6 hours ago, Erlend K said:

ends/pauses of the internal struggle among these competing systems. 

This would imply that all those dualistic/fragmented movements would have to totally end for there to be order and communion without opposition.

At least it seems so to me. 

To integrate/merge such contradictory systems “time/thought would only lead to more “time”..”contradiction/fragmentation”  

 

Do you see that? 

 

Can we use time “any movement of contradiction” as a means to end time “contradiction” ???

Seems quite contradictory to me. 

 

What do you think? 

 

Why don’t we simply negate all that time implies???....It’s  “competing systems, the merging of dualistic mental movement”???

 

It’s only then can there be any action of wholeness “truth” 

 

DO YOU SEE THE BEAUTY OF THIS??

To understand this entire movement of time    “contradiction/fragmentation/mind/thought”

And in this total and holistic understanding end all attempts to employ time to end time. And in that very cessation to move dualistically time ends. Therefore what is left is that which is timeless, whole, and what you are referring to as a holy man/woman... DO YOU SEE THE SIGNIFICANCE HERE FRIEND...ITS BEAUTIFUL.

 

 Do you see the beauty in what has been communicated here??? 

 

Be as it may, I greatly appreciate your interest here friend. You seem very intelligent. 

I think I see where you are going with this. I am following what you are suggesting. I can see this movement of thought your implying as a whole.

This is the most direct approach possible to ending time. I hope you see this. I think you have the capacity to grasp the whole of this. 

CHECK INTO IT CAREFULY IF YOU ARE INTERESTED OF COURSE??

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 28, 2018 by Faceless

[Robert]

Everyone is incompetent in their own way. Just find a psychologist who is competent based on what you need. Problem solved.

[Nahm]

@Faceless ??

[d0ornokey]

@Robert +1

[Robert]

@d0ornokey

[Faceless]

@Nahm ??????

[Prabhaker]

12 hours ago, Erlend K said:

This is the polar opposite of what you see in true spiritualy development.

Jesus was a freak. At that time deprogrammer psychologists had not arrived; otherwise Jesus would have been saved from crucifixion. Just deprogramming would have been enough. He had just to be constantly hammered: "You are not the only son of God. Drop this nonsense. If you are the messiah for whom the whole Judaic tradition is waiting, let them recognize you. Why do you go on shouting that you are the awaited messiah?" It would have been very easy to deprogram that poor carpenter, but the psychologists were not around there.

Plato called Diogenes "a Socrates gone mad". Difference between ordinary madness and divine madness is very subtle.

[Erlend K]

Thanks for the reply @Faceless . Some parts of it I don't t fully understand, like your views in time and what time has to do with this topic.

I have a few comments:

Quote

My original reply was meant to point out the contradiction of “Spiritual development” as it implies time/thought/an entity who acts in accordance to the idea of being separate from that which it strives to develope. A means to achieve, or attain. This all implies division/duality, as the doer and what it does. This is a contradiction to start and any movement in this direction as it implies positive action on behalf of the doer, which is illusory. Any action from this is contradictory.

Again just to be clear as this can be confusing, when there is this movement of time/thought that implies the self. This is a dualistic movement in that it implies there is a doer/doing, but this is an illusion and a contradiction taking place. Evolution, growth,  and expansion imply a movement of cultivation and therefore again another contradiction of progression of the doer/time.

These are all movements of time “the psychological entity that seeks and strives” But this is all rooted in a false division between the i and it’s motive to self improve. An illusion securing and illusion. 

Does that make sense? 

I don't agree with your line of reasoning here. You seem to view a doer/doing duality between as a necessary condition for spiritual development to be possible. I view seeking, striving, growing, developing etc as real even tho there are no Self that seeks, strives, grows or develops. Obviously the question "what is Real?" fully depends on ones definition of the word "Real". For me, any meaningful definition of "Real" would have to include the stream of consiousness and its contents. One might insist on some pet epistomology that excludes the stream of consiousness from "Reality", but at that point we would just be bugged down in a silly language game.

Phenomenologicaly we have this sense of a "Self" inside our stream of consciousness. It's an illutions, but the phenomenology of it exists/is real, just like the phantom pain of an amputated leg is real, even tho the leg dosn't exist/ is an illution.

Quote

Equanimity as in composure or self-possession? 

If so, this also implies a dualistic movement “contradiction or fragmentation” as does any movement of concentration, “THOUGHT”.... Any movement of self-control, self-possession, self-command, and so on are implications of this division of the controller and the controlled. This is a contradiction because they are one and the same movement. 

'Equanimity' as a rough translation of the Pali term 'upekkha'. Bhikkhu Bodhi translates Upekkha more precisely as "stability in the face of the fluctuations of worldly fortune. It is evenness of mind, unshakeable freedom of mind, a state of inner equipoise that cannot be upset by the six  gain and loss, honor and dishonor, praise and blame, pleasure and pain. Upekkha is freedom from all points of self-reference; it is indifference only to the demands of the ego-self with its craving for pleasure and position, not to the well-being of one's fellow human beings."

Quote

Can we integrate “merge” such competing systems, implying, “strife,volition, will, which implies duality?? Where there is contradiction there must inevitably be conflict between opposing mental systems. Don’t you think? 

(...)

This would imply that all those dualistic/fragmented movements would have to totally end for there to be order and communion without opposition.

At least it seems so to me. 

To integrate/merge such contradictory systems “time/thought would only lead to more “time”..”contradiction/fragmentation”  

Again I don't agree that this implies duality.

The main thing here is to just embrace the paradox of this whole ting. At one level ideas like "I don't exist" and "There is no me that can develop" are true, but one have to be careful not to let this become an excuse not to put in the hard work required to develop.

It's like saying "nothing is objectively morally right or wrong" and then use this as an excuse for cruelty or selfishness, or saying "time is an illusion/the past dosn't exist/it's always just now" and use this as an excuse to be late to appointments, etc.

What is true at one level can untrue at another. We kind of just have to except that we can't fully wrap our head around "Truth". Wisdom is about understanding witch of the often many contradictory truths that are relevant to any particular real-life situation, and then acting based on that truth.

On the path of spiritual development jumping straight to the truth that "I don't exist, therefor there is no I that can grow or develop" dosn't seem like a wise way to deal with this paradox.

 

[Faceless]

Understanding is not actual yet. We can work on it together though. I see your train of thought very well. I think we need to come to an understanding on what my original post was saying. 

20 hours ago, Faceless said:

My original reply was meant to point out the contradiction of “Spiritual development” as it implies time/thought/an entity who acts in accordance to the idea of being separate from that which it strives to develope. A means to achieve, or attain. This all implies division/duality, as the doer and what it does. This is a contradiction to start and any movement in this direction as it implies positive action on behalf of the doer, which is illusory. Any action from this is contradictory.

Again just to be clear as this can be confusing, when there is this movement of time/thought that implies the self. This is a dualistic movement in that it implies there is a doer/doing, but this is an illusion and a contradiction taking place. Evolution, growth,  and expansion imply a movement of cultivation and therefore again another contradiction of progression of the doer/time.

These are all movements of time “the psychological entity that seeks and strives” But this is all rooted in a false division between the i and it’s motive to self improve. An illusion securing and illusion. 

Does that make sense? 

 

2 hours ago, Erlend K said:

I don't agree with your line of reasoning here. You seem to view a doer/doing duality between as a necessary condition for spiritual development to be possible. I view seeking, striving, growing, developing etc as real even tho there are no Self that seeks, strives, grows or develops.

The seeking is a movement of duality. There is no way out of that. Any movement in that direction is dualistic/contradictory. 

We have look deep in ourselves. Look at the dualistic motive.

2 hours ago, Erlend K said:

Upekkha is freedom from all points of self-reference; it is indifference only to the demands of the ego-self with its craving for pleasure and position, not to the well-being of one's fellow human beings."

 

Freedom from” is reactionary, as this is to escape form the fact “non freedom” and implies the entity and its desire to be free. But the entity and desire to be free are the same movement...therefore again a movement of duality “action influenced by the desire to escape fear, or desire seeking pleasure through the doer/doing illusion”

 

2 hours ago, Erlend K said:

The main thing here is to just embrace the paradox of this whole ting

To embrace duality is to act in accordance to duality, therefore to remain caught in the illusion. If any action is influenced by that illusion then the illusion “duality” remains the case. Then one is just spinning there wheels and perpetuating contradiction, confusion, and conflict. Which the dualistic “me” feeds off of. You are then a dog chasing its own tail. 

To merely accept to move dualistically remains the movement in contradiction. This is another escape “illusion” 

Therefore Truth is not. 

2 hours ago, Erlend K said:

but one have to be careful not to let this become an excuse not to put in the hard work required to develop.

It’s not in ones desire “duality” to be free that truth becomes actual, but the ending of such dualistic movements that truth becomes actual. 

 

2 hours ago, Erlend K said:

It's like saying "nothing is objectively morally right or wrong" and then use this as an excuse for cruelty or selfishness, or saying "time is an illusion/the past dosn't exist/it's always just now" and use this as an excuse to be late to appointments, etc.

Just to be clear even and illusions are facts. 

I’m not implying that if you look closer. Much closer. 

There is no objectivity if duality is in movement “ the chooser” 

 That’s the point. 

2 hours ago, Erlend K said:

We kind of just have to except that we can't fully wrap our head around "Truth".

There is only one truth. Anything else is a movement of mind/thought. If the movement of duality is in action truth is not. 

 

To merely accept to move dualistically remains the movement in contradiction. This is another escape “illusion” 

Therefore Truth is not. 

2 hours ago, Erlend K said:

On the path of spiritual development jumping straight to the truth that "I don't exist, therefor there is no I that can grow or develop" dosn't seem like a wise way to deal with this paradox.

That’s not what’s being implied here. It goes much deeper than that. 

The point is do you see that to develop spiritually/psychologically has absolutely no meaning what so ever?? If anything it’s about the ending of volition to cultivate at all. 

 

To say I don’t exist is still an illusion if one is moving dualistically. So when I say i don’t exists and still act according to the idea I do by seeking, striving, and so on, that is still subtly action according to belief/dualistic illusion that the psychological entity “I” is real. 

 

The wanting to spiritually “develop” is the very movement of contradiction/duality. 

 

The cause is the effect and the effect is the cause. ⭕️ 

that’s the contradiction/paradox 

 

This is what I mean by time. The movement entity/motive/volition that wants to become something other than what is is the illusion of time/thought. An illusion seeking security in illusion. 

 

Time is any movement of thought/self

Fear, pleasure, desire, and so on. All this is duality at play. 

 

A lot of problems spring out of being caught and influenced by thought. Instead of self reflecting and learning about the self/thought we accumulate various ideas, concepts, therorys that have been passed down through knowledge. We seek security in these abstractions. 

The key is to end all dependence on authority altogether. And simply learn about oursleves. Self knowledge. Then we don’t get caught in our own complex minds. 

 

Freedom is when all traditional and cultural conditioning to conform to such things as Buddhism, Hinduism, and so on end. To end all that and go beyond all that is freedom. 

 

And freedom is in the beginning, not the end. That’s the good news. 

Edited May 28, 2018 by Faceless

[moon777light]

On 5/26/2018 at 7:08 PM, Faceless said:

Are most psychologists incompetents?

Seeking psychological order through an authority only creates further disorder. 

If one learns about themselves this is realized. 

Its like being sold your own watch. Hehe

 

 

very well said

[MisterMan]

Yeah i remember speaking to a drug counselor and her saying, once my child was born i could no longer believe any of the bhuddist practices and theory as i cared too much. I scratched my head a bit on that one in confusion as to..what? It's just as important to vibe with the other person than what they know. If you don't connect regardless of academics then they won't be able to help you. 

[nour-cha93]

I dont like psychologists, money making bullshit while you can heal yourself. 

[Raphael]

@Etagnwo

This is very relevant, thank you. I also thought about that, and this seems for me to be the reason why a lot of them are inadequate to help on the path of self-actualization and don't understand common issues on this journey.

@Charlotte I saw in some of your posts that you are interested in psychology, what do you think about this?

[Charlotte]

@Raphael  Will read it in a few hours when I get home...

don't have my reading glasses on ?? (thanks for the tag) ?♥️

[Charlotte]

@Raphael Everybody has answered perfectly. If I was to answer it would be a repeat of many of the answers already given. 

Just to add a quick side note from my personal experience (been through one full therapy course and currently in the middle of CBT) I think it takes to find the correct psychologist for yourself. Once you have that 'click' with them, you'll know. Just because they have several qualifications doesn't make them right or right for you. Remember... Everybody comes from a place of their own perspective no matter how much collective training they've had. 

If you feel it isn't working for you (and from what I've gathered it isn't) find an alternative. How could you ever progress with such therapist?

Sending you love and strength ??