Avoidance of Necessary Suffering is the Root of all Mental Illness

[IJB063]

Carl Jung said something along the lines that the avoidance of legitimate suffering is the root of all mental illness.

I'd like to here some thoughts on that idea

Thanks

[BETGR164128]

5 hours ago, IJB063 said:

I'd like to here some thoughts on that idea

Sure. It's just another idea. Like everything else.

 

[Martin123]

6 hours ago, BETGR164128 said:

Sure. It's just another idea. Like everything else.

 

And that would be an example of the avoidance, thanks for a skillful demonstration. 

[BETGR164128]

23 minutes ago, Martin123 said:

And that would be an example of the avoidance, thanks for a skillful demonstration. 

You only suffer if you believe that there is something wrong. But don't believe me, try it for yourself and see how it works. It's your thoughts that you're a victim of, not life itself. That's what this forum is about for me, it's not about believing in convoluted crack pot psychology theories or philosophies. 

[Martin123]

6 minutes ago, BETGR164128 said:

You only suffer if you believe that there is something wrong. But don't believe me, try it for yourself and see how it works. It's your thoughts that you're a victim of, not life itself.

What a wonderful way to re-frame victim blaming, you're quite skilled with words, well done.
 

8 minutes ago, BETGR164128 said:

That's what this forum is about for me, it's not about believing in convoluted crack pot psychology theories or philosophies. 

Did you just call Carl Jung a crack pot? Oh boy That's an interesting judgement you got there. Nicely done, thanks for being so passionate about such subject matter. I am sure there are many more judgments you share with others with equal passion. How intriguing. 

[Nahm]

13 hours ago, IJB063 said:

Carl Jung said something along the lines that the avoidance of legitimate suffering is the root of all mental illness.

I'd like to here some thoughts on that idea

Thanks

Did he legitimize suffering? Doesn’t sound like someone’ who knew who he was. Sounds like a ceiling of duality / psychology, rather than self understanding. 

[BETGR164128]

1 hour ago, Martin123 said:

What a wonderful way to re-frame victim blaming, you're quite skilled with words, well done.
 

Did you just call Carl Jung a crack pot? Oh boy That's an interesting judgement you got there. Nicely done, thanks for being so passionate about such subject matter. I am sure there are many more judgments you share with others with equal passion. How intriguing. 

You're playing ego games, trying to pin a lack of compassion on me. Psychology is crackpot stuff. Psychological experts try to make you a good citizen and functional in a dysfunctional system. Why are you ever here if you cling to these ideologies? Shouldn't you be in a therapy group or forum instead of actualised. Org? 

[BETGR164128]

@Martin123 Im not sure why you're allowed on the forum . I think you're married to all these ideologies about psychology. You should be banned 

[Martin123]

Just now, BETGR164128 said:

You're playing ego games, trying to pin a lack of compassion on me. Psychology is crackpot stuff. Psychological experts try to make you a good citizen and functional in a dysfunctional system. Why are you ever here if you cling to these ideologies? Shouldn't you be in a therapy group or forum instead of actualised. Org? 

First of all, I believe you should read the title of this section of the forum, it includes the word serious, and Within its description a number of issues that are all considered therapy appropriate. So your attempt to out me as a way of hiding behind a false superiority in a forum that deals with spirituality, although misguided and brutally inaccurate, is in and of itself just a plain falsehood.

 

Second of all, thanks for sharing your opinion about my expression, however your hostile attitude is letting me know that this debate isn’t productive at all, and so thanks for the exchange, it was greatly appreciated and I am moving on.

[BETGR164128]

47 minutes ago, Martin123 said:

First of all, I believe you should read the title of this section of the forum, it includes the word serious, and Within its description a number of issues that are all considered therapy appropriate. 

No problem with therapy, just have a problem with low consciousness trolling who start fights or persist in trying to recruit people into their ideology. You should be banned from this site as you fit the description of a troll perfectly. I hope Leo will be pulling you in on his crackdown of no bullshitters when he returns.

49 minutes ago, Martin123 said:

So your attempt to out me as a way of hiding behind a false superiority in a forum that deals with spirituality, although misguided and brutally inaccurate, is in and of itself just a plain falsehood.

These are your warped perceptions. You don't actually see what's going on because you're displaying the behaviour of an ideologue.

When you think you know, you don't know and that stops you seeing what's going on with another person.

50 minutes ago, Martin123 said:

Second of all, thanks for sharing your opinion about my expression, however your hostile attitude is letting me know that this debate isn’t productive at all, and so thanks for the exchange, it was greatly appreciated and I am moving on.

I'm not being hostile towards you, I'm just letting you know that you should be banned for your counter productive trolling. I've got nothing against you personally, but you did start a fight, but you didn't see your own behaviour and the true meaning of it. Which is worrying me. For that I categorise your behaviour as low conciousness trolling.

[BETGR164128]

3 hours ago, Martin123 said:

And that would be an example of the avoidance, thanks for a skillful demonstration. 

That is your issue right now. If I were you id spend a lot of time contemplating why you feel the need to start fights with people who threaten your ideology. 

That's a sure sign you're not a genuine self actualiser. 

[IJB063]

@Martin123  Hey Buddy, I've was in an argument with Betgr164128 a week ago in this thread

Which spanned a few pages, went on for over an hour, since that thread hes been responding to me in my posts, with the same argument

To reference another crackpot psychologist, I think its Freudian how he then calls you a troll, found that funny

 He played this same holier than thou game with me

That's why the first response of his didn't make much sense

13 hours ago, BETGR164128 said:

Sure. It's just another idea. Like everything else.

Yes mate, I understand its an idea, like everything else, truly profound

I'm curious about that idea in particular 

That's the point of the thread, is suffering necessary

Not that everything is a idea 

4 hours ago, BETGR164128 said:

Im not sure why you're allowed on the forum . I think you're married to all these ideologies about psychology. You should be banned 

I'm not trying to express an ideology, I haven't brought up politics previously

I'm just saying what I believe, of course I might be wrong and probably am in many ways that I'm unaware of

I don't think people should be banned from a forum designed to help people discover that they are wrong

I think calling to ban people because they disagree with you is worse and more trollish, than not being a "genuine self actualizer"

Anyway BETGR164128, when you inevitably read this looking to start another argument, I'm not interested buddy, I have nothing against you, I just believe that its not going to get us anywhere and is going derail the point of the thread which is about the root of mental illness, unless you want to talk about the point of the thread I'm not interested, you annoy me 

Thanks

 

Edited March 11, 2020 by IJB063

[IJB063]

@Nahm  Thanks for the reply

5 hours ago, Nahm said:

Did he legitimize suffering? Doesn’t sound like someone’ who knew who he was. Sounds like a ceiling of duality / psychology, rather than self understanding. 

5 hours ago, Nahm said:

Did he legitimize suffering?

Is suffering illegitimate, I think in many ways suffering is important to develop character and discipline, so that you can self actualize

5 hours ago, Nahm said:

Doesn’t sound like someone’ who knew who he was. Sounds like a ceiling of duality / psychology, rather than self understanding. 

I don't know enough about Carl Jung but I'm interested in reading into him in the future, maybe he didn't understand himself

Isn't that the point of psychology to get a better understanding of yourself and how the mind work

But I agree that breaking through duality is important to better self understanding, if that is what you were saying

 

 

[Martin123]

@IJB063 if you had conflicts with the user I’d encourage you to check out the post I started an hour ago in meditation section (you can find it through looking at my profile).

[IJB063]

@Martin123  Ok, I'll check it out now

[supremeyingyang]

@IJB063 It's true. Many longterm problem come from that

[Nahm]

30 minutes ago, IJB063 said:

Is suffering illegitimate, I think in many ways suffering is important to develop character and discipline, so that you can self actualize

This gets into a ‘heated’ place conversationally and that is not my intention, but... there is no such thing as suffering. Please note, I say this in a specific way, in a “pointing” if you will between pain... & suffering as in mental anguish, misery, the “no pain no gain” perspective, “becoming”,  etc. It is very much like realizing who the devil is, and why the story is so ‘famous’. 

30 minutes ago, IJB063 said:

Isn't that the point of psychology to get a better understanding of yourself and how the mind work

Well...yeah, in the sense, I’d have to be an over the top ball buster to argue with that. But at the same time, what is psychology, other than one single thought arising at a time, Now.  No psychologist has ever found a “mind”, in the same sense no physicist has ever found “matter”. 

30 minutes ago, IJB063 said:

But I agree that breaking through duality is important to better self understanding, if that is what you were saying

Yeah, that’s kinda where I’m coming from here. I wouldn’t go so far as to say it’s not of value to learn, but duality (thought) can also be it’s own quicksand. An interesting note...all this “ego” “work”, etc, etc.....”ego” (from what I understand)...is one word, coined (or made popular) by one man. And as crazy as it might sound, that is literally all that it is. Might take many views, but the double slit can “cut through” all psychology. But of course, as I’m saying this - these are just thoughts, opinion, which could be said to only be “psychology”. 

Imo, thought is only for creating. That’s it. One at a time to choose and create. Apparently. 

Feeling is “where it’s at”, where intelligence “is”,  to the extent little to no psychology is needed. Unless there are deep enough beliefs, identification, attachment, etc...but even then, it’s often innocently used directly and via enablement, to avoid purification, which is none other than feeling. 

An interesting question maybe (op wise)...where is suffering found - other than in one’s own “psychology”. 

[IJB063]

3 minutes ago, Nahm said:

his gets into a ‘heated’ place conversationally and that is not my intention, but... there is no such thing as suffering. Please note, I say this in a specific way, in a “pointing” if you will between pain... & suffering as in mental anguish, misery, the “no pain no gain” perspective, “becoming”,  etc. It is very much like realizing who the devil is, and why the story is so ‘famous’. 

Can you expand on what you mean by there being no such thing as suffering?

Or send me any links to help me understand 

thanks

4 minutes ago, Nahm said:

No psychologist has ever found a “mind”, in the same sense no physicist has ever found “matter”. 

Sure, but now we've eroded the very idea of truth, but I think I get what you're saying

12 minutes ago, Nahm said:

And as crazy as it might sound, that is literally all that it is. Might take many views, but the double slit can “cut through” all psychology. But of course, as I’m saying this - these are just thoughts, opinion, which could be said to only be “psychology”. 

Just watched the double slit experiment video you linked, I understand this next question is pretty difficult but

How can the double slit experiment cut through all psychology?

Because we reality changes as we observe it

What significance does this have to psychology

13 minutes ago, Nahm said:

But of course, as I’m saying this - these are just thoughts, opinion, which could be said to only be “psychology”. 

Psychology is the best word I have currently 

[Nahm]

4 hours ago, IJB063 said:

Can you expand on what you mean by there being no such thing as suffering?

I’d start with where it most literally occurs...and sort assumption from direct experience. Using paper rather than ‘in the head’ is most ideal. It’s much easier to sort out what is seen. I don’t have a link with info, but essentially this is what I do, and there’s a link in the signature below to my site. Happy to help here or there so to speak, in any case. 

4 hours ago, IJB063 said:

Sure, but now we've eroded the very idea of truth, but I think I get what you're saying

I think you get where I’m ‘pointin’ too. My idea of you is no more accurate than my idea of truth. Ideas are ideas. 

4 hours ago, IJB063 said:

What significance does this have to psychology

“It” is you. 

4 hours ago, IJB063 said:

Psychology is the best word I have currently 

Understandable. There’s a sort of ceiling of communication in this format (words / the forum). Psychology is as it appears though, it’s one thought. Just like “toilet” is one thought. That, (points to “toilet”) isn’t a toilet.  “Toilet”, is a thought, a word learned. 

[BETGR164128]

1 hour ago, IJB063 said:

@Martin123  Hey Buddy, I've was in an argument with Betgr164128 a week ago in this thread

 

It wasn't an argument. It was a discussion. If you decided that it was an argument then that's probably something to with the mood you were in. 

1 hour ago, IJB063 said:

@Martin123

Yes mate, I understand its an idea, like everything else, truly profound

I'm curious about that idea in particular 

That's the point of the thread, is suffering necessary

Not that everything is a idea 

No, suffering isn't necessary. Not in my opinion anyway. 

1 hour ago, IJB063 said:

@Martin123 I 'm not trying to express an ideology, I haven't brought up politics previously

I never said you were trying to express an ideology. I think because you were so triggered reading the post I think you read a post that wasn't tagged for you. 

But ideology goes beyond politics. Ideology is creating a narrative, that's what the ego is, a story, an ideology, a personal philosophy. It stops people from connecting with others because if the ideology is threatened (like it was here) the person goes deeper into survival mode and tries to hammer down harder on the story by creating a story about the perceived enemy. The ego has to create a story in which the enemy is wrong and has all these issues, because without it the personal ego would feel very vulnerable. 

1 hour ago, IJB063 said:

@Martin123

I don't think people should be banned from a forum designed to help people discover that they are wrong

I think calling to ban people because they disagree with you is worse and more trollish, than not being a "genuine self actualizer"

I didn't call a ban because he disagreed with me. I called on a ban because I think it's counter productive to have to waste time discussing things with materialists who are ideological. The forum guidelines that Martin 123 pulled up says clearly that anyone perpetuating an ideology and who isn't a mystic is going to get banned. This guy is focused on getting people to follow his own kind of spritual practice , but to do it you have to become familiar with all this materialist psychology stuff that does nothing except create a barrier between you and other perspectives. It literally turns into an ideology. I saw it in you and you confirmed it with your behaviour. You got lost in your own assumptions because you're not able yet to drop ideas and see with your own eyes how things are. So much of last comment to me was chock full of assumption that I couldn't really respond to it. There was no point because you weren't talking to me, you were talking to a construct in your mind , an internal representation of me, but not actually me. Your ability to contact me was crippled by your abstract mind.

1 hour ago, IJB063 said:

@Martin123 

 

Anyway BETGR164128, when you inevitably read this looking to start another argument, I'm not interested buddy

I was never interested in having an argument anyway. That's your internal representation of me. That's why I did the off after your last post. Like I said, it was pointless trying to communicate with you because you already made up your mind.